Regarding the “apple” example: are we not merely conforming to a “concept of an apple,” which is an invention of language (a reification) that itself evolved to communicate our subjective experiences, thereby being sufficiently removed from them? As far as I know, nothing like “immediate apprehension or experience” exists, whether physical or mental, because everything that exists has necessary causes and conditions and therefore exists only contingently. Hence, there cannot be any universal essences, i.e., a thing-in-itself.
I'm not too familiar with the core of Idealism and arguments like this but, coincidentally, I am reading Otto's Dionysus which takes Usener's view to task in a way similar to what you are saying here.
The reduction of a god to a single essence may, in fact, destroy the character of certain gods, especially those which are described in myths as of a polar nature, that is, self-contradictory. Dionysus or his corrolaries exhibit both death and life, so the anthropological/philological attempt to reduce him to "the vegetation god" makes no sense. Per my article, who would be awed into worship by "the phenomenological essence of vegetation"?
A more Romantic viewpoint, perhaps thereby a more Greek one, and what you propose, is something like what would be described as "the symphony of the gods". Reducing each to an individual component may help you understand the instrument itself, but it has nothing to do with hearing "the whole" performance, in which the art of music plays with the contrast and unison of the parts.
But, we still need to explain where religion comes from. Usener etc still necessary for this. I will rewrite this project soon, but much more reading to be done
Only a god can save us now...
wheres the next 2 parts nigga
Have to read a lot more and rewrite. Could push these out but they'd be a little sloppy
Are you going to do the two parts?
Regarding the “apple” example: are we not merely conforming to a “concept of an apple,” which is an invention of language (a reification) that itself evolved to communicate our subjective experiences, thereby being sufficiently removed from them? As far as I know, nothing like “immediate apprehension or experience” exists, whether physical or mental, because everything that exists has necessary causes and conditions and therefore exists only contingently. Hence, there cannot be any universal essences, i.e., a thing-in-itself.
I'm not too familiar with the core of Idealism and arguments like this but, coincidentally, I am reading Otto's Dionysus which takes Usener's view to task in a way similar to what you are saying here.
The reduction of a god to a single essence may, in fact, destroy the character of certain gods, especially those which are described in myths as of a polar nature, that is, self-contradictory. Dionysus or his corrolaries exhibit both death and life, so the anthropological/philological attempt to reduce him to "the vegetation god" makes no sense. Per my article, who would be awed into worship by "the phenomenological essence of vegetation"?
A more Romantic viewpoint, perhaps thereby a more Greek one, and what you propose, is something like what would be described as "the symphony of the gods". Reducing each to an individual component may help you understand the instrument itself, but it has nothing to do with hearing "the whole" performance, in which the art of music plays with the contrast and unison of the parts.
But, we still need to explain where religion comes from. Usener etc still necessary for this. I will rewrite this project soon, but much more reading to be done