God and immortality

 On On Apr 24, 2025, at 00:59, Ermes Culos <eculos@hotmail.com> wrote:

Hi …

I tried to download what I think are samples of your work, but wasn't able to. It  may well be because I am not familiar with the format you’re using. Maybe a hint on how to use it will help. 

Meantime a comment on your thoughts.

Like you I find it hard to believe that a creator (if he exists at all) of so vast a universe would care in the least for someone like me. Having said this, it doesn’t matter all that much if he cares about me: what really matters, I think, is what people believe. At this moment I am thinking of my poor mother, whose earliest years (that included the years when I was growing up) were very hard, so hard that without  a deep conviction in God and that our suffering in this life was part of God’s plan, and that we would be rewarded for it in the end; that without this conviction her life would have been totally unbearable. (Dostoevski’s chapter “The Grand Inquisitor” in Brothers Karamazov comes to mind here.) For my mother—and for countless other people—God was reality. Whether or not I myself believe in God is sort of irrelevant. The universe is so big, as you have demonstrated, that what goes on at its fringes we really don't know. What we do know—I think—is that in our little, very little, corner of this universe, what is real seems to be anything but an absolute: given thing A, people on its left will see it as true, people on its right will see it as false. This, possibly more than ever, seems to be the case—in matters of religion, in matters of sex, in matters of politics, and so on. Going back to God: the universe may well be infinite in time and space. I think there are philosophers who will tell us that in an infinite universe anything is possible, including an all-powerful being. So maybe the position of Pascal (I think he was the guy) is the right one to take.

My position is a little more earthy. We are not likely to end up in any sort of conventional paradise. In all my years of tending to my gardening and orchard if I have learned anything it is this: that flowers keep coming back, year after year, and better and better if they are tended well. The flowers come out in the springtime and later in the season they wilt and die. There is non pretence here at immortality, at least not at the individual level. (Though in a broader sense maybe there is.) We're not too terribly different from flowers: we may live a very short life, but during this short life we can draw and give quite a bit of pleasure.  

As I said above, I haven’t been able to open your attachments, though I'm pretty sure that when I do get to open them, I will see some of your own blossoms.

All the best,

Ermes

Sent from my iPad

On Apr 23, 2025, at 02:35, wrote:

Ermes,

I was actually born a Catholic but at that time the Protestants and

Catholics were at war just across the water from where I grew up and

the troubles often spilt over to the mainland. Knowing little about

anything at the time, I still knew that these people could not be

following the doctrines of Jesus (who was by all accounts a decent

bloke).

The concept of gods or divinity has existed for a very long time.

Their stories and depictions have been passed down and reshaped over

generations. Recently, I read God: An Anatomy by Francesca

Stavrakopoulou—a work grounded in her academic background and deep

analysis of the Bible. The book paints a vivid portrait of a god with

strikingly human traits. Whether one believes or not, it's undeniable

that religion has had a profound social impact across centuries and

across the globe. Even today, around 85% of the world's population

identifies with some form of religion.

I can understand how the idea of gods emerged in the human mind and

how religions have provided a sense of identity, support, and

belonging. I also recognize the political power and influence many

religious institutions have amassed—the Catholic Church being one of

the most opulent and enduring examples.

I may have been born Catholic, but I’ve never believed in gods. To me,

they seem clearly like human inventions. I find it hard to comprehend

the idea of a god having a human form or speaking in human language.

From my perspective, we are insignificant creatures living on a tiny

rock we call Earth, orbiting an unremarkable star in a rather ordinary

solar system.

To put things in perspective:

In our galaxy (the Milky Way), there are estimated to be between 100

and 400 billion stars. Observations from the Kepler and Gaia missions

suggest that most of these stars have at least one planet. That means

there could be at least 100 billion planetary systems in the Milky Way

alone.

Beyond the Milky Way, the observable universe contains about 2

trillion galaxies. If each one had roughly 100 billion solar systems,

we’d be talking about some 200 sextillion solar systems—that's

200,000,000,000,000,000,000,000. A number so vast it becomes almost

abstract.

And this only concerns the observable universe. The real universe

could be much larger—or even infinite—which would mean an even more

inconceivably large number of solar systems out there. We won't even

consider the concept of multiverse.

