W not he is living in the here and now, unfortunately, the result of a study / marketing message from Harvard / Cupertino. For the study not only shows that with this little device can begin so incredibly much, but that may or may not reflect the daydream is all too suited to make them happy. Oh-ho.
Be it better to avoid these unworldly states. This is reminiscent of course of the limbo that directly leads to Nirvana: Happy accomplished resolution in the state that we call Being.
"Where I think, I'm not where I am, I do not think" is the reorganization of the old post-structuralist "Cogito Ergo Sum" Descartes's and hits the spot.
The absorption in his reach those who carry too much thinking and not to yield. Because that will only lead to areas that the being could possibly cause problems.
The conclusion of the study is: thinking sad. Okay. Just as well that the study participants considered a possible cure for this disease in his hand.
The great literary scholar George Steiner titled a few years ago an essay titled "Why thinking makes you sad." and went with the rhetorical title question is a good step beyond that now go out into the media-spread study.
He comes to some possible answers: The thinking is not attained, it is uncontrolled and erratic, it shows us the irrevocable barrier between ourselves, our ego and the world. It is waste, such extravagance, it refers to the distance between act and thought. And the volatility of the thought. Thought is the only thing for us seems suddenly Erfahrbare, apparently because it always fail because of the multitude of forms must be to him to show the boundaries, such as language, mathematics, death, of reality itself. And it shows us, ultimately, the gulf between their own identity and the Other: The impossibility of a real participation in the thinking of others. And again the inequality.
But from all the conflicting pulsation also formed the first of what we finally say "I" can.
"The gravest concern to our times is that we do not think" Heidegger once said in his lecture "What means thinking? . The rule is, he reasoned, the acting arbitrarily.
The first-mentioned absorption in the here and now shows this mentality only too well. A happy way to disaster. But at least talk always good. Today's Harvard psychology seems to be unreflective enough to march on this path.
Be it better to avoid these unworldly states. This is reminiscent of course of the limbo that directly leads to Nirvana: Happy accomplished resolution in the state that we call Being.
"Where I think, I'm not where I am, I do not think" is the reorganization of the old post-structuralist "Cogito Ergo Sum" Descartes's and hits the spot.
The absorption in his reach those who carry too much thinking and not to yield. Because that will only lead to areas that the being could possibly cause problems.
The conclusion of the study is: thinking sad. Okay. Just as well that the study participants considered a possible cure for this disease in his hand.
The great literary scholar George Steiner titled a few years ago an essay titled "Why thinking makes you sad." and went with the rhetorical title question is a good step beyond that now go out into the media-spread study.
He comes to some possible answers: The thinking is not attained, it is uncontrolled and erratic, it shows us the irrevocable barrier between ourselves, our ego and the world. It is waste, such extravagance, it refers to the distance between act and thought. And the volatility of the thought. Thought is the only thing for us seems suddenly Erfahrbare, apparently because it always fail because of the multitude of forms must be to him to show the boundaries, such as language, mathematics, death, of reality itself. And it shows us, ultimately, the gulf between their own identity and the Other: The impossibility of a real participation in the thinking of others. And again the inequality.
But from all the conflicting pulsation also formed the first of what we finally say "I" can.
"The gravest concern to our times is that we do not think" Heidegger once said in his lecture "What means thinking? . The rule is, he reasoned, the acting arbitrarily.
The first-mentioned absorption in the here and now shows this mentality only too well. A happy way to disaster. But at least talk always good. Today's Harvard psychology seems to be unreflective enough to march on this path.
0 comments:
Post a Comment