Author: Chaim Simons File Type: pdf Who said the following?1) I favour compulsory transfer (of Arabs). I see nothing unethical in it.2) The Jews ... will help in getting Arabs out of Galilee.3) Palestine should be for the Jews and no Arabs should be in it.4) Western Palestine should be handed over completely to the Jews, clear of Arab population...For the answers, read this book... you will get some surprises!!

Author: Andrew Cutrofello File Type: pdf A specter is haunting philosophy -- the specter of Hamlet. Why is this? Wherefore? What should we do?Entering from stage left the philosophers Hamlet. The philosophers Hamlet is a conceptual character, played by philosophers rather than actors. He performs not in the theater but within the space of philosophical positions. In All for Nothing, Andrew Cutrofello critically examines the performance history of this unique role. The philosophers Hamlet personifies negativity. In Shakespeares play, Hamlets speech and action are characteristically negative he is the melancholy Dane. Most would agree that he has nothing to be cheerful about. Philosophers have taken Hamlet to embody specific forms of negativity that first came into view in modernity. What the figure of the Sophist represented for Plato, Hamlet has represented for modern philosophers. Cutrofello analyzes five aspects of Hamlets negativity his melancholy, negative faith, nihilism, tarrying (which Cutrofello distinguishes from delaying), and nonexistence. Along the way, we meet Hamlet in the texts of Kant, Coleridge, Hegel, Marx, Schopenhauer, Kierkegaard, Nietzsche, Freud, Russell, Wittgenstein, Heidegger, Benjamin, Arendt, Schmitt, Lacan, Deleuze, Foucault, Derrida, Badiou, Zizek, and other philosophers. Whirling across a kingdom of infinite space, the philosophers Hamlet is nothing if not thought-provoking.** A specter is haunting philosophy -- the specter of Hamlet. Why is this? Wherefore? What should we do?Entering from stage left the philosophers Hamlet. The philosophers Hamlet is a conceptual character, played by philosophers rather than actors. He performs not in the theater but within the space of philosophical positions. In All for Nothing, Andrew Cutrofello critically examines the performance history of this unique role. The philosophers Hamlet personifies negativity. In Shakespeares play, Hamlets speech and action are characteristically negative he is the melancholy Dane. Most would agree that he has nothing to be cheerful about. Philosophers have taken Hamlet to embody specific forms of negativity that first came into view in modernity. What the figure of the Sophist represented for Plato, Hamlet has represented for modern philosophers. Cutrofello analyzes five aspects of Hamlets negativity his melancholy, negative faith, nihilism, tarrying (which Cutrofello distinguishes from delaying), and nonexistence. Along the way, we meet Hamlet in the texts of Kant, Coleridge, Hegel, Marx, Schopenhauer, Kierkegaard, Nietzsche, Freud, Russell, Wittgenstein, Heidegger, Benjamin, Arendt, Schmitt, Lacan, Deleuze, Foucault, Derrida, Badiou, Zizek, and other philosophers. Whirling across a kingdom of infinite space, the philosophers Hamlet is nothing if not thought-provoking.

Author: Charles-Ferdinand Ramuz File Type: epub Joseph est un jeune homme taciturne. Il mene une vie paisible jusquau jour ou il decouvre la promesse de lamour avec Annabella, la belle acrobate dun cirque itinerant. Envoute, fou damour, Joseph ira jusquau meurtre pour atteindre son ideal...**

Author: Hugh Nicholson File Type: pdf In theological discourse, argues Hugh Nicholson, the political goes all the way down. One never reaches a bedrock level of politically neutral religious facts, because all theological discourse - even the most sublime, edifying, and spiritual--is shot through with polemical elements. Liberal theologies, from the Christian fulfillment theology of the nineteenth century to the pluralist theology of the twentieth, have assumed that religious writings attain spiritual truth and sublimity despite any polemical elements they might contain. Through his analysis and comparison of the Christian mystical theologian Meister Eckhart and his Hindu counterpart IaSkara, Nicholson arrives at a very different conclusion. Polemical elements may in fact constitute the creative source of the expressive power of religious discourses. Wayne Proudfoot has argued that mystical discourses embody a set of rules that repel any determinate understanding of the ineffable object or experience they purport to describe. In Comparative Theology and the Problem of Religious Rivalry, Nicholson suggests that this principle of negation is connected, perhaps through a process of abstraction and sublimation, with the need to distinguish oneself from ones intra- andor inter-religious adversaries. Nicholson proposes a new model of comparative theology that recognizes and confronts one of the most urgent cultural and political issues of our time namely, the return of the political in the form of anti-secular and fundamentalist movements around the world. This model acknowledges the ineradicable nature of an oppositional dimension of religious discourse, while honoring and even advancing the liberal project of curtailing intolerance and prejudice in the sphere of religion. **