@ALEXI
ഇതിനു തൊട്ടു മുൻപായിട്ടു, 'ഷെർലക് ഹോംസ് നിവർത്തിയ ചുരുളുകൾ' എന്നൊരു ലേഖനമുണ്ട്.
അപസർപ്പക (detective) സാഹിത്യത്തിന്റെ ചരിത്രം. അതും വായിക്കാൻ നല്ല രസമാണ്.
Printable View
@ALEXI
ഇതിനു തൊട്ടു മുൻപായിട്ടു, 'ഷെർലക് ഹോംസ് നിവർത്തിയ ചുരുളുകൾ' എന്നൊരു ലേഖനമുണ്ട്.
അപസർപ്പക (detective) സാഹിത്യത്തിന്റെ ചരിത്രം. അതും വായിക്കാൻ നല്ല രസമാണ്.
Kant explicit aayi humeyude claimsine aanu tackle cheyyunth engilum anger athu vare undayirnna kure schoolsine masala paruvathil eduthath aayrinnu.. criqitiue ezuthan anger 12 varsham chinthichu, ezuthiyath oru 6 monthsil matto aanu ..
Humeyude modern day influencukaar sharikkum atheist aayirikkum , kaaranam angerude theistic arguments valre reasonable aanu pakse scieintific ithiri darkum.. athu anger ezuthiyath newtone pole ulla aalkar puthiya world view kond vanna samayath aayirnnu ..
yes... the religious view of hume was on the foundation that morality has nothing to do with the concept of god... the humean framework is found to be atheistic because of his belief that religion can actually corrupt a person or make him immoral... for him all these rituals of fasting, praying, humility, silence, it bloody makes a person more susceptible to think he is entitled to chainsaw massacre... then comes kant's religious view where he too finds morality a problem in religious matters (his point that children should be taught about god only after they have fully understood what is good and bad and not the other way around) but kant is far less agnostic than hume... for kant, his concept of moral theism is belief in god while following the moral law...
as for hume's scientific outlook, it leads to a skepticism about everything which could eventually lead to nihilism and that is something totally unscientific.
Hume pole pinned vanna schoppeneur angeyytam pessimist aanu.. hume scientific thoughtinte limitation aanengil schoppeneour human groundil ninnum love,friendship,music polum akramikum .. pinneed post modernist vannu history,culture ellathinteym mele hume stylil avasanthe aaniyum adichu koduthu ...
https://images-na.ssl-images-amazon....4,203,200_.jpg
50th year of khasak sees the fourth edition of the french translation. the beauty of this work is the language. the english translation by vijayan himself was a disaster in that respect. all the beautiful words used by vijayan in malayalam seemed so dead in english though the truth is vijayan himself was more comfortable with the english language and having taught the language at madras chrisitian college. the french translation might have captured the sartre existentialism of the subject but would have failed to capture the essence of the conversations. nizam ali, mollakka, maimoona - i have no idea how a french translator could do justice to the words spoken by these characters.
arthur schopenhauer is someone i have not given much time to. maybe its because my mind leaned more towards philosophical realism than transcendental idealism. i would prefer to believe reality is something i can have grasp on rather than doubting the ability of my own mind to even have such a grasp. kant and schopenhauer who follows him, they might be right about the noumenal world and the limitations of the mind to get perceptions about it and form subsequent knowledge about those. but i believe in the powers of the mind to grasp the necessary concepts of the phenomena rather than the unnecessary ones of the noumena. anyways will read about schopenhauer and get back to you.