With all that in mind, I find it hard to believe in stories that are

so clearly human in origin. Of course, the problem is that you can’t

prove the non-existence of a god—just as I can’t prove the

non-existence of fairies. But as far as I know, despite all the

stories, there’s not a single piece of concrete evidence for their

existence either.

I hope this gives you a clearer picture of where I’m coming from.

Naturally, in a fair and just world, everyone should be free to

believe what they want—so long as their beliefs don’t infringe on the

rights of others. My intention isn’t to change anyone’s faith (which,

by definition, requires no proof), but simply to assert that I too

have the right to hold my own beliefs, based on reason and personal

judgment.

Continuing with the Catholic theme, the Pope seemed like a decent

person—he’s shown more tolerance toward homosexuals and even washed

the feet of AIDS patients in Argentina. Maybe meeting Doctor Death, JD

Vance, was what finally broke him. Still, the Catholic Church doesn’t

support gay marriage or the ordination of women. So it’s not an

institution I wish to be closely associated with.

I wish you well my friend whatever your belief may be. I would hazard

a guess that whatever either of us believe it will be a long way from

anything that could be called reality. As we are both running out of

time I suggest that we return to our walks and our stories, with our

imaginations hitching a ride alongside nature for those precious

moments that still remain before us.

Have a great day.

Hi Steve.
I tried to download what I think are samples of your work, but wasn't able to. It  may well be because I am not familiar with the format you’re using. Maybe a hint on how to use it will help.
Meantime a comment on your thoughts.
Like you I find it hard to believe that a creator (if he exists at all) of so vast a universe would care in the least for someone like me. Having said this, it doesn’t matter all that much if he cares about me: what really matters, I think, is what people believe. At this moment I am thinking of my poor mother, whose earliest years (that included the years when I was growing up) were very hard, so hard that without  a deep conviction in God and that our suffering in this life was part of God’s plan, and that we would be rewarded for it in the end; that without this conviction her life would have been totally unbearable. (Dostoevski’s chapter “The Grand Inquisitor” in Brothers Karamazov comes to mind here.) For my mother—and for countless other people—God was reality. Whether or not I myself believe in God is sort of irrelevant. The universe is so big, as you have demonstrated, that what goes on at its fringes we really don't know. What we do know—I think—is that in our little, very little, corner of this universe, what is real seems to be anything but an absolute: given thing A, people on its left will see it as true, people on its right will see it as false. This, possibly more than ever, seems to be the case—in matters of religion, in matters of sex, in matters of politics, and so on. Going back to God: the universe may well be infinite in time and space. I think there are philosophers who will tell us that in an infinite universe anything is possible, including an all-powerful being. So maybe the position of Pascal (I think he was the guy) is the right one to take.
My position is a little more earthy. We are not likely to end up in any sort of conventional paradise. In all my years of tending to my gardening and orchard if I have learned anything it is this: that flowers keep coming back, year after year, and better and better if they are tended well. The flowers come out in the springtime and later in the season they wilt and die. There is no pretence here at immortality, at least not at the individual level. (Though in a broader sense maybe there is.) We're not too terribly different from flowers: we may live a very short life, but during this short life we can draw and give quite a bit of pleasure.  
As I said above, I haven’t been able to open your attachments, though I'm pretty sure that when I do get to open them, I will see some of your own blossoms.
All the best,
Ermes








Sent from my iPad

On Apr 23, 2025, at 02:35, stephen preece <stephen.preece@gmail.com> wrote:

Ermes,

I was actually born a Catholic but at that time the Protestants and
Catholics were at war just across the water from where I grew up and
the troubles often spilt over to the mainland. Knowing little about
anything at the time, I still knew that these people could not be
following the doctrines of Jesus (who was by all accounts a decent
bloke).

The concept of gods or divinity has existed for a very long time.
Their stories and depictions have been passed down and reshaped over
generations. Recently, I read God: An Anatomy by Francesca
Stavrakopoulou—a work grounded in her academic background and deep
analysis of the Bible. The book paints a vivid portrait of a god with
strikingly human traits. Whether one believes or not, it's undeniable
that religion has had a profound social impact across centuries and
across the globe. Even today, around 85% of the world's population
identifies with some form of religion.

