Gentoo Forums
Gentoo Forums
Gentoo Forums
Quick Search: in
Immanentize the eschaton?
View unanswered posts
View posts from last 24 hours

Goto page 1, 2, 3  Next  
Reply to topic    Gentoo Forums Forum Index Off the Wall
View previous topic :: View next topic  

Immanentize the eschaton?
Yes
34%
 34%  [ 11 ]
No
65%
 65%  [ 21 ]
Total Votes : 32

Author Message
richk449
Guru
Guru


Joined: 24 Oct 2003
Posts: 345

PostPosted: Sun Dec 17, 2006 4:06 am    Post subject: Immanentize the eschaton? Reply with quote

You have to pick yes or no, so google if you dont know what it means.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
dmitchell
Veteran
Veteran


Joined: 17 May 2003
Posts: 1159
Location: Austin, Texas

PostPosted: Sun Dec 17, 2006 4:17 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Is that what kids are calling it these days?
_________________
Your argument is invalid.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
yabbadabbadont
Advocate
Advocate


Joined: 14 Mar 2003
Posts: 4791
Location: 2 exits past crazy

PostPosted: Sun Dec 17, 2006 4:18 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

I don't have to pick either one. So there. :P
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
DoktorSeven
Apprentice
Apprentice


Joined: 21 Feb 2003
Posts: 194
Location: Here, somewhere

PostPosted: Sun Dec 17, 2006 4:33 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

oooh baby do you know what that's worth
Oooh, heaven is a place on earth
they say in heaven love comes first
oooh heaven is a place on earth
_________________
WARNING: this post may be filled with lies and/or extreme sarcasm.
I write stuff on the internet, just like everyone else. I'M SPECIAL
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
richk449
Guru
Guru


Joined: 24 Oct 2003
Posts: 345

PostPosted: Sun Dec 17, 2006 4:35 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Wow, great response so far. The most intellectual gentooer I know of makes a sex joke, another poster refuses to do anything (oddly appropriate), and the third, in the most on-topic post, quotes a cheesy 80's pop singer.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
yabbadabbadont
Advocate
Advocate


Joined: 14 Mar 2003
Posts: 4791
Location: 2 exits past crazy

PostPosted: Sun Dec 17, 2006 4:59 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

DoktorSeven wrote:
oooh baby do you know what that's worth
Oooh, heaven is a place on earth
they say in heaven love comes first
oooh heaven is a place on earth

Whoa! College flashback for a moment. :D
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
yabbadabbadont
Advocate
Advocate


Joined: 14 Mar 2003
Posts: 4791
Location: 2 exits past crazy

PostPosted: Sun Dec 17, 2006 5:00 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

richk449 wrote:
Wow, great response so far. The most intellectual gentooer I know of makes a sex joke, another poster refuses to do anything (oddly appropriate), and the third, in the most on-topic post, quotes a cheesy 80's pop singer.

You need to be a believer in order for your question to have any meaning. As an agnostic, I don't care one way or the other. ;)
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
richk449
Guru
Guru


Joined: 24 Oct 2003
Posts: 345

PostPosted: Sun Dec 17, 2006 5:03 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

yabbadabbadont wrote:
richk449 wrote:
Wow, great response so far. The most intellectual gentooer I know of makes a sex joke, another poster refuses to do anything (oddly appropriate), and the third, in the most on-topic post, quotes a cheesy 80's pop singer.

You need to be a believer in order for your question to have any meaning. As an agnostic, I don't care one way or the other. ;)

The question doesn't have anything to do with religion. You are reading it too literally.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
yabbadabbadont
Advocate
Advocate


Joined: 14 Mar 2003
Posts: 4791
Location: 2 exits past crazy

PostPosted: Sun Dec 17, 2006 5:11 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

richk449 wrote:
yabbadabbadont wrote:
richk449 wrote:
Wow, great response so far. The most intellectual gentooer I know of makes a sex joke, another poster refuses to do anything (oddly appropriate), and the third, in the most on-topic post, quotes a cheesy 80's pop singer.

