vincentML
Posts: 9980
Joined: 10/31/2009 Status: offline
|
quote:
I'd love to be responsible for the concept of 'something extra' but I'm not. It is a common concept in post-modernist perspectives. In this instance it refers to the difference between a human being and the sum of the physical elements that humans are comprised of. Well, my goodness, why is that uniquely a post-modernist concept? Obviously, there is a difference between being human and the sum total of the physical parts. I have alluded to this before. We have symbollic language; we create art, music, drama and science beyond ourselves; we contemplate our beginnings and the purpose of our lives; and we alone among the other animals it seems are aware of our mortality. So, how is it that post-modernism has a franchise on ‘something extra?’ quote:
Classification is arbitrary and always fails to account for this something extra that eludes classification, identification and verification. I know you said you were not proposing a supernatural construct but I wonder if what you say here does not amount to something akin to a secular substitute for ‘soul?’ Having moved on from the Enlightenment does post-modernism yearn for ‘something extra’ to maintain the dignity and value of the individual in a culture-centric zeitgeist? Serious question; not meaning to be a smart-ass here. quote:
Another very loose analogy is that it's the sum of unrealised potentials of humans (where unrealised means something closer to un-materialised, manifest at a psychic but not physical level) in a de Leuzian scheme of things. Interestingly, this perspective is generally consistent with a broader materialist approach. Sorry, I tried, but it will take me quite awhile to understand what Gilles Deleuze is about. quote:
I hope that helps but I have a funny feeling it's all as clear as mud.  I’m afraid it is. Ready to let this thread die.
|