There are two kinds of love. Charlie may "love" his cocaine; however, this is the love that corrupts and destroys the soul (the classic definition of passion, will, and intellect; the modern definition of Maslow and Fromm are in perfect agreement on this point). The desire for a single object or activity is pathological. Love opens the world to new pleasures. Take Napoleon: he had a passion for Josephine. She was destroyed emotionally by Napoleon's divorce. He wanted a political marriage to an Austrian princess, who never saw him again after his exile to Elba. In fact she stood with his enemies after his escape from Elba.
This brings to Ben Linus who saved "his" daughter at birth but refused to save her by trading his life for hers. BUT WAIT A MOMENT. If one thinks of it carefully, do really think Kreamy would spared anyone except Lapidus? I THINK NOT. He had choice and chose to prolong the islanders chance of beating back the invaders. Ben HAD no choice; he had to kill Kreamy. The mercenary was going to kill everybody on the island. Ben did not choose his fate. Sayid did the very thing that made Ben into Napoleon. Admonishment: Every evil act begets evil. Jack refused to act to help Ben; he likely would have failed (I am a physician. I know about such matters). Then there is Sawyer who decided to act when Jack would not. Sometimes the right act done for the right reason leads to evil.
Good can come from good. Evil can come from good or evil.
Allow me to continue with a possible exception. Michael betrayed his fellow castaways. He gave his life to atone. But for me Michael reminds me of the merchant who finds a field in which is buried the Pearl of Great Price (Walt). He gave his soul to save the Pearl. On the other hand, we have Eli who sends her son (her Pearl) to his death by her own hand. You tell me which parent loved his progeny. There is a great danger in the idea of the "greater good". Just ask Ben Linus
venerdì 30 aprile 2010
giovedì 29 aprile 2010
love
Hell: Bernard and Rose are serene in the face of death because they love each other. Charlie sees his drug, doomed love. Hurley finds that he can be loved by Libby Desmond who has forgotten Penny re-discovers her. Faraday (dead for 27 years) still loves Charlotte. Locke has made peace through his love for Helen. what is hell? Hell is the inability to love, not God, ideas, not objects. But the defect is the inability to love another person. Ben lives in hell. Richard has been tricked to abandon his love; these are the chains he wore for 150 years
Lost--once more into the breech
The line is from Shakespeare : Henry V---
@ Mr Sheep: Jacob and MiB are two demons that have no place in this universe. The bottle clinches it. See James Maxwell's argument about demons and bottles.(See the physics textbook of your choice) See again Einstein's Appendix 5 to Relativity. Notice the names he mentions Hume, Michaelson (=Walt), Minkowski, Faraday. Faraday is the shadow power behind one faction He is engaged in a bridge game. Jacob and MiB playing Faraday and his "dummy" Locke. Then we have Juilet Burke. Edmund Burke: Reflections on the Revolution in France. (the title varies with the edition). Burke predicted the raise of Napoleon. Juilet's last gasp from the Grave: IT WORKED. You should read a Wiki on Edmund Burke, Mr. Sheep. Dr Linus: Napoleon at Elba. The real contest is between Faraday and his agents and Ben Linus. If you google St. Helena, the island off the coast of Africa where Napoleon, you find an attraction called Jacob's ladder. To me everything converges. This might not be the ending, but such a cosmic duel between the champions of a divinely ordered universe and a God separated from His creation (Aristotle, Spinoza, Einstein) against a single little man is no small matter. It is the stuff of Ahab, Lear, and Dostoyevski's protagonists. I do not think the producers will take this dark and sublime road. I wish they would.
@ Mr Sheep: Jacob and MiB are two demons that have no place in this universe. The bottle clinches it. See James Maxwell's argument about demons and bottles.(See the physics textbook of your choice) See again Einstein's Appendix 5 to Relativity. Notice the names he mentions Hume, Michaelson (=Walt), Minkowski, Faraday. Faraday is the shadow power behind one faction He is engaged in a bridge game. Jacob and MiB playing Faraday and his "dummy" Locke. Then we have Juilet Burke. Edmund Burke: Reflections on the Revolution in France. (the title varies with the edition). Burke predicted the raise of Napoleon. Juilet's last gasp from the Grave: IT WORKED. You should read a Wiki on Edmund Burke, Mr. Sheep. Dr Linus: Napoleon at Elba. The real contest is between Faraday and his agents and Ben Linus. If you google St. Helena, the island off the coast of Africa where Napoleon, you find an attraction called Jacob's ladder. To me everything converges. This might not be the ending, but such a cosmic duel between the champions of a divinely ordered universe and a God separated from His creation (Aristotle, Spinoza, Einstein) against a single little man is no small matter. It is the stuff of Ahab, Lear, and Dostoyevski's protagonists. I do not think the producers will take this dark and sublime road. I wish they would.
