time and narration 2 and can some1 explain this to me? especially the
greimas part?

sirblob2@hotmail.com schreef:
> time and narration 2 and can some1 explain this to me? especially the
> greimas part?

Maybe this link is usefull: http://folk.uio.no/geira/thesis/thesis.pdf

On 2 jul, 10:00, Leon Hoeneveld  wrote:
> sirbl...@hotmail.com schreef:
>
> > time and narration 2 and can some1 explain this to me? especially the
> > greimas part?
>
> Maybe this link is usefull:http://folk.uio.no/geira/thesis/thesis.pdf

nah. it isnt. if i read it i'd just be more anxious.

sirblob2@hotmail.com schreef:
> On 2 jul, 10:00, Leon Hoeneveld  wrote:
>> sirbl...@hotmail.com schreef:
>>
>>> time and narration 2 and can some1 explain this to me? especially the
>>> greimas part?
>> Maybe this link is usefull:http://folk.uio.no/geira/thesis/thesis.pdf
> 
> nah. it isnt. if i read it i'd just be more anxious.

that's intended all the way

philosophy is thinking until you don't have to do it.

On 2 jul, 11:31, Leon Hoeneveld  wrote:
> sirbl...@hotmail.com schreef:
>
> > On 2 jul, 10:00, Leon Hoeneveld  wrote:
> >> sirbl...@hotmail.com schreef:
>
> >>> time and narration 2 and can some1 explain this to me? especially the
> >>> greimas part?
> >> Maybe this link is usefull:http://folk.uio.no/geira/thesis/thesis.pdf
>
> > nah. it isnt. if i read it i'd just be more anxious.
>
> that's intended all the way
>
> philosophy is thinking until you don't have to do it.

all i can do these days is mumbly splagoogle something along the lines
of 'less goethe, more spinoza' and in capital letters...

sirblob2@hotmail.com schreef:
> On 2 jul, 11:31, Leon Hoeneveld  wrote:
>> sirbl...@hotmail.com schreef:
>>
>>> On 2 jul, 10:00, Leon Hoeneveld  wrote:
>>>> sirbl...@hotmail.com schreef:
>>>>> time and narration 2 and can some1 explain this to me? especially the
>>>>> greimas part?
>>>> Maybe this link is usefull:http://folk.uio.no/geira/thesis/thesis.pdf
>>> nah. it isnt. if i read it i'd just be more anxious.
>> that's intended all the way
>>
>> philosophy is thinking until you don't have to do it.
> 
> all i can do these days is mumbly splagoogle something along the lines
> of 'less goethe, more spinoza' and in capital letters...

I wonder if you ever get to Gadamer then. In a thesis from a friend of 
mine Gadamer is compared with Wittgenstein, with the main theme the 
hermeneutics.

Through Gadamer we get in the process of judging prejudices,as a result 
of hemeneutics. Judging predjudices is done with prejudices, but you get 
closer to understanding your individuality and so also closer to an 
understanding of commonality. It is this explaining what is individual 
(knowledge) and what is not that lets you make a full hermeneutic 
circle. Any depth in a story is what divides individual point of views 
with collective points of view.

On 2 jul, 18:38, Leon Hoeneveld  wrote:
> sirbl...@hotmail.com schreef:
>
> > On 2 jul, 11:31, Leon Hoeneveld  wrote:
> >> sirbl...@hotmail.com schreef:
>
> >>> On 2 jul, 10:00, Leon Hoeneveld  wrote:
> >>>> sirbl...@hotmail.com schreef:
> >>>>> time and narration 2 and can some1 explain this to me? especially the
> >>>>> greimas part?
> >>>> Maybe this link is usefull:http://folk.uio.no/geira/thesis/thesis.pdf
> >>> nah. it isnt. if i read it i'd just be more anxious.
> >> that's intended all the way
>
> >> philosophy is thinking until you don't have to do it.
>
> > all i can do these days is mumbly splagoogle something along the lines
> > of 'less goethe, more spinoza' and in capital letters...
>
> I wonder if you ever get to Gadamer then. In a thesis from a friend of
> mine Gadamer is compared with Wittgenstein, with the main theme the
> hermeneutics.
>

mine are keeping it safe, doing theses on, say, ONE pynchon book.

> Through Gadamer we get in the process of judging prejudices,as a result
> of hemeneutics. Judging predjudices is done with prejudices, but you get
> closer to understanding your individuality and so also closer to an
> understanding of commonality. It is this explaining what is individual
> (knowledge) and what is not that lets you make a full hermeneutic
> circle. Any depth in a story is what divides individual point of views
> with collective points of view.

the circle's a laugh and as funny as harold bloom.

sirblob2@hotmail.com schreef:


> the circle's a laugh and as funny as harold bloom.

And now judge your prejudice.