Make a Donation

Consider making a donation to support SHAKSPER.

Subscribe to Our Feeds

Current Postings RSS

Announcements RSS

Home :: Archive :: 1994 :: February ::
Re: Universals and the Human Condition
Shakespeare Electronic Conference, Vol. 5, No. 0114.  Monday, 14 February 1994.
 
(1)     From:   William Proctor Williams <TB0WPW1@NIU.BITNET>
        Date:   Sunday, 13 Feb 94 18:52 CST
        Subj:   Re: SHK 5.0112  Re: Universals and the Human Condition
 
(2)     From:   William Godshalk <GODSHAWL@UCBEH>
        Date:   Sunday, 13 Feb 1994 22:04:40 -0500 (EST)
        Subj:   Re: SHK 5.0112  Re: Universals and the Human Condition
 
(3)     From:   Nate Johnson <
 This e-mail address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it
 >
        Date:   Monday, 14 Feb 1994 02:06:29 -0500
        Subj:   [Universals Discussion]
 
 
(1)----------------------------------------------------------------------------
From:           William Proctor Williams <TB0WPW1@NIU.BITNET>
Date:           Sunday, 13 Feb 94 18:52 CST
Subject: 5.0112  Re: Universals and the Human Condition
Comment:        Re: SHK 5.0112  Re: Universals and the Human Condition
 
All my words mean +exactly+ what I say they mean. Anyone who disagrees is
looking for a fat lip!
 
I find this discussion of the "Human Condition" pointless. What is Human?  What
is the Condition?  Who cares?  We all get up in the morning and, if we are
lucky, go in to teach our Shakespeare classes; if we are unlucky we go in to
teach our Comp. classes.   Can we, at least, live in the real world rather than
the rather exclusive world that Mr. Hawkes lives in. Have a nice day!!
 
William Proctor Williams
Department of English
Northern Illinois University
DeKalb, IL  60115
 
TB0WPW1@NIU.BITNET
 
(2)----------------------------------------------------------------------------
From:           William Godshalk <GODSHAWL@UCBEH>
Date:           Sunday, 13 Feb 1994 22:04:40 -0500 (EST)
Subject: 5.0112  Re: Universals and the Human Condition
Comment:        Re: SHK 5.0112  Re: Universals and the Human Condition
 
I have a question. If all human experience is culture specific and culture
relative, how is the worldwide study of science possible? If any and all human
observations are culture specific, how can any interpretation be falsified?
 
Francis Crick in THE ASTONISHING HYPOTHESIS seems to be saying that all human
brains work in the same way. If brains can be observed working in the same way,
the varying thoughts that we humans have are all generated in the same way. Why
emphasize different cultures? Why not emphasize the similarities of the human
brain?
 
In fact, why don't we get back to discussing the texts (I risk being called a
right-wing pig by the Dragon Son of Mona), the texts, I say, of Shakespeare?
 
I just got done reading The Wells/Taylor MACBETH, with interpolations from
Middleton. Or, did Shakespeare write the songs which Middleton later adapted
for THE WITCH? Anybody want to discuss?
 
Bill Godshalk
 
(3)----------------------------------------------------------------------------
From:           Nate Johnson <
 This e-mail address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it
 >
Date:           Monday, 14 Feb 1994 02:06:29 -0500
Subject:        [Universals Discussion]
 
I find the universal vs. not discussions, Luc Borot's passionate plea for
dispassion included, really very entertaining.  What are 500 people doing on
this list and why do tempers run so high over a writer who's been dead for
hundreds of years?  The very existence of this ongoing discussion seems, in
itself, worth taking into account.
 
Two little bits of cultural flotsam keep popping into my head whenever I
read my SHAKSPER e-mail these days.  First, Bob Dylan's line: "It
ain't no use talkin' to me / It's just the same as talkin' to you."  Second,
the great controversy in physics, "It's a wave!"  "No, stupid, it's a
particle..."  "No, it's a wave!"
 
--Nate Johnson
 

©2011 Hardy Cook. All rights reserved.