Tag Archives: arguing to win
“What Are We Really Arguing About Now?”
“What Are We Really Arguing About Now?” My recent columns were about “argument” in the philosopher’s sense of reasoning. Thinking they might find them of special interest, I’ve sent the columns to philosopher friends. And was pleased, but not surprised, … Continue reading
Posted in Absolute Freedom and Terror, absurdism, academe, action, alienation, art, art of living, atheism, autonomy, beauty, books, cities, class, conformism, contemplation, contradictions, cool, courage, cultural politics, culture, desire, dialectic, erotic life, eternity, ethics, evil, existentialism, exploitation, faith, fashion, femininity, feminism, freedom, friendship, gender balance, glitterati, Gnosticism, guilt and innocence, health, Hegel, hegemony, heroes, hidden God, hierarchy, history of ideas, idealism, ideality, identity, ideology, idolatry, institutional power, legal responsibility, life and death struggle, literature, male power, masculinity, memoir, memory, mind control, modernism, moral action, moral evaluation, moral psychology, morality, mortality, ontology, past and future, Phenomenology of the Mind, philosophy, politics of ideas, postmodernism, power, presence, promissory notes, public facade, public intellectual, reading, reductionism, relationships, secular, seduction, self-deception, social construction, social conventions, social ranking, spiritual journey, spiritual not religious, status, status of women, the examined life, the problematic of men, the problematic of woman, the profane, the sacred, theology, time, twentieth century, twenty-first century, Utopia, work, writing, Zeitgeist
Tagged Albert Camus, arguing to win, argument, argument from authority, argument from design, argument from observation, bad arguments, Bloomsbury group, Cheryl Misak’s Frank Ramsey: A Sheer Excess of Powers, conscious assumptions, conscious reasons, de Beauvoir’s Paris, drama of argument, famous philosophers, folk theology, forcing the argument, Frank Ramsey, Freud, Freud’s Vienna, global citizens, global culture, globalization, Gnosticism, human imperfection, human incompleteness, imperfect people, inspiration, intuitions, life purposes, life-defining argument, life-shaping argument, manipulative argument, necessary imperfections, opinion shapers, philosopher friends, philosophic argument, philosophic life world, realm of argument, reason, reasoning, rejecting the world, resisting the human condition, rhetorical tricks, Socrates in Athens, Stephen Toulmin’s and Allan Janick’s Wittgenstein’s Vienna, tales of argument, teleological argument, Tennessee farmers, the human condition, the perfect is the enemy of the good, unconscious assumptions, unstated subtexts, utopian ideals, verbal victories, Wittgenstein, world citizens, world city, world culture, world of ideas
Leave a comment
“The Politics of Ideas”
“The Politics of Ideas” They say you are what you eat, but it’s been my experience that you are what you believe. People live and die for the ideas they believe to be true. What is more, people dress, work … Continue reading
Posted in Absolute Freedom and Terror, absurdism, academe, action, afterlife, alienation, anthropology, art, art of living, atheism, autonomy, Christianity, cities, contemplation, contradictions, cool, courage, culture, desire, dialectic, erotic life, ethics, evil, existentialism, faith, fashion, femininity, feminism, freedom, friendship, gender balance, guilt and innocence, Hegel, heroes, hidden God, history, history of ideas, idealism, ideality, identity, ideology, idolatry, immortality, institutional power, Jews, law, legal responsibility, life and death struggle, literature, love, male power, martyrdom, masculinity, master, medieval, Messianic Age, mind control, modernism, mortality, mysticism, non-violence, ontology, past and future, peace, Phenomenology of the Mind, philosophy, political, political movements, power, propaganda, psychology, public intellectual, reductionism, relationships, religion, roles, seduction, social conventions, sociobiology, spirituality, suffering, terror, the examined life, the problematic of men, the problematic of woman, theism, theology, time, twenty-first century, Utopia, violence, war, work, writing, Zeitgeist
Tagged 586 B.C., ancient history, anger, anomaly, anti-semitism, aporia, apostles, Apostles Peter and James, archaeology, arguing to find the truth, arguing to win, argument, belief systems, beliefs, Brooklyn College, Christendom, Christian Fathers, Christian Jewish rapportchement, Christians, circumcision, competition for converts, counter-example, country gospel, damnation, destruction of The Temple, dialectic, diversity, Early Christianity, elites, Ethics, evangelical Christians, evil inclination, Feminism, feminist politics, feminist slogans, First Temple, freedom, Gentiles, good inclination, History, ideas, ideology, Institutional Power, institutional practice, integrity, inter-religious dialogue, Jesus, Jewish antiquity, Jewish authorities, Jews, John G. Gager's "Who Made Early Christianity: The Jewish Lives of the Apostle Paul", Judaica, Judaism, liberation, life of ideas, Mind Control, missionary, models, morals, mores, multi-culturalism, New Yorkers, opinion shapers, original sin, paradigms, personal conduct, philosophy professor, Plato, Political Movements, politics, politics of ideas, Princeton Theological Seminary, Princeton University, principles, refutation, religious politics, resentment, salvation, search for truth, shared assumptions, sinners, social boundries, social conduct, social construct, social control, social penalties, social practice, Socrates, Socratic dialogues, sophisticates, steles, supersessionism, synagogue donors, synagogue membership, synagogues in the ancient world, The Book of Acts, The Covenant, The Crucifixion, the Law, The Passion of Christ, the rift between Christians and Jews, the Righteous Gentile, theology, thought police, thought world, tragic history, truth, world views, wrongheadedness, You are what you believe, You are what you eat
5 Comments
