Sam (![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png)
l33tminion) wrote2007-05-17 09:59 pm
l33tminion) wrote2007-05-17 09:59 pm
More Train Reading
Middlesex - The autobiography / family history of a fictional hermaphrodite. I really can't explain it any better than that, except to say that this book received a lot of critical acclaim when it first came out, and rightly so.
Jewish with Feeling - This book was recommended to me by a stranger on a train in Boston. I bought it a while ago, but I just got around to reading it. The book presents a case for spirituality and an argument why Judaism makes an effective center for such a spiritual life, even accepting a "universalist" position. I recommend this book to anyone who's interested in Judaism, especially those interested in Jewish mysticism. (Dan: I'd like to recommend this to you personally. Just to be perfectly clear, I don't mean that as any sort of covert criticism; I just think you'd really enjoy it.)
The Problem of Pain - My next choice was C.S. Lewis's theodicy, borrowed from the library in the IES Center. Lewis plays this venerable game of theological chess with great skill and style. His opening is a variant of the popular free will theodicy (with some fine distinctions made between "omnibenevolent" and "all loving"), and he goes on to discuss human suffering, animal pain, and the concept of heaven and hell. I was a bit disappointed that Lewis doesn't pursue this argument to it's utmost level (while he convincingly argues that some suffering can't be avoided while allowing meaningful free will, he doesn't argue the case of whether all suffering in this world is necessary in that way). Also, I found it annoying that Lewis's belief in Christianity seems to be based on a false dichotomy. (The relevant quote: "Either he [Jesus] was a raving lunatic of an unusually abominable type, or else He was, and is, precisely what He said. There is no middle way.") On the other hand, I like that Lewis is not a creationist, he addresses atheism seriously and respectfully, and his writing is undoubtedly excellent. I was also struck by the extreme similarities between Lewis's exposition on the "fall of Man" and Quinn's (delivered by the title character in Ishmael). That was very surprising, considering the huge difference between their philosophical backgrounds.
Jewish with Feeling - This book was recommended to me by a stranger on a train in Boston. I bought it a while ago, but I just got around to reading it. The book presents a case for spirituality and an argument why Judaism makes an effective center for such a spiritual life, even accepting a "universalist" position. I recommend this book to anyone who's interested in Judaism, especially those interested in Jewish mysticism. (Dan: I'd like to recommend this to you personally. Just to be perfectly clear, I don't mean that as any sort of covert criticism; I just think you'd really enjoy it.)
The Problem of Pain - My next choice was C.S. Lewis's theodicy, borrowed from the library in the IES Center. Lewis plays this venerable game of theological chess with great skill and style. His opening is a variant of the popular free will theodicy (with some fine distinctions made between "omnibenevolent" and "all loving"), and he goes on to discuss human suffering, animal pain, and the concept of heaven and hell. I was a bit disappointed that Lewis doesn't pursue this argument to it's utmost level (while he convincingly argues that some suffering can't be avoided while allowing meaningful free will, he doesn't argue the case of whether all suffering in this world is necessary in that way). Also, I found it annoying that Lewis's belief in Christianity seems to be based on a false dichotomy. (The relevant quote: "Either he [Jesus] was a raving lunatic of an unusually abominable type, or else He was, and is, precisely what He said. There is no middle way.") On the other hand, I like that Lewis is not a creationist, he addresses atheism seriously and respectfully, and his writing is undoubtedly excellent. I was also struck by the extreme similarities between Lewis's exposition on the "fall of Man" and Quinn's (delivered by the title character in Ishmael). That was very surprising, considering the huge difference between their philosophical backgrounds.
no subject
no subject
However, the correct term is "intersex person" or "intersexual". Humans can't be hermaphrodites, biologically speaking...snails can, though. You would only use the word "hermaphrodite" to refer to an intersex person who self-identified with that term, but it isn't the correct terminology to use to refer to people with biological gender ambiguity anymore.
no subject
By the way, I adore your icon. I'm such a Hedhead, and in my aforementioned senior project, I referenced the movie and song and included a picture of the lightning splitting the people. Fun times.
no subject
As far as I recall, the narrator of the story uses "hermaphrodite" more often, although there's at least some discussion of the term "intersex".
no subject
Middlesex == <3