I can understand how the idea of gods emerged in the human mind and
how religions have provided a sense of identity, support, and
belonging. I also recognize the political power and influence many
religious institutions have amassed—the Catholic Church being one of
the most opulent and enduring examples.

I may have been born Catholic, but I’ve never believed in gods. To me,
they seem clearly like human inventions. I find it hard to comprehend
the idea of a god having a human form or speaking in human language.
From my perspective, we are insignificant creatures living on a tiny
rock we call Earth, orbiting an unremarkable star in a rather ordinary
solar system.

To put things in perspective:

In our galaxy (the Milky Way), there are estimated to be between 100
and 400 billion stars. Observations from the Kepler and Gaia missions
suggest that most of these stars have at least one planet. That means
there could be at least 100 billion planetary systems in the Milky Way
alone.

Beyond the Milky Way, the observable universe contains about 2
trillion galaxies. If each one had roughly 100 billion solar systems,
we’d be talking about some 200 sextillion solar systems—that's
200,000, On Apr 24, 2025, at 00:59, Ermes Culos <eculos@hotmail.com> wrote:

Hi Steve.
I tried to download what I think are samples of your work, but wasn't able to. It  may well be because I am not familiar with the format you’re using. Maybe a hint on how to use it will help.
Meantime a comment on your thoughts.
Like you I find it hard to believe that a creator (if he exists at all) of so vast a universe would care in the least for someone like me. Having said this, it doesn’t matter all that much if he cares about me: what really matters, I think, is what people believe. At this moment I am thinking of my poor mother, whose earliest years (that included the years when I was growing up) were very hard, so hard that without  a deep conviction in God and that our suffering in this life was part of God’s plan, and that we would be rewarded for it in the end; that without this conviction her life would have been totally unbearable. (Dostoevski’s chapter “The Grand Inquisitor” in Brothers Karamazov comes to mind here.) For my mother—and for countless other people—God was reality. Whether or not I myself believe in God is sort of irrelevant. The universe is so big, as you have demonstrated, that what goes on at its fringes we really don't know. What we do know—I think—is that in our little, very little, corner of this universe, what is real seems to be anything but an absolute: given thing A, people on its left will see it as true, people on its right will see it as false. This, possibly more than ever, seems to be the case—in matters of religion, in matters of sex, in matters of politics, and so on. Going back to God: the universe may well be infinite in time and space. I think there are philosophers who will tell us that in an infinite universe anything is possible, including an all-powerful being. So maybe the position of Pascal (I think he was the guy) is the right one to take.
My position is a little more earthy. We are not likely to end up in any sort of conventional paradise. In all my years of tending to my gardening and orchard if I have learned anything it is this: that flowers keep coming back, year after year, and better and better if they are tended well. The flowers come out in the springtime and later in the season they wilt and die. There is no pretence here at immortality, at least not at the individual level. (Though in a broader sense maybe there is.) We're not too terribly different from flowers: we may live a very short life, but during this short life we can draw and give quite a bit of pleasure.  
As I said above, I haven’t been able to open your attachments, though I'm pretty sure that when I do get to open them, I will see some of your own blossoms.
All the best,
Ermes,000,000,000,000,000. A number so vast it becomes almost
abstract.

