"if things cannot keep being, their value is limited. if they can’t be at all, their value is similarly non-extant. any ethics that is realist... will be an ethics of survival: what can we do to last longer?"
-
-
(actually such a statement would constitute a kind of obscenity or transgression under this philosophy)
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
-
-
But I have no idea why one would place mere 'survival', which is itself unsustainable without metamorphic change, over 'transcendence'.
-
that's probably the best summary of the unbridgeable gap between realists and idealists.
End of conversation
New conversation -
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.