domenica 25 aprile 2010
in the details
It is those throw-away lines that the heart of the matter resides. Both God and the devil live and prove their existence within the seldom seen parts of the universe. We see but are blind to that that defines the universe. Life is not only impossible and real. It is a great paradox. Only four hours left, unless they use to clipshow to drop some answers. There great question remains: what (who) lies (not in the sense of lying or disceiving) in the shadow of the statue. There is one obvious answer. One needs to look where the bodies have gone, both the living and the dead.
sabato 24 aprile 2010
thoughts on LOST
thoughts on LOST
Beckettt...(intentional missed spelling) used the name of an unseen person in Balzac's play "The Speculator" for his title character in Waiting for Godot. Godot never shows up. The Film "Rainmaker is a triangle with one part never seen, The father of Hoffman and Cruise's characters. His death and his testament propel the entire movie. Jacob did this in Lost. Faraday is another example. His plan propelled the series into another direction. He has been seen once, talked only to Hume in brief. There are of course two possibilities: Jacob = Faraday. In which case, the plot seems obvious. FLocke has got the wrong candidate. The right person is Hume. Sayid came back from the well redeemed. OR (my view), Faraday along with Ben are Jacob's main opponents. Their champions, particularly Hume, are there to defeat Jacob and MiB. I am not sure who Ben's champion is quite yet. He made not even need one. However, Ben knows how to play and to place "inside men".
Kant was no mystic; yet his philosophy underpins Fitche's "An attempt at a critique of all revelation". Reading the young Fitche's response to Kant's difficulties with Faith using Kant's own system is the first step to the creation of archetypes. Reading Alfred Russel WALLACE's words debunking evolution (his own theory as much as Darwin's), one gets the concept that science can run away from anthropology. That Whether We LIke or NOT, we stuck in a particular culture. This leads to a major division in opinion regarding David Hume. Hume says that men put things in order because to avoid doing so leads to CONFUSION. So we have watches, calenders, names for random grouping of stars, a taxonomy of the biosphere (that many call evolution). Novels (whether in print or video) do not have scientific endings or religious endings, they have cultural endings. Dickens among many others wrote episodes in monthly installments. Readers reactions altered what he wrote. Fitche in his first work, Wallace in his withdrawal from evolution, and Dickens in his response to his readers are all examples of culture forming our responses to art. If you have any doubt about this, take a look at Stephen Jay Gould's The Flamingo's Smile in which presents Wallace's very profound problem with evolution along side of Mark Twain's unique defense of Darwin. Again, Lost is a novel. Novels end with people. Tolstoy latched on a terrible history lesson to the end of War and Peace. He makes the same point much more vividly in the novel.
. You have put your finger on this last pulsating heart of Hegel's absolute. I have read this article which is a massive apologia for the inadequate "progress" of neurology. I am perhaps the only member of the group which I have christened "skeptical modified realism". As far as I tell from this presentation is that only one or three of these views could possibly be subjected to the Popper test: a theory is only scientific if I (or some other) can prove it false. Einstein proposed a question concerning his theory and others confirmed his prediction off the coast of Africa (Mercury, the bending of light, a very famous story that we need not retell here). This Italian author is surely the heir of Croce (the last defender of Hegel's concept of History) which is opposed by G. Vico These two southern Italians represent two distinctive views of civilization (Spengler, Toynbee, Frye need to get your attention as refutation of Hegel and Croce.) Finally, there is an Angelo-Saxon tradition that Penrose and the other English speaking authors have ignored. Starting from Francis Bacon's Four Idols (see Market place and Theatre) through Gilbert Ryle's The Concept of the Mind, precision in defining the terms "mind, consciousness, memory...." is lacking. Superb article, though it is, and truly excellent though it is, the article's author (as is her right) pushes aside a great hulking mass of metaphysics.
This is for you and anyone else with the guts to accept this rant. It is not my rant. It belongs to a certain Captain Ahab; more or less the words are I would strike at the sun (GOD) should it offend me. You need to go the Book of Job to hear God's reply to Job: "Were you with Me, when I laid the foundation of the world....when I created the monster of deep". Ahab answers with a toast to Satan and blasphemy. We now come to the end of Lost and why the original ending changed and the problem the producers made for themselves when they cast Michael Emerson (too good to toss off the show) and Cusack (too good an actor, too good a story to truncate). So we end up with the redeemed Ben in classroom preaching the gospel of the beast (Napoleon). Read the "prophetic" Edmund Burke (as in Juliet’s ex) Reflections on the Revolution in France. Ben Linus Napoleon is ready to challenge Widmore, Flocke, the devil, or God. There is the constant: Desmond. There is the drive shift (Charlie) and the Driver (who can get you girls or flight manifests), and the strange constant music of Chopin always. Faraday is ready to take God the Father's part of creator sending his John the Baptist or Messiah or Moses Hume. You pick your archetype for Hume's role. Widmore is shadow of Ahab, too soft. Then we have these two demons: both are acting as rebels against GOD, albeit divine in origin. The candidates are three: Ben, Faraday through Hume, and Jack. The position vacant is Deity. With Emerson, Cusick, and the strange creature that Davies portrays as if he is excluded from humanity (except for his moments with his red-haired chocolate lover), the producers have constructed a story that seems to be bigger than can be contained within DVDs and transcripts.