And this only concerns the observable universe. The real universe
could be much larger—or even infinite—which would mean an even more
inconceivably large number of solar systems out there. We won't even
consider the concept of Hi Steve. 
I tried to download what I think are samples of your work, but wasn't able to. It  may well be because I am not familiar with the format you’re using. Maybe a hint on how to use it will help. 
Meantime a comment on your thoughts.
Like you I find it hard to believe that a creator (if he exists at all) of so vast a universe would care in the least for someone like me. Having said this, it doesn’t matter all that much if he cares about me: what really matters, I think, is what people believe. At this moment I am thinking of my poor mother, whose earliest years (that included the years when I was growing up) were very hard, so hard that without  a deep conviction in God and that our suffering in this life was part of God’s plan, and that we would be rewarded for it in the end; that without this conviction her life would have been totally unbearable. (Dostoevski’s chapter “The Grand Inquisitor” in Brothers Karamazov comes to mind here.) For my mother—and for countless other people—God was reality. Whether or not I myself believe in God is sort of irrelevant. The universe is so big, as you have demonstrated, that what goes on at its fringes we really don't know. What we do know—I think—is that in our little, very little, corner of this universe, what is real seems to be anything but an absolute: given thing A, people on its left will see it as true, people on its right will see it as false. This, possibly more than ever, seems to be the case—in matters of religion, in matters of sex, in matters of politics, and so on. Going back to God: the universe may well be infinite in time and space. I think there are philosophers who will tell us that in an infinite universe anything is possible, including an all-powerful being. So maybe the position of Pascal (I think he was the guy) is the right one to take.
My position is a little more earthy. We are not likely to end up in any sort of conventional paradise. In all my years of tending to my gardening and orchard if I have learned anything it is this: that flowers keep coming back, year after year, and better and better if they are tended well. The flowers come out in the springtime and later in the season they wilt and die. There is non pretence here at immortality, at least not at the individual level. (Though in a broader sense maybe there is.) We're not too terribly different from flowers: we may live a very short life, but during this short life we can draw and give quite a bit of pleasure.  
As I said above, I haven’t been able to open your attachments, though I'm pretty sure that when I do get to open them, I will see some of your own blossoms.
All the best,
Ermes
With all that in mind, I find it hard to believe in stories that are
so clearly human in origin. Of course, the problem is that you can’t
prove the non-existence of a god—just as I can’t prove the
non-existence of fairies. But as far as I know, despite all the
stories, there’s not a single piece of concrete evidence for their
existence either.

I hope this gives you a clearer picture of where I’m coming from.
Naturally, in a fair and just world, everyone should be free to
believe what they want—so long as their beliefs don’t infringe on the
rights of others. My intention isn’t to change anyone’s faith (which,
by definition, requires no proof), but simply to assert that I too
have the right to hold my own beliefs, based on reason and personal
judgment.

Continuing with the Catholic theme, the Pope seemed like a decent
person—he’s shown more tolerance toward homosexuals and even washed
the feet of AIDS patients in Argentina. Maybe meeting Doctor Death, JD
Vance, was what finally broke him. Still, the Catholic Church doesn’t
support gay marriage or the ordination of women. So it’s not an
institution I wish to be closely associated with.

I wish you well my friend whatever your belief may be. I would hazard
a guess that whatever either of us believe it will be a long way from
anything that could be called reality. As we are both running out of
time I suggest that we return to our walks and our stories, with our
imaginations hitching a ride alongside nature for those precious
moments that still remain before us.

Have a great day!
Ps Here is what I am upto when not cleaning streets or writing
garbage. I feel, strangely perhaps, more alive when I draw. What do
you feel when you write? 24, 2025, at 00:59, Ermes Culos <eculos@hotmail.com> wrote:

Hi Steve.
I tried to download what I think are samples of your work, but wasn't able to. It  may well be because I am not familiar with the format you’re using. Maybe a hint on how to use it will help.
Meantime a comment on your thoughts.
Like you I find it hard to believe that a creator (if he exists at all) of so vast a universe would care in the least for someone like me. Having said this, it doesn’t matter all that much if he cares about me: what really matters, I think, is what people believe. At this moment I am thinking of my poor mother, whose earliest years (that included the years when I was growing up) were very hard, so hard that without  a deep conviction in God and that our suffering in this life was part of God’s plan, and that we would be rewarded for it in the end; that without this conviction her life would have been totally unbearable. (Dostoevski’s chapter “The Grand Inquisitor” in Brothers Karamazov comes to mind here.) For my mother—and for countless other people—God was reality. Whether or not I myself believe in God is sort of irrelevant. The universe is so big, as you have demonstrated, that what goes on at its fringes we really don't know. What we do know—I think—is that in our little, very little, corner of this universe, what is real seems to be anything but an absolute: given thing A, people on its left will see it as true, people on its right will see it as false. This, possibly more than ever, seems to be the case—in matters of religion, in matters of sex, in matters of politics, and so on. Going back to God: the universe may well be infinite in time and space. I think there are philosophers who will tell us that in an infinite universe anything is possible, including an all-powerful being. So maybe the position of Pascal (I think he was the guy) is the right one to take.
My position is a little more earthy. We are not likely to end up in any sort of conventional paradise. In all my years of tending to my gardening and orchard if I have learned anything it is this: that flowers keep coming back, year after year, and better and better if they are tended well. The flowers come out in the springtime and later in the season they wilt and die. There is no pretence here at immortality, at least not at the individual level. (Though in a broader sense maybe there is.) We're not too terribly different from flowers: we may live a very short life, but during this short life we can draw and give quite a bit of pleasure.  
As I said above, I haven’t been able to open your attachments, though I'm pretty sure that when I do get to open them, I will see some of your own blossoms.
All the best,
Ermes