You need to be a believer in order for your question to have any meaning. As an agnostic, I don't care one way or the other. ;)

The question doesn't have anything to do with religion. You are reading it too literally.

Still don't care. :P :D
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
pjp
Administrator
Administrator


Joined: 16 Apr 2002
Posts: 17409

PostPosted: Sun Dec 17, 2006 5:20 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Not compelling enough to Google it.
_________________
Slowly I turned. Step by step.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
yabbadabbadont
Advocate
Advocate


Joined: 14 Mar 2003
Posts: 4791
Location: 2 exits past crazy

PostPosted: Sun Dec 17, 2006 5:39 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

pjp wrote:
Not compelling enough to Google it.

Wikipedia says it is about forcing the "End of Days". Which is clearly related to a belief in religion richk449. So there! :P :D (again) :lol:
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
richk449
Guru
Guru


Joined: 24 Oct 2003
Posts: 345

PostPosted: Sun Dec 17, 2006 5:43 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

yabbadabbadont wrote:
pjp wrote:
Not compelling enough to Google it.

Wikipedia says it is about forcing the "End of Days". Which is clearly related to a belief in religion richk449. So there! :P :D (again) :lol:

Okay, fair enough. I was wrong to say it has nothing to do with religion, since it clearly does.

But what I meant was that the question has meaning independent of any religion, and so you don't need to be religious to have an opinion on it. In fact, it is more meaningful as a gauge of your political views than your religious views.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
yabbadabbadont
Advocate
Advocate


Joined: 14 Mar 2003
Posts: 4791
Location: 2 exits past crazy

PostPosted: Sun Dec 17, 2006 5:49 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

richk449 wrote:
yabbadabbadont wrote:
pjp wrote:
Not compelling enough to Google it.

Wikipedia says it is about forcing the "End of Days". Which is clearly related to a belief in religion richk449. So there! :P :D (again) :lol:

Okay, fair enough. I was wrong to say it has nothing to do with religion, since it clearly does.

But what I meant was that the question has meaning independent of any religion, and so you don't need to be religious to have an opinion on it. In fact, it is more meaningful as a gauge of your political views than your religious views.

No it's not.

:lol:
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
richk449
Guru
Guru


Joined: 24 Oct 2003
Posts: 345

PostPosted: Sun Dec 17, 2006 6:03 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

yabbadabbadont wrote:
richk449 wrote:
yabbadabbadont wrote:
pjp wrote:
Not compelling enough to Google it.

Wikipedia says it is about forcing the "End of Days". Which is clearly related to a belief in religion richk449. So there! :P :D (again) :lol:

Okay, fair enough. I was wrong to say it has nothing to do with religion, since it clearly does.

But what I meant was that the question has meaning independent of any religion, and so you don't need to be religious to have an opinion on it. In fact, it is more meaningful as a gauge of your political views than your religious views.

No it's not.

:lol:


Quote:
Why does any of this matter? Don’t jump too quickly to the question of whether or not you believe in God. That is obviously a momentous question, but Voegelin’s challenge to us cannot, at least initially, be reduced to a contest between theism and its alternatives. Indeed, Voegelin takes great pains to show historically that religious leaders, speaking in the name of their faith, are quite capable of immanentizing the eschaton, with frequently tragic results.

(http://www.propositionsonline.com/html/uncertain.html)[/b]
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
richk449
Guru
Guru


Joined: 24 Oct 2003
Posts: 345

PostPosted: Sun Dec 17, 2006 6:03 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

pjp wrote:
Not compelling enough to Google it.

In the time it took you to post that reply, you could have googled it and learned something, rather than revel in your ignorance.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
yabbadabbadont
Advocate
Advocate


Joined: 14 Mar 2003
Posts: 4791
Location: 2 exits past crazy

PostPosted: Sun Dec 17, 2006 6:05 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

richk449 wrote:
yabbadabbadont wrote:
richk449 wrote:
yabbadabbadont wrote:
pjp wrote:
Not compelling enough to Google it.

Wikipedia says it is about forcing the "End of Days". Which is clearly related to a belief in religion richk449. So there! :P :D (again) :lol:

Okay, fair enough. I was wrong to say it has nothing to do with religion, since it clearly does.

