Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

I still love Kierkegaard

aeon.co

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

51–60 of 146 posts

Re: I still love Kierkegaard

#51

Post by StavrosK »

throwawayjava wrote: post #39
StavrosK wrote: post #32

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Oh man, I couldn't even understand what he meant, let alone find the humour in it.

Yeah, translations need to take into account changes in writing style over the centuries in addition to changes in language. Here's the joke in "modern English": Instead of joining the state's church, I propose instead the following. I will buy a flag, a uniform, a gun, and one of those battery-powered toy jeeps that little kids drive around their yards. Then, with grave seriousness, I will declare my faith in God's…

I see, thank you, so he's making fun of how silly swearing fidelity is and taking it seriously is.

Re: I still love Kierkegaard

#52

Post by StavrosK »

racer-v wrote: post #42
StavrosK wrote: post #32

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Oh man, I couldn't even understand what he meant, let alone find the humour in it.

The comparison is to a ritual that feels very important and profound to those involved, but to an outside observer is clearly a childish imitation of the real thing (like a hobby-horse): http://www.oldbike.eu/museum/wp-content/uploads/2015/07/1920... https://www.istockphoto.com/vector/victorian-boy-riding-his-...

Ah, thanks, I thought a hobbyhorse was some kind of actual horse, so it looked to me like he was just serious.

Re: I still love Kierkegaard

#53

Post by glibgil »

jmcqk6 wrote: post #14
quantumofmalice wrote: post #9

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> And of course Jesus is that exact same myth of child sacrifice (with a twist: he dies but lives again). The twist is more complex than that: it is God sacrificing his own Son, which is also Him, in place of all sacrifices. God becomes the scapegoat. Rene Girard talks about this idea in this interview: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BNkSBy5wWDk

>God sacrificing his own Son, which is also Him, in place of all sacrifices. The twist is more complex than that. God is sacrificing his own son, which is also him, to himself, in order to satisfy rules that he himself also put in place so that he doesn't have to send people he created and loves infinitely to be tortured forever in a place he created because they broke rules they couldn't understand with consequences…

A better twist would be if god ate his kids

Re: I still love Kierkegaard

#54

Post by glibgil »

quantumofmalice wrote: post #37
jmcqk6 wrote: post #14

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>God sacrificing his own Son, which is also Him, in place of all sacrifices. The twist is more complex than that. God is sacrificing his own son, which is also him, to himself, in order to satisfy rules that he himself also put in place so that he doesn't have to send people he created and loves infinitely to be tortured forever in a place he created because they broke rules they couldn't understand with consequences…

I highly recommend watching Jordan Peterson's lecture series on the bible stories. You are doing yourself a huge disservice by thinking about religion in this way.

> You are doing yourself a huge disservice by thinking about religion

fixed

Re: I still love Kierkegaard

#55

Post by jmcqk6 »

quantumofmalice wrote: post #37
jmcqk6 wrote: post #14

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>God sacrificing his own Son, which is also Him, in place of all sacrifices. The twist is more complex than that. God is sacrificing his own son, which is also him, to himself, in order to satisfy rules that he himself also put in place so that he doesn't have to send people he created and loves infinitely to be tortured forever in a place he created because they broke rules they couldn't understand with consequences…

I highly recommend watching Jordan Peterson's lecture series on the bible stories. You are doing yourself a huge disservice by thinking about religion in this way.

Thanks, but I'll pass on that. It's not a topic I find interesting any more. I was just trying to point out that you can continue throwing in more details and complexity, albeit it in a snarky manner.

A single comment on hacker news encompass my thinking about religion. You are doing yourself a huge disservice by making such assumptions about other people.

Re: I still love Kierkegaard

#56

Post by Apocryphon »

charcoal23 wrote: post #44
jmcqk6 wrote: post #23

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I was raised in one of those places where Old Testament beliefs are still championed and they believe in a literal bible. They absolutely believe as I described it, though they would not connect those beliefs together like I did. There are millions of Christians like this in the US alone, let alone the rest of the world. I'm not sure what you're trying to push with your interpretation of christianity, but it's certai…

I was also raised in a fundamentalist / evangelical church. I'll back you up on this as your interpretation is completely correct. coldtea's interpretation would be completely alien in any of the churches of my youth. In the United States at least, it would be completely alien outside of academia.