Sent from my iPad

On Apr 23, 2025, at 02:35, stephen preece <stephen.preece@gmail.com> wrote:

Ermes,

I was actually born a Catholic but at that time the Protestants and
Catholics were at war just across the water from where I grew up and
the troubles often spilt over to the mainland. Knowing little about
anything at the time, I still knew that these people could not be
following the doctrines of Jesus (who was by all accounts a decent
bloke).

The concept of gods or divinity has existed for a very long time.
Their stories and depictions have been passed down and reshaped over
generations. Recently, I read God: An Anatomy by Francesca
Stavrakopoulou—a work grounded in her academic background and deep
analysis of the Bible. The book paints a vivid portrait of a god with
strikingly human traits. Whether one believes or not, it's undeniable
that religion has had a profound social impact across centuries and
across the globe. Even today, around 85% of the world's population
identifies with some form of religion.

I can understand how the idea of gods emerged in the human mind and
how religions have provided a sense of identity, support, and
belonging. I also recognize the political power and influence many
religious institutions have amassed—the Catholic Church being one of
the most opulent and enduring examples.

I may have been born Catholic, but I’ve never believed in gods. To me,
they seem clearly like human inventions. I find it hard to comprehend
the idea of a god having a human form or speaking in human language.
From my perspective, we are insignificant creatures living on a tiny
rock we call Earth, orbiting an unremarkable star in a rather ordinary
solar system.

To put things in perspective:

In our galaxy (the Milky Way), there are estimated to be between 100
and 400 billion stars. Observations from the Kepler and Gaia missions
suggest that most of these stars have at least one planet. That means
there could be at least 100 billion planetary systems in the Milky Way
alone.

Beyond the Milky Way, the observable universe contains about 2
trillion galaxies. If each one had roughly 100 billion solar systems,
we’d be talking about some 200 sextillion solar systems—that's
200,000,000,000,000,000,000,000. A number so vast it becomes almost
abstract.

And this only concerns the observable universe. The real universe
could be much larger—or even infinite—which would mean an even more
inconceivably large number of solar systems out there. We won't even
consider the concept of multiverse.

With all that in mind, I find it hard to believe in stories that are
so clearly human in origin. Of course, the problem is that you can’t
prove the non-existence of a god—just as I can’t prove the
non-existence of fairies. But as far as I know, despite all the
stories, there’s not a single piece of concrete evidence for their
existence either.

I hope this gives you a clearer picture of where I’m coming from.
Naturally, in a fair and just world, everyone should be free to
believe what they want—so long as their beliefs don’t infringe on the
rights of others. My intention isn’t to change anyone’s faith (which,
by definition, requires no proof), but simply to assert that I too
have the right to hold my own beliefs, based on reason and personal
judgment.

Continuing with the Catholic theme, the Pope seemed like a decent
person—he’s shown more tolerance toward homosexuals and even washed
the feet of AIDS patients in Argentina. Maybe meeting Doctor Death, JD
Vance, was what finally broke him. Still, the Catholic Church doesn’t
support gay marriage or the ordination of women. So it’s not an
institution I wish to be closely associated with.

I wish you well my friend whatever your belief may be. I would hazard
a guess that whatever either of us believe it will be a long way from
anything that could be called reality. As we are both running out of
time I suggest that we return to our walks and our stories, with our
imaginations hitching a ride alongside nature for those precious
moments that still remain before us.

