tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-20662860.post6492592343326157815..comments2023-04-02T09:49:12.204-04:00Comments on Problems of Life: Stranger than FictionMatthew Pianaltohttp://www.blogger.com/profile/16380038537888895216noreply@blogger.comBlogger5125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-20662860.post-74858504223628925002012-02-13T00:04:43.376-05:002012-02-13T00:04:43.376-05:00I haven't read that, j. Thanks for the tip!I haven't read that, j. Thanks for the tip!Matthew Pianaltohttps://www.blogger.com/profile/16380038537888895216noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-20662860.post-70850440881870468972012-02-12T14:06:36.740-05:002012-02-12T14:06:36.740-05:00have you ever read jay bernstein's book on ado...have you ever read jay bernstein's book on adorno's ethics? i'm not sure about the fit between this talk about fictionalism and such, but my guess is that you would find it stimulating. especially the last chapter on 'ethical modernism', as a way of getting a semi-detachable sense of the stuff without wading through the very heavy detail work in the earlier chapters.j.https://www.blogger.com/profile/09002699528461726304noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-20662860.post-33115743677256675162012-02-10T09:54:43.166-05:002012-02-10T09:54:43.166-05:00Phillips, I think, would be a very good person to ...Phillips, I think, would be a very good person to read, although I don't know his work well enough to be able to point you to anything specific (shame on me). Rhees, too, I would think, unless you've already read everything of his. Although perhaps what you want is an atheist version of that kind of work. I don't know if such a thing exists. I remember finding Peter Byrne's book "Kant on God" very interesting in this connection (and someone else on Kant, too, maybe Paul Guyer). Supposedly Kant was, at least roughly speaking, an atheist who believed in sticking to religious language by the end of his life.Duncan Richterhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/15708344766825805406noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-20662860.post-3157894414486256032012-02-10T09:43:01.054-05:002012-02-10T09:43:01.054-05:00Thanks. I thought, too, about that book you'd ...Thanks. I thought, too, about that book you'd blogged about that claims that talk of God is expression of "love of a God of love," and I'd read that NDPR review of it, too, and found it in some ways curious. Maybe I should look at that book. (And I also need to read some John Whitaker and DZ Phillips probably. I saw Whitaker in Nashville in November, and he has some interesting "Wittgensteinian" (it seemed to me) ideas about religious language...he edited a book of essays in honor of Phillips.)Matthew Pianaltohttps://www.blogger.com/profile/16380038537888895216noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-20662860.post-5356436308481086692012-02-10T09:01:27.199-05:002012-02-10T09:01:27.199-05:00For what it's worth, I think it makes a lot of...For what it's worth, I think it makes a lot of sense (although I don't mean to suggest that what you're working hard to express is a piece of cake to understand). It's a hard trick to pull off, but I don't think you're alone in wanting to do so.Duncan Richterhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/15708344766825805406noreply@blogger.com