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

61–70 of 146 posts

Re: I still love Kierkegaard

#61

Post by throwawayjava »

miloshadzic wrote: post #59
throwawayjava wrote: post #17

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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?

It's just an analogy, and I didn't claim it's perfect :-)

But there's a divide between language authors who sound like engineers/mathematicians and language authors who sound like continental philosphers.

I'd include languages like Java, Python, Go, Haskell, OCaml to be in the "analytic tradition" as well. And yes. lots of people get lots of work done in those languages :-)

Re: I still love Kierkegaard

#62

Post by paulpauper »

interfixus wrote: post #13

Kierkegaard annoys the crap out out of me, as almost all philosophers do. But I will say this for the guy: He had humour. A weird, understated, tangled one, but he had it. Mind you, it is so tied up with his native language and culture, it ought not travel well. And judging by whatever translations I have seen, it hasn't. His worldwide fame is still a mystery to me. And by the way, correct pronunciation is something…

why would a philosopher be annoying. confusing, certainly, but annoying?

Re: I still love Kierkegaard

#63

Post by racer-v »

StavrosK wrote: post #51
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…

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

Yes; there's a certain unwholesome smugness in a person who conflates civic duty (e.g. fighting for his country) with religious purpose, which Kierkegaard mocks here.

Re: I still love Kierkegaard

#64

Post by opportune »

throwawayjava wrote: post #61
miloshadzic wrote: post #59

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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

It's just an analogy, and I didn't claim it's perfect :-) But there's a divide between language authors who sound like engineers/mathematicians and language authors who sound like continental philosphers. I'd include languages like Java, Python, Go, Haskell, OCaml to be in the "analytic tradition" as well. And yes. lots of people get lots of work done in those languages :-)

I'd agree that Python and OCaml are analytic. But personally I find Java much more "continental" than C++, in that it combines aesthetics and function in a way that is both time-tested/consistent and expressive. C++ has always felt like a programming language designed with the same philosophy in mind that Frankenstein had when creating his monster.

Re: I still love Kierkegaard

#65

Post by [deleted] »

racer-v wrote: post #63
StavrosK wrote: post #51

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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

Yes; there's a certain unwholesome smugness in a person who conflates civic duty (e.g. fighting for his country) with religious purpose, which Kierkegaard mocks here.

[deleted]

Re: I still love Kierkegaard

#66

Post by throwawayjava »

opportune wrote: post #64
throwawayjava wrote: post #61

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's just an analogy, and I didn't claim it's perfect :-) But there's a divide between language authors who sound like engineers/mathematicians and language authors who sound like continental philosphers. I'd include languages like Java, Python, Go, Haskell, OCaml to be in the "analytic tradition" as well. And yes. lots of people get lots of work done in those languages :-)

I'd agree that Python and OCaml are analytic. But personally I find Java much more "continental" than C++, in that it combines aesthetics and function in a way that is both time-tested/consistent and expressive. C++ has always felt like a programming language designed with the same philosophy in mind that Frankenstein had when creating his monster.

Hm. I tend to think more in terms of how using the language makes me feel than in terms of what the language design reminds me of.

I see what you mean, though.

Re: I still love Kierkegaard

#67

Post by mmyyyy »

quantumofmalice wrote: post #9
bambax wrote: post #4

> Kierkegaard’s greatest illustration of this is his retelling of the story of Abraham and Isaac in Fear and Trembling (1843). Abraham is often held up as a paradigm of faith because he trusted God so much he was prepared to sacrifice his only son on his command. Kierkegaard makes us realize that Abraham acted on faith not because he obeyed a difficult order but because lifting the knife over his son defied all moral…

> 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

edit: I copied my previous comment to be in reply to jmcqk6 where it makes more sense -- sorry I actually signed up for an account here just to say it so this is my first post and I wasn't sure how to "mention" someone?

Re: I still love Kierkegaard

#68

Post by quantumofmalice »

mmyyyy wrote: post #67
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

edit: I copied my previous comment to be in reply to jmcqk6 where it makes more sense -- sorry I actually signed up for an account here just to say it so this is my first post and I wasn't sure how to "mention" someone?

I am a Christian and was describing the sacrifice of Christ on The Cross in terms of the earlier conception of child sacrifice, tying in Girard's insights.

I very much admire Orthodoxy. I haven't read any formal orthodox theology, but Dostoevsky is perhaps my favorite author.

I wish you well with your studies and I hope some day to perhaps read your work.

Re: I still love Kierkegaard

#69

Post by mmyyyy »

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…

As someone in the tech field and an Orthodox Christian doing a masters in theology, I find it incredibly frustrating that there is absolute sheer ignorance about Christian theology.

Literally ALL basic tenets of Christianity are misunderstood and distorted. And while I acknowledge that part of the problem is the ignorance of some Christian leaders and ministers, it's definitely not the whole problem. Intellectual honesty demands of us that we properly understand a viewpoint before rejecting it.

>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 they couldn't comprehend.

You claim this is the Christian view of the atonement. Where do you get this? Is it scriptural? Patristic?

Don't speak on behalf of Christianity if you do not understand it. And let me tell you in case this isn't clear: You do not understand it.

How can someone reject Christianity when they haven't done the due diligence of looking at __primary sources__ for the Christian position?

Re: I still love Kierkegaard

#70

Post by mmyyyy »

quantumofmalice wrote: post #68
mmyyyy wrote: post #67

Earlier quoted context omitted.

edit: I copied my previous comment to be in reply to jmcqk6 where it makes more sense -- sorry I actually signed up for an account here just to say it so this is my first post and I wasn't sure how to "mention" someone?

I am a Christian and was describing the sacrifice of Christ on The Cross in terms of the earlier conception of child sacrifice, tying in Girard's insights. I very much admire Orthodoxy. I haven't read any formal orthodox theology, but Dostoevsky is perhaps my favorite author. I wish you well with your studies and I hope some day to perhaps read your work.

ah I lost the context of the thread... I edited my comment and "moved" it to where it makes more sense (it's a reply to someone who replied to your original comment) sorry to have sounded rude -- this whole thing is just incredibly frustrating for me.
Post reply on HN