Have a great day!
Ps Here is what I am upto when not cleaning streets or writing
garbage. I feel, strangely perhaps, more alive when I draw. What do
you feel when you write?

Riarmo e pace, o riarmo o pace

Alla Stampa

In Europa un'avvio (praticamente unanime) per il riarmo.  Esultano i leader europei. Calorose strette di mano e abbracci al Presidente Zelenski. Il perché? Semplicemente perché gli europei temono che gli Stati Uniti di Donald Trump si rifiutino di estendere il loro sostanziale aiuto alla Ukraina. Se non lo farà Trump, lo faremo noi: questo è l'orgoglio europeo, questa è la sfida lanciata a Trump. Gli europei, però, non vedono il sorriso sardonico del nuovo inquilino della Casa Bianca, che vede in questa decisione degli europei  la conseguenza diretta della sua “minaccia" di qualche anno anno fa, che se le nazioni NATO non si preparavano con più efficacia alla loro protezione, allora lui non avrebbe offerto nessuna protezione.  800 miliardi di Euro per il riarmo dovrebbero bastare—con avanzi—per la difesa dell'Europa. E gli Stati Uniti non dovranno far altro che ossservare, a spese minimissime, come bramerebbe Trump. Resta l'incognita: gioveranno questi fondi praticamente illimitati a ribaltare l'esito della guerra a favore dell'Ukraina? —o serviranno solo alla prolungazione del conflitto?

Ermes Culos

Ashcroft, BC Canada

Ashcroft, BC Can

…ihren Aether, den verderbt ihr nicht. Ah!

 

Scriveva Hölderlin un paio di secoli fa nel suo Hyperion:

(Oder ist nicht göttlich, was ihr höhnt und seellos nennt? Ist besser, denn euer Geschwätz, die Luft nicht, die ihr trinkt? der Sonne Strahlen, sind sie edler nicht, denn all ihr Klugen? der Erde Quellen und der Morgentau erfrischen euern Hain; könnt ihr auch das? ach! töten könnt ihr, aber nicht lebendig machen, wenn es die Liebe nicht tut, die nicht von euch ist, die ihr nicht erfunden. Ihr sorgt und sinnt, dem Schicksal zu entlaufen und begreift es nicht, wenn eure Kinderkunst nichts hilft; indessen wandelt harmlos droben das Gestirn. Ihr entwürdiget, ihr zerreißt, wo sie euch duldet, die geduldige Natur, doch lebt sie fort, in unendlicher Jugend, und ihren Herbst und ihren Frühling könnt ihr nicht vertreiben, ihren Aether, den verderbt ihr nicht.)

Cuanta ironìa ch'i ghi jodìn in ta chisti rìghis s'i pensàn a li porcarìis ch'i ghi vìn fàt a sta nustra puora cjera in taj ùltins doj sècuj!

Iperion

 Gentile X

Ringrazio per la lezione sul come scrivere correttamente una email. Mi sia permesso di osservare, però, che al di sopra della correttezza formale c'e pure qualcosa che si chiama cortesia o—come avrebbero detto i nostri vecchi—semplice “creansa” che, mi dispiace dirlo, è del tutto assente nella risposta della "filologica.” La filologica, dopotutto, non è qualcosa di inanime e indefinito. È fatta —dovrei dubitarne?—di individui, di persone che, come me, hanno un nome che li innalza dalla anonimità, dallo scuro, dallo scialbo. Insomma, quando una persona si firma con un nome specifico e reale, non è semplice creansa il rispondergli facendo uso del suo stesso nome?

Di più: il mio era un annuncio sulla traduzione (nella lingua che—solo la sua preservazione—giustifica l'esistenza della “filologica” e dell'anonimo che ha risposto al mio annuncio) di una delle opere più significative della letteratura europea, e che quindi non sarebbe sacrilego pensare che avrebbe meritato dalla filologica un cenno almeno un pochino più florido delle due insipide parole “suo scritto.” Di nuovo: creansa.

Ermes Culos

On Dec 10, 2024, at 01:36, Formazione <formazione@filologicafriulana.it> wrote:



Buongiorno,

