I didn't like the article.

This is a good example of spirituality in the modern era: the penis as an external soul.

soul

I liked the article.
---------------------------
A fine example of 21st century spirituality indeed.
I like spirits in my Irish coffee, but I distrust anyone using words like spiritual and spirituality as a matter of course, or using them in some article on 'healing', or 'this society' (lacking 'spirituality e.g.).
Are we back to discussions of the soul, this good old vital force ('élan vital' & Henri Bergson - to drop a name here); mind & matter, narrowed down to man's sexual organs?

"Would you like to see my external soul?" as a pick-up: I might try this phrase on some dating sites to see how many women would understand what it means.

Did the discussion with these students reach any conclusions?
Do we indeed have a soul (again) or was that a premisse anyway?

bert

Don't underestimate women. Even those on dating sites.
When a man refers to something external, he is talking about his penis.
When a man refers to his soul, he is talking about his penis.
When a man refers to his soul mate, he is talking about himself.

Soul 2

@Vera M
I don't underestimate anyone. Even those on dating sites.
(Who is underestimating women here?!)
But what a few sentences cannot do to my estimation or 'appreciation' of either a man or a woman !
When I talk of something external I certainly would not be talking about myself.
I deny the existence of a soul.
Having a 'soulmate' is based on an illusion.

Mr. Hesper

I urge you to read "Slow Man" before you are jumping to conclusions.

Slow Man

If it is urgent I certainly might some day.
But I think JM Coetzee isn't going to be one of my favourite writers.
Too much of a writer's writer perhaps.
I have always liked reading ABOUT him and his books.
Furthermore as I happen to be a bit of a slow man myself I doubt I will ever reach for one his books.

Where exactly did I jump to conclusions?
I made some remarks and observations on the subject of this 'external soul' which I think doesn't mean much, if anything.
Didn't and will not need the book for that.

Mr Hesper

Your certainty about the soul, your conviction that it is a waste of time to speak about something that is nonexistent.

Mr Grunberg

Yes, but the point was: discussing some CONCEPT may be interesting, but what about the MEANING of these words, i.c. 'external soul'?
[See e.g. C.K. Ogden & I.A. Richards: The Meaning Of Meaning,
or Wayne C. Booth: The Rhetoric Of Fiction]

I might miss something here, or just not understand, but WHAT was discussed? The external soul? Or something entirely different?
Was the discussion with these students about the MEANING of those words, (hence my inquiry about any conclusions).
Or about every possible connotation/association these words might conjure up?
(Which in your mind led to the word 'penis'?)
Whatever (as they say these days), I may be getting too far off into all kinds of philosophical and literary problems....
For which you may have no time and/or patience to go into yourself.
So you react with 'don't jump to conclusions' / 'urge you to read the book' / 'my certainty' / 'my conviction'.
OK.
Are you sure you were discussing something meaningful?
Are you convinced of the existence of something like 'the external soul'? Or was it all just words, words, words, signifying nothing?

Hesper

You miss something here because you refuse to read "Slow Man".

FYI It's Paul Rayment, the main character of "Slow Man" who is linking his soul to his penis. And to be more precise he is quoting Augustine before he is making the comparison.

So perhaps reading Augustine would be helpful as well.

Your distinction between "meaning" and "concept" is not helpful at all.

Let's assume I state "mr. Hesper is my favorite name-dropper" -- I don't see how distinguishing the meaning of "name-dropper" from the concept of "name-dropper" is going to help us.

If Mr. Rayment is convinced that his penis is his external soul (he is a bit more prudent in his statement) I'm convinced of the existence of this thing, at least for as long as I'm reading "Slow Man" and as long as I'm thinking about this book.

You don't seem to understand how fiction works.

You believe that you yourself are the measure of all things.

Since you believe, perhaps for good reason, that we have no souls you are unable to identify with people who have other opinions, or even take these people seriously. (I don't believe there is an important difference between people and characters in this context.)

What is worse you don't take words seriously, hence your cry: "It's all words, words, words."

Grunberg

1) I didn't refuse anything; just said it was unlikely for me to read 'Slow Man', being a slow man myself.

2) "You don't seem to understand how fiction works.
You believe that you yourself are the measure of all things."
I do & I don't; please don't jump to conclusions here!
I wouldn't be reading your novels etc if I believed myself to be the measure of all things.

3) "I'm convinced of the existence of this thing, at least for as long as I'm reading "Slow Man" and as long as I'm thinking about this book."
- Of course, that's the old 'willing suspension of disbelief'.

4) "What is worse you don't take words seriously, hence your cry: "It's all words, words, words.""
Ah well, perhaps I should urge you to reread your Shakespeare?
'What are you reading my Lord?" - "Words, words, words."

5) Finally, I think we might be talking at cross-purposes here.
Irony is a difficult thing.
I was talking ironically about your discussions with these students.
(External soul? Are we going 'metaphysical' again? Etc)
That was all.
But you missed my irony, I think.
(What about me calling myself a slow man, which should lead you to the simple 'conclusion' that I happen to be a lost soul?)
(And consequently will never bother to read that novel?)
(I'm not refusing to read it, I am too slow to do so)

Mr Hesper

I missed the irony completely.

Shakespeare is a lame excuse.

Student: To be or not be, that is the question

Teacher: That's a cliche.

Student: Not it's Shakespeare.

Regarding being a slow man, I do hope you have all your limbs.

slow man

Thank you Mr Grunberg, I do have all my limbs, but I'm still kind of a slow man.
Meaning that I myself may easily be compared with Paul Raiment (vraiment), someone who won't readily seize every opportunity to better his life.
A bystander, an observer, and not much else.
Isn't this novel by Coetzee about 'joie de vivre' etc.?

Hesper

I'm nor sure if "Slow Man" is about joie de vivre, unless you would state that certain (unsuitable) passions can be compared to joie de vivre.
Rayment rhymes with vraiment, you are correct.