|
Nothingness
|
|
|
 Being
and Nothingness : A Phenomenological Essay on Ontology by Jean-Paul
Sartre,
Hazel E. Barnes (Translator)
Jean-Paul Sartre, the seminal smarty-pants of mid-century
thinking, launched the existentialist fleet with the publication of Being
and Nothingness in 1943. Though the book is thick, dense, and
unfriendly to careless readers, it is indispensable to those interested
in the philosophy of consciousness and free will. Some of his arguments
are fallacious, others are unclear, but for the most part Sartre's
thoughts penetrate deeply into fundamental philosophical territory.
Basing his conception of self-consciousness loosely on Heidegger's
"being," Sartre proceeds to sharply delineate between
conscious actions ("for themselves") and unconscious ("in
themselves"). It is a conscious choice, he claims, to live one's
life "authentically" and in a unified fashion, or not--this is
the fundamental freedom of our lives.
Drawing on history and his own rich imagination for
examples, Sartre offers compelling supplements to his more formal
arguments. The waiter who detaches himself from his job-role sticks in
the reader's memory with greater tenacity than the lengthy discussion of
inauthentic life and serves to bring the full force of the argument to
life. Even if you're not an angst-addicted poet from North Beach, Being
and Nothingness offers you a deep conversation with a brilliant
mind--unfortunately, a rare find these days. --Rob Lightner
The often criticized philosophy of Jean-Paul Sartre
encompasses the dilemmas and aspirations of the individual in
contemporary society. This work of power and epic scope provides a vivid
analysis for all who would understand one of the most influential
philosophic movements of this or any age.
 Click
here for more info on this title
Click
here for more books on Sartre
Click
here for more books on Being
Click
here for more books on Nothingness
Click
here for more Philosophy Books
|
|
Philosophy, science, art, religion... and emptiness. This
site features and reflects a book on this subject by Albert Ribas:
 Biografía
del vacío. Su historia filosófica y científica desde la Antigüedad a
la Edad Moderna by Albert Ribas
(Biography of emptiness. Its philosophical and scientific history from
Antiquity to Modern Age)
In Taoist philosophy the principle or origin is
Dao (or Tao), and Dao seems like the "Being" of Greek
philosophy. But exactly, the difference between the Dao and the Being is
that Dao is conceived in emptiness terms, while Being is conceived in
fullness terms.
Also on this site you will find links to:
Papers on:
And more.
Site is also in the following languages:
|
|
Excerpt:
Nagarjuna (200-300 CE) was an Indian Buddhist
philosopher and founder of the Madhyamika school of Mahayana
Buddhism. He studied both the secular and religious branches of Hindu
knowledge before converting to Buddhism and spent most of his life in
the great Mahayana centres of learning in southeast India. Two texts
most clearly present his views: the Mulamadhyamikararikas (Stanzas of
the Middle Way) and the Vigrahavyavartani (Treatise on Averting the
Arguments). Nagarjuna's stature in the Mahayana and Varjayana is
enormous and the Tibetan tradition even identifies him as a
magician-alchemist.
The Madhyamika school is characterised by its logical
refutation and negation of all philosophical systems, Buddhist and
non-Buddhist alike, while claiming no philosophy per se of its own. His
philosophical method, refered to as 'negative dialectics', was somewhat
similar to Hegel's
dialectical method. Nagarjuna especially attacked the Adhidharmas,
claiming that the real agenda of dharma theory (atomism) was not really
momentarism, time, or causality but a new form of substantialism (anatta).
It is an unfolding argument culminating in the triumphant assertion of
the reality of emptiness only. Nagarjuna tries to re-establish the
Buddha's middle-path, affirming neither existence nor nonexistence,
permanence nor impermanence, identity nor difference, but showing the
relativity of all conceptions. Even the basic elements of existence (dharmas)
are taken to be void of ultimate reality...
|
|
By Raimon Panikkar
Excerpt:
The following nine points are intended
as a contribution to resolving a conflict that tears many of our
contemporaries apart. It would seem, in fact, that many people do not
succeed in resolving the following dilemma: whether to believe in a
caricature of God that is nothing but a projection of our unsatisfied
desires; or to believe in absolutely nothing at all, and, consequently,
not even in oneself.
At least since Parmenides, the major
part of Western culture has been centered on the limit-experience of
Being and Plenitude. A large part of Eastern culture, on the other hand,
at least since the Upanishads, is centered on the consciousness-limit of
Nothing and Emptiness. The former is attracted by the world of things as
they reveal to us the transcendence of Reality. The latter is attracted
by the world of the subject, which reveals to us the impermanence of
that very Reality. Both are preoccupied with the problem of "ultimacy,"
which many traditions have called God.
The nine brief reflections I am
presenting say nothing about God. Instead, they would simply hope to
indicate the circumstances in which discourse about God might be
adequate and show itself to be fruitful, if only to help us live our
lives more fully and freely. This is not offered as an excuse but as
perhaps the most profound intuition: we cannot speak about God as we do
of other things...
|
 |
|