Beckettt...(intentional missed spelling) used the name of an unseen person in Balzac's play "The Speculator" for his title character in Waiting for Godot. Godot never shows up. The Film "Rainmaker is a triangle with one part never seen, The father of Hoffman and Cruise's characters. His death and his testament propel the entire movie. Jacob did this in Lost. Faraday is another example. His plan propelled the series into another direction. He has been seen once, talked only to Hume in brief. There are of course two possibilities: Jacob = Faraday. In which case, the plot seems obvious. FLocke has got the wrong candidate. The right person is Hume. Sayid came back from the well redeemed. OR (my view), Faraday along with Ben are Jacob's main opponents. Their champions, particularly Hume, are there to defeat Jacob and MiB. I am not sure who Ben's champion is quite yet. He made not even need one. However, Ben knows how to play and to place "inside men".
Kant was no mystic; yet his philosophy underpins Fitche's "An attempt at a critique of all revelation". Reading the young Fitche's response to Kant's difficulties with Faith using Kant's own system is the first step to the creation of archetypes. Reading Alfred Russel WALLACE's words debunking evolution (his own theory as much as Darwin's), one gets the concept that science can run away from anthropology. That Whether We LIke or NOT, we stuck in a particular culture. This leads to a major division in opinion regarding David Hume. Hume says that men put things in order because to avoid doing so leads to CONFUSION. So we have watches, calenders, names for random grouping of stars, a taxonomy of the biosphere (that many call evolution). Novels (whether in print or video) do not have scientific endings or religious endings, they have cultural endings. Dickens among many others wrote episodes in monthly installments. Readers reactions altered what he wrote. Fitche in his first work, Wallace in his withdrawal from evolution, and Dickens in his response to his readers are all examples of culture forming our responses to art. If you have any doubt about this, take a look at Stephen Jay Gould's The Flamingo's Smile in which presents Wallace's very profound problem with evolution along side of Mark Twain's unique defense of Darwin. Again, Lost is a novel. Novels end with people. Tolstoy latched on a terrible history lesson to the end of War and Peace. He makes the same point much more vividly in the novel.
. You have put your finger on this last pulsating heart of Hegel's absolute. I have read this article which is a massive apologia for the inadequate "progress" of neurology. I am perhaps the only member of the group which I have christened "skeptical modified realism". As far as I tell from this presentation is that only one or three of these views could possibly be subjected to the Popper test: a theory is only scientific if I (or some other) can prove it false. Einstein proposed a question concerning his theory and others confirmed his prediction off the coast of Africa (Mercury, the bending of light, a very famous story that we need not retell here). This Italian author is surely the heir of Croce (the last defender of Hegel's concept of History) which is opposed by G. Vico These two southern Italians represent two distinctive views of civilization (Spengler, Toynbee, Frye need to get your attention as refutation of Hegel and Croce.) Finally, there is an Angelo-Saxon tradition that Penrose and the other English speaking authors have ignored. Starting from Francis Bacon's Four Idols (see Market place and Theatre) through Gilbert Ryle's The Concept of the Mind, precision in defining the terms "mind, consciousness, memory...." is lacking. Superb article, though it is, and truly excellent though it is, the article's author (as is her right) pushes aside a great hulking mass of metaphysics.
This is for you and anyone else with the guts to accept this rant. It is not my rant. It belongs to a certain Captain Ahab; more or less the words are I would strike at the sun (GOD) should it offend me. You need to go the Book of Job to hear God's reply to Job: "Were you with Me, when I laid the foundation of the world....when I created the monster of deep". Ahab answers with a toast to Satan and blasphemy. We now come to the end of Lost and why the original ending changed and the problem the producers made for themselves when they cast Michael Emerson (too good to toss off the show) and Cusack (too good an actor, too good a story to truncate). So we end up with the redeemed Ben in classroom preaching the gospel of the beast (Napoleon). Read the "prophetic" Edmund Burke (as in Juliet’s ex) Reflections on the Revolution in France. Ben Linus Napoleon is ready to challenge Widmore, Flocke, the devil, or God. There is the constant: Desmond. There is the drive shift (Charlie) and the Driver (who can get you girls or flight manifests), and the strange constant music of Chopin always. Faraday is ready to take God the Father's part of creator sending his John the Baptist or Messiah or Moses Hume. You pick your archetype for Hume's role. Widmore is shadow of Ahab, too soft. Then we have these two demons: both are acting as rebels against GOD, albeit divine in origin. The candidates are three: Ben, Faraday through Hume, and Jack. The position vacant is Deity. With Emerson, Cusick, and the strange creature that Davies portrays as if he is excluded from humanity (except for his moments with his red-haired chocolate lover), the producers have constructed a story that seems to be bigger than can be contained within DVDs and transcripts.
Iscriviti a:
Post (Atom)