I'm Really Confused.............. Can that be a universal about this book? Confusion?

By
Let me start off by saying this is really going over my head. I can admit that.  In Chapter 9, I came across a really interesting thing that Bertrand Russel explored. He explored the very origin of "idea". You could almost say he explored the "idea behind an idea". Of course, this stemmed from Plato's ideas, which he dubs, "universals" From what I understood, Universals were likened to qualities shared by many differing things. Just as I was beginning to understand the nature if universals, "abstract ideas" are thrown into the mix. And the relation of the existence of the direction "North" to the existence of Edinburgh or London just threw me. Where do these qualities stop overlapping for Russel? Or is the point of all this to point to a source which all things do connect?? if that's the case, then it seems Bertrand is leaning more towards a belief in God than I would have thought after hearing him debate Father Copleston. Sorry for the unorganized blog, I just can't seem to get my thoughts straight with this stuff.

P.S. I commented on Will and Zelda's posts!

Comments

  1. Zelda PeachFebruary 5, 2018 at 12:30 PM

    I know what you mean, his ideas in the text seem to flow together like one unending stream of a complex philosophy river. Sometimes while reading it I just have to stop reading to try and understand what exactly it is I am reading. But you are right, if he does feel that everything is connected, shouldn't that point to a belief in God?

    ReplyDelete
  2. Sophia ColbertFebruary 5, 2018 at 4:45 PM

    My mind was blown when he talked about "North of" as existing outside of space, time, and the mind. It's like there is a separate dimension between all of that where the ideas like that exist. Does that make sense? No. It is interesting how he noticed everything has a connection. It's like he's staring the answer right in the face but refuses to acknowledge it.

    ReplyDelete
  3. Natalie SchulerFebruary 5, 2018 at 5:11 PM

    Ah, the abstract. He published this right around the time that the idea of the 4th dimension was being discussed. His concepts of things existing outside of space and time are directly correlated to this mathematical concept.

    ReplyDelete
  4. Ty GoramFebruary 5, 2018 at 9:11 PM

    Just reading the phrase "idea behind an idea" hurts me now. But personally I believe all of these overlap for Russel, and the overlaps overlap other overlaps, and it's why he raises so many questions about what we perceive as "real" and whatnot.

    ReplyDelete
  5. Michael TurnerFebruary 5, 2018 at 10:00 PM

    We were doing some exercises in stream of conscious writing the other day in the novel class. Russell seems to enjoy this style. The only thing that confused me with him is the fact that he repeats the same ideas over and over again.

    ReplyDelete
  6. Brenna StringfellowFebruary 5, 2018 at 11:29 PM

    I AGREE I cannot wrap my mind around his concepts. I feel like the episode of Spongebob where Patrick has his head replaced my a smart one and then it goes back to his original head. I simply just do not get it.

    ReplyDelete

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

An Honest Reaction to Reading "Honest to God"

By
Originally I said in my last blog post that I liked this book, but I have sort of changed my mind. It is not that I hate it or anything, it is just weird and I don’t really agree with what John Robinson is saying most of the time. I appreciate that he is trying to write something different and new, but my problem is that some of the ideas are just a little too radical for my taste, and I disagree with him a lot. In the seventh and last chapter of the book, Robinson himself acknowledges his radicalness and writes about how he knows that this type of thought on religion is controversial. He goes on to write how all great thinkers were seen as controversial when they first started and says, “Every new religious truth comes as the destroyer of some other god”. To further prove this point, he uses the example of how Socrates was condemned as an atheist for not believing in multiple gods, and while it is true that Socrates was a great philosopher who was not seen as so when he was alive, I ...
Read more

Raphael and a man walk into Eden...

By
I'll just start off by saying Raphael is one of the three named archangels in Scripture we hear the least about, and I thoroughly enjoy just reading and seeing his name pop up. Regardless, I want to touch on Adam's recounting of his own..."birth". Take that with a grain of salt as Adam was not physically born, but rather he simply became. In truth, we should all be able to give a similar account to their first memory of consciousness and fully aware. Adam was created, but he realized he could walk, talk, and speak without first learning. Imagine being able to think clear thoughts in your native language and be a functioning individual right out of the womb. It's an incredible thought, and Adam can give a recall of this like it were yesterday...which it might have been, who knows? Aside from that, Adam could even give an account to Eve's creation. The Bible says nothing pertaining to this matter so this is where Milton does a bit of adlibbing and writes around ...
Read more

Extra blog

By
OK so, honors project! Honestly I really loved it as a whole. I said this already in the video, but I feel like I personally could've done better. I just feel like I didn't have enough time to completely process some questions and be able to give my best responses. I really enjoyed reading the O'Connor piece, which I think was everyone's favorite anyway. I love narrative stories like that, but honestly I'm glad I got to be in the Russell group. I feel like that group was the easiest to argue and answer from, honestly. As a whole, I would love to do a project like this again in later semesters. It was a lot of fun and time FLEW by.
Read more