But what I meant was that the question has meaning independent of any religion, and so you don't need to be religious to have an opinion on it. In fact, it is more meaningful as a gauge of your political views than your religious views.

No it's not.

:lol:


Quote:
Why does any of this matter? Don’t jump too quickly to the question of whether or not you believe in God. That is obviously a momentous question, but Voegelin’s challenge to us cannot, at least initially, be reduced to a contest between theism and its alternatives. Indeed, Voegelin takes great pains to show historically that religious leaders, speaking in the name of their faith, are quite capable of immanentizing the eschaton, with frequently tragic results.

(http://www.propositionsonline.com/html/uncertain.html)[/b]

They're wrong.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
timeBandit
Bodhisattva
Bodhisattva


Joined: 31 Dec 2004
Posts: 2673
Location: here, there or in transit

PostPosted: Sun Dec 17, 2006 6:23 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

I voted "no." There are too many things misplaced around the house that I'd like to find, first.
_________________
Plants are pithy, brooks tend to babble--I'm content to lie between them.
Super-short f.g.o checklist: Search first, strip comments, mark solved, help others.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
cokey
Advocate
Advocate


Joined: 23 Apr 2004
Posts: 3343

PostPosted: Sun Dec 17, 2006 6:26 am    Post subject: Re: Immanentize the eschaton? Reply with quote

richk449 wrote:
You have to pick yes or no, so google if you dont know what it means.
wikipedia wrote:
* The end of everything, as studied in the subject of eschatology.
* Eschaton (weblog), written by Dr. Duncan B. Black (also known as Atrios)
* Eschaton (entity), a posthuman entity in the Charles Stross novels Singularity Sky and Iron Sunrise
* Eschaton (trilogy), a science fiction trilogy by Frederik Pohl
* Eschaton (album), a black metal album by Anaal Nathrakh
* The novel Infinite Jest by David Foster Wallace describes a computer-aided turn-based nuclear wargame called Eschaton which requires that players be adept both at matters of game theory and at hitting targets with tennis balls.

_________________
"Sex: breakfast of champions" - James Hunt
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
richk449
Guru
Guru


Joined: 24 Oct 2003
Posts: 345

PostPosted: Sun Dec 17, 2006 9:41 pm    Post subject: Re: Immanentize the eschaton? Reply with quote

cokehabit wrote:
richk449 wrote:
You have to pick yes or no, so google if you dont know what it means.
wikipedia wrote:
* The end of everything, as studied in the subject of eschatology.
* Eschaton (weblog), written by Dr. Duncan B. Black (also known as Atrios)
* Eschaton (entity), a posthuman entity in the Charles Stross novels Singularity Sky and Iron Sunrise
* Eschaton (trilogy), a science fiction trilogy by Frederik Pohl
* Eschaton (album), a black metal album by Anaal Nathrakh
* The novel Infinite Jest by David Foster Wallace describes a computer-aided turn-based nuclear wargame called Eschaton which requires that players be adept both at matters of game theory and at hitting targets with tennis balls.

You only defined one of the three words. I will let you slide on "the", but you still have one word to go.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
dmitchell
Veteran
Veteran


Joined: 17 May 2003
Posts: 1159
Location: Austin, Texas

PostPosted: Sun Dec 17, 2006 10:24 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

In a word: no, and in this video, Jacob Bronowski eloquently explains why not. Speaking from the concentration camp at Auschwitz, he says "This is what men do when they aspire to the knowledge of gods. We have to cure ourselves of the itch for absolute knowledge and power." We must recognize that we are far too fallible to immanentize the eschaton.
_________________
Your argument is invalid.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
omp
Retired Dev
Retired Dev


Joined: 10 Sep 2005
Posts: 1018
Location: Glendale, California

PostPosted: Sun Dec 17, 2006 10:28 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

DoktorSeven wrote:
oooh baby do you know what that's worth
Oooh, heaven is a place on earth
they say in heaven love comes first
oooh heaven is a place on earth

Great song!
_________________
meow.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
cokey
Advocate
Advocate


Joined: 23 Apr 2004
Posts: 3343

PostPosted: Sun Dec 17, 2006 10:31 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Quote:
To immanentize the eschaton means trying to bring about the eschaton (the end of days, see eschatology) in the immanent (material) world. More recently, it has been used by conservatives as pejorative against what they perceive as utopian schemes, such as socialism, communism, etc. It is also being used by libertarians to criticise right-wing utopians like George W. Bush and the neo-conservative movement [1]. In this context it means "trying to make that which belongs to the afterlife happen here and now (on Earth)" or "trying to create heaven here on Earth."
Your question cannot have a yes/no answer. What is it you are questioning?
_________________
"Sex: breakfast of champions" - James Hunt
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
azagthoth
n00b
n00b


Joined: 21 Aug 2006
Posts: 2

PostPosted: Sun Dec 17, 2006 10:43 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Oh God, the text in the Wikipedia page reminds me of:
http://www.elsewhere.org/pomo
Randomly generated text on post-modernist themes using a pure hyper-intellectual glossolalia.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
richk449
Guru
Guru


Joined: 24 Oct 2003
Posts: 345

PostPosted: Sun Dec 17, 2006 10:44 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

dmitchell wrote:
In a word: no, and in this video, Jacob Bronowski eloquently explains why not. Speaking from the concentration camp at Auschwitz, he says "This is what men do when they aspire to the knowledge of gods. We have to cure ourselves of the itch for absolute knowledge and power." We must recognize that we are far too fallible to immanentize the eschaton.

That is a very powerful clip. Although they are both asides to the main point, there were two things that really struck me:
(1) The mention of Leo Szilard. His life perfectly illustrates the danger of attempting to immanstize the eschaton. He was a very idealistic man who contributed to the founding of nuclear theory, and he fought hard to get the US to build the atomic bomb in order to stop the evil German war machine. Yet in the end, the bomb turned into weapon nearly as terrible (perhaps moreso) as what he was trying to prevent.
(2) The mention of Cromwell. That is interesting because the clip mentions his quote "Consider that you might be wrong". Yet in another article I linked to earlier, Cromwell is given as an example of the certainty that is so dangerous:
Quote:
For Voegelin, as least in his role as political scientist, the great dividing line is between certainty and uncertainty. The good thing is uncertainty. Why? Because people who are certain about humanity’s ends often seek to divinize society, to reunite heaven and earth, by establishing within this world the true and final purposes of man. For Voegelin, this form of certainty is the great threat to humanity. For the man who is certain in this way “will not leave the transfiguration of the world to the grace of God beyond history but will do the work of God himself, right here and now, in history.” Cromwell was certain in this way. Lenin and Hitler were, if anything, even more certain. Indeed, leaders and social movements possessed of this type of certainty shaped much of the 20th century, including alm

(http://www.propositionsonline.com/html/uncertain.html)
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
richk449
Guru
Guru


Joined: 24 Oct 2003
Posts: 345

PostPosted: Sun Dec 17, 2006 10:54 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

cokehabit wrote:
Quote:
To immanentize the eschaton means trying to bring about the eschaton (the end of days, see eschatology) in the immanent (material) world. More recently, it has been used by conservatives as pejorative against what they perceive as utopian schemes, such as socialism, communism, etc. It is also being used by libertarians to criticise right-wing utopians like George W. Bush and the neo-conservative movement [1]. In this context it means "trying to make that which belongs to the afterlife happen here and now (on Earth)" or "trying to create heaven here on Earth."
Your question cannot have a yes/no answer. What is it you are questioning?

The question is "Should we attempt to immanentize the eschaton?"

In slightly simpler form, the question is: "Should we attempt to create a perfect world, or should we accept that the world will never be perfect?"

It is an interesting question, because it rougly splits liberals and conservatives.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Display posts from previous:   
Reply to topic    Gentoo Forums Forum Index Off the Wall All times are GMT
Goto page 1, 2, 3  Next
Page 1 of 3

 
Jump to:  
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum