It's End of Financial Year madness here at the Opinion Emporium! All opinions on sale at never to be repeated prices! Send money quickly for an opinion on any topic, and you'll be proud to print out my personalised response 300 times and glue each copy to your lounge room floor for that unique look that your friends are guaranteed to notice.
Need a fresh opinion next year? No problem. New opinions always available, but never at these never-to-be-repeated prices!
Hurry, opinion sale must end 30 June!
Meanwhile, posting will be light here while I deal with the influx of orders. Don't miss out: order your opinion now!
4 comments:
What about an opinion on this? It's some interesting musings on theodicy by James Wood, though I can't help but feel some of his arguments are a little lacking.
Tim, Tim, Tim. I had mentioned that article a couple of weeks ago here. Once again evidence that you do not sit at the feet of my blog and read and memorise every word, in the way I used to imagine you did!
The article was interesting, I thought, though nothing particularly new.
One thing I have been meaning to say about theodicy is that I don't know why people get stuck into Christianity about this and give the asian religions a easy pass. As far as I can tell, Buddhism avoids the problem by saying that suffering is just all in your mind anyway. Give up desire and you don't suffer.
I think this is an idea that has many unappealing aspects to it, but because the Dalai Lama smiles a lot, and doesn't emphasise much that he is every bit as conservative on sexual morality as the old Catholic Church, people never question this aspect of his religion and think that Buddhism is more sophisticated and "nice" than Christianity.
[My fee for his opinion: $200. Cheque or cash only, please.]
This is what happens when you get a blog that claims a monopoly on the opinion market!
(And this is also what happens when people update their blogs more regularly than I receive my print version of the New Yorker. Damn, damn!)
The main problem I had with that article was its inadequate definition of 'suffering.' Wood seemed to settle on the definition 'people dying', mostly in noticeable ways like in earthquakes or tsunamis. This is a rather inadequate definition, IMO. (A much more challenging type of suffering, one imagines, would be the infliction of needless physical pain upon undeserving sufferers, either through cancer or accident.)
Saw Prince Caspian, by the way. Splendid film, though the Caspian/Susan suggested romance could have been left out. (I think Adamson/the writers are looking for a way of writing Susan out of later films, and explaining the plot twist in 'The Last Battle' where she's fails to turn along with Peter, Lucy and Edmund, not to mention Professor Kirke, Polly, Eustace, and Jill.)
Post a Comment