Happy new year to you all! I, for one, am glad that all of you find yourselves getting. sorted for another year of challenges and surprises. I’m also reassured that each and all of you will undoubtedly rise to the task.
It has been a while since anything “happened” here in the Café, so over the holidays I gave some thought to perhaps getting the ball rolling again. I, for one, wouldn’t mind at all a bit of conversation about something unpolitical but worth-the-time and came up with the proposal presented here. All responses welcome.
What?
A proposal for a series of Cosmos Café (CCafé) sessions or some other TBD format of a structured, organized, collective, close, and critical reading of
Markus Gabriel’s (2017) Why The World Does Not Exist, Translated by Gregory S. Moss, Cambridge, UK/Malden, MA , Polity Press [v + 239 pp. (incl. Notes, Glossary, and Index of Names)].
This is the first book of a trilogy (why is it that German philosophers apparently think in threes … cf. Kant, Sloterdijk) introducing what the author proposes as a school of philosophical thought called the New Realism. We’re obviously not over the “worldview wars” yet, but this is a very down-to-earth, accessible take on a realist’s view of the battle. As with the Kastrup reading we did a couple of years back, one need not be a philosophy freak to get in on this one. Don’t let the “ontology” or “epistemology” intimidate you: being and knowing are familiar enough to all of us which more like Gabriel’s approach. Once again, at bottom, this is a book about what is reality and why do we think so?
Why?
If you’re as “geeky” as I am or are simply a curious individual who is interested in how we humans try to make sense of the “world” in which we find ourselves, it could be, well, dare I say it? FUN.
This reading dovetails nicely with a number of CCafés we’ve had over the years: not just on Kastrup, but also Hofstadter, Langer, Bortoft, and Gebser, to name the first that spring to mind, but it also picks up on themes that go beyond these, especially those which have centered on or intersected with our discussions on consciousness, alternate ways of knowing, language, and more.
Most of us in this corner of the cosmos agree that physicalism/materialism only gets you so far: there’s more in heaven and on earth than is dreamt of its philosophy. Idealism, in a variety of flavors, is probably the most widespread “alternative” view of things, and here is where Gabriel comes in: his is a case for a realist approach.
In spite of its systematic approach and specific (but not “jargony”) language (the translations more than does the original justice), it is nevertheless closely argued and full of logical detail. It is the kind of book that needs to be talked about with others, not just read on its own. I, for one, would like the opportunity for “sanity checks” of my own reading, which is possible for everyone participating in this particular reading. While not wanting to project my own shortcomings onto others, given the depth and seriousness of the underlying topic, I think others would also benefit from being able to “kick the tires” on this one before deciding on whether to take it out for a spin.
How?
The book is available as a(n English-language) trade paperback, and (though I read it in the original German) it has also been translated into French and Spanish, if that makes it more accessible to you. It’s not all that long (see bibliographic info, above), and due to its style and presentation, I’m estimating we could cover the text in five (5) bi-weekly (i.e., every 14 days) CCafé (or CCafé-like) sessions plus, if necessary, an initial meet-up to get ourselves organized.
Just so you know, I would be willing to take care of the primary organization of the reading (setting up the session pages for the individual CCafé sessions, moderating the meet-ups, etc.), but I am also open to any other reasonable format, just in case someone has an approach suitable for getting us involved with and enaged in the text. These are precisely the kind of details we could sort out in an organizational meet-up, if we should so choose. Otherwise, I’d approach this in a very similar manner to how we read Kastrup or Bortoft, for example.
When?
Given sufficient interest, we could start whenever it is convenient for all interested parties. However …
It is clear to me that with a potential worldwide participation, severe limits are placed on our get-togethers (and if the following is confusing, you might find some help here). Unfortunately, as the world is turning right now, and given that I’m physically located in Germany, Tuesdays or Thursdays (maybe Wednesdays), 8:00 pm +/- 1 (CET; 7:00 pm UK; 2:00 pm EST, noon MST, 11:00 am PST; 3:00-5:00 am, next day AWST-AEST) is most suitable for me. If there were enough interested and enthusiastic parties involved, I might be able to swing a Sunday get-together around the same time.
Who?
Anyone game?