The history of fundamentalism, an Anglo-American creation (not to mention the history of the existence of the U.S. itself) is but a fraction of the history of Christianity.

Re: I still love Kierkegaard

#57

Post by throwawayjava »

T_D_K wrote: post #46
throwawayjava wrote: post #39

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yeah, translations need to take into account changes in writing style over the centuries in addition to changes in language. Here's the joke in "modern English": Instead of joining the state's church, I propose instead the following. I will buy a flag, a uniform, a gun, and one of those battery-powered toy jeeps that little kids drive around their yards. Then, with grave seriousness, I will declare my faith in God's…

Maybe I'm slow, but I still don't get it. Is he saying that members of the state's church will follow him blindly (making them out to be dumb / sheeple)? Or is he saying that even such a ridiculous sight is less ridiculous than the church? Maybe he's satirizing the state's enthusiasm for war? I feel like I'm missing context here. Or maybe this is why people say his humor is weird...

It's funny to think of a grown man on a little toy jeep/horse all dressed up for war and taking seriously his trip to the front line and into the battlefield. That's the "funny" part of the joke. And it's not weird funny, it's just normal funny.

The deeper point being made isn't possible to ascertain from just this snippet; you'd have to put the joke back into its context and find the larger point being made in the text around the joke. (edit: but, see racer-v's explanation)

Re: I still love Kierkegaard

#58

Post by charcoal23 »

Apocryphon wrote: post #56
charcoal23 wrote: post #44

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I was also raised in a fundamentalist / evangelical church. I'll back you up on this as your interpretation is completely correct. coldtea's interpretation would be completely alien in any of the churches of my youth. In the United States at least, it would be completely alien outside of academia.

The history of fundamentalism, an Anglo-American creation (not to mention the history of the existence of the U.S. itself) is but a fraction of the history of Christianity.

Indeed it is. However, it will be the dominant experience of Christianity for many of us. Hence the previous snarky statement, and how that statement is correct for those of us who endured that experience.

Re: I still love Kierkegaard

#59

Post by miloshadzic »

throwawayjava wrote: post #17
mschaef wrote: post #8

Whenever I see Kierkegaard referenced, I can't help but think of Michael Swaine's comments (1998) on how it influenced Stroustrup as he developed C++: > Is modesty a virtue in a programming language? Stroustrup thinks so. Invisibility, even. "If you know what language you are using," he says, "there is something wrong. You shouldn't be able to tell." The "you" in this case is the user, I guess. Even Bjarne isn't mode…

When I'm feeling contemplative, I really want to read something continental for the evening. But when I have shit to do, I snap into an analytic frame of mind. I feel the same way about programming languages; the Kierkegaardian crowd (C++, Perl) are great for evening enjoyment, but I'd prefer something from the more analytic tradition to language design when there's work to be done.

so you program in prolog or coq when you really need to get stuff done?

Re: I still love Kierkegaard

#60

Post by quantumofmalice »

jmcqk6 wrote: post #55
quantumofmalice wrote: post #37

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I highly recommend watching Jordan Peterson's lecture series on the bible stories. You are doing yourself a huge disservice by thinking about religion in this way.

Thanks, but I'll pass on that. It's not a topic I find interesting any more. I was just trying to point out that you can continue throwing in more details and complexity, albeit it in a snarky manner. A single comment on hacker news encompass my thinking about religion. You are doing yourself a huge disservice by making such assumptions about other people.

That's fair, these are all very small bits of information we are exchanging of course, but I would still encourage you to watch the Peterson lectures, at least the first one, to see how an intelligent and very well read non-religious person confronts these stories.

I am saying this from a genuine position of good will. I will try to be better about not making assumptions about people.

Post reply on HN