<?xml version="1.0" encoding="utf-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Søren Kierkegaard&#8217;s view on the aesthetic life</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.letterneversent.com/s%c3%b8ren-kierkegaards-view-on-the-aesthetic-life/2306/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.letterneversent.com/s%c3%b8ren-kierkegaards-view-on-the-aesthetic-life/2306/</link>
	<description>Tell me when to go.</description>
	<pubDate>Tue, 02 Dec 2008 12:36:19 +0000</pubDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.6</generator>
		<item>
		<title>By: Chris Sivori</title>
		<link>http://www.letterneversent.com/s%c3%b8ren-kierkegaards-view-on-the-aesthetic-life/2306/#comment-148583</link>
		<dc:creator>Chris Sivori</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 31 Jul 2008 19:31:50 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.letterneversent.com/index.php/archives/2008/05/05/s%c3%b8ren-kierkegaards-view-on-the-aesthetic-life/#comment-148583</guid>
		<description>That's a fascinating point, Brandon. It does seem rather counter-intuitive that there was no physics before the big bang.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>That&#8217;s a fascinating point, Brandon. It does seem rather counter-intuitive that there was no physics before the big bang.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Brandon</title>
		<link>http://www.letterneversent.com/s%c3%b8ren-kierkegaards-view-on-the-aesthetic-life/2306/#comment-148582</link>
		<dc:creator>Brandon</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 31 Jul 2008 19:26:56 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.letterneversent.com/index.php/archives/2008/05/05/s%c3%b8ren-kierkegaards-view-on-the-aesthetic-life/#comment-148582</guid>
		<description>Good post. I knew of Soren K but I forgot how profound he was in his works. I too am an agnostic so I would tend to agree with you on that. The only thing I have noticed within my interactions with believers and non believers alike is when pressed no one is 100% sure, regardless of what they say before being pressed. I just think when one leans towards one side or the other the projection appears that they believe this with out one shred of doubt, but I have found that is not the case. I do find it annoying though when Santa Clause, Elves, and the easter bunny get put in the same basket as God.  However I also do not like when Theists seemingly lay out all of God's attributes as if they were best buddies and they know everything about God. I did learn something interesting about the big bang that I never truly thought about, correct me of I am wrong, but if the point of singularity lead to the birth of space and time and the laws of physics, then essentially this point of singularity was outside of time, space, and the laws of physics so then it is also reasonable to except a higher being outside of this realm as well. Anyway Good blog, I hope to have many more conversations. InvisiblePills@aol.com.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Good post. I knew of Soren K but I forgot how profound he was in his works. I too am an agnostic so I would tend to agree with you on that. The only thing I have noticed within my interactions with believers and non believers alike is when pressed no one is 100% sure, regardless of what they say before being pressed. I just think when one leans towards one side or the other the projection appears that they believe this with out one shred of doubt, but I have found that is not the case. I do find it annoying though when Santa Clause, Elves, and the easter bunny get put in the same basket as God.  However I also do not like when Theists seemingly lay out all of God&#8217;s attributes as if they were best buddies and they know everything about God. I did learn something interesting about the big bang that I never truly thought about, correct me of I am wrong, but if the point of singularity lead to the birth of space and time and the laws of physics, then essentially this point of singularity was outside of time, space, and the laws of physics so then it is also reasonable to except a higher being outside of this realm as well. Anyway Good blog, I hope to have many more conversations. <a href="mailto:InvisiblePills@aol.com">InvisiblePills@aol.com</a>.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: chris sivori</title>
		<link>http://www.letterneversent.com/s%c3%b8ren-kierkegaards-view-on-the-aesthetic-life/2306/#comment-148575</link>
		<dc:creator>chris sivori</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 19 Jul 2008 22:57:01 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.letterneversent.com/index.php/archives/2008/05/05/s%c3%b8ren-kierkegaards-view-on-the-aesthetic-life/#comment-148575</guid>
		<description>1. Extreme disbelief in elves is not equivalent to extreme disbelief in God. The presumption of a Creator is not ridiculous or illogical, though it still be a presumption. The idea of a Creator-less universe is also a presumption. Let's all acknowledge this. 

2. Nay-saying is not equivalent to unknowing. While a-theist, is without God. The commonly accepted meaning of atheism is "no God". In my thinking, I think mostly of the proselytizing "your belief in God is ridiculous" atheist.

3. Some things are beyond articulation or knowing. I may not build my life around such unknowable concepts, but it would be premature to reject them as this is precisely the type of certitude that requires knowledge.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>1. Extreme disbelief in elves is not equivalent to extreme disbelief in God. The presumption of a Creator is not ridiculous or illogical, though it still be a presumption. The idea of a Creator-less universe is also a presumption. Let&#8217;s all acknowledge this. </p>
<p>2. Nay-saying is not equivalent to unknowing. While a-theist, is without God. The commonly accepted meaning of atheism is &#8220;no God&#8221;. In my thinking, I think mostly of the proselytizing &#8220;your belief in God is ridiculous&#8221; atheist.</p>
<p>3. Some things are beyond articulation or knowing. I may not build my life around such unknowable concepts, but it would be premature to reject them as this is precisely the type of certitude that requires knowledge.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: You damn well know who</title>
		<link>http://www.letterneversent.com/s%c3%b8ren-kierkegaards-view-on-the-aesthetic-life/2306/#comment-148573</link>
		<dc:creator>You damn well know who</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 19 Jul 2008 19:41:57 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.letterneversent.com/index.php/archives/2008/05/05/s%c3%b8ren-kierkegaards-view-on-the-aesthetic-life/#comment-148573</guid>
		<description>you can't be an 'extreme atheist' any more than you can be an 'extreme' disbeliever in elves.

Furthermore if the concept is introduced as incoherent, unknowable, off limits, etc., then one who ignores it totally is an "atheist", by definition, one who doesn't use the word or concept.

If you can't articulate what is your 'possibility of god' is, then it's safe to reject it.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>you can&#8217;t be an &#8216;extreme atheist&#8217; any more than you can be an &#8216;extreme&#8217; disbeliever in elves.</p>
<p>Furthermore if the concept is introduced as incoherent, unknowable, off limits, etc., then one who ignores it totally is an &#8220;atheist&#8221;, by definition, one who doesn&#8217;t use the word or concept.</p>
<p>If you can&#8217;t articulate what is your &#8216;possibility of god&#8217; is, then it&#8217;s safe to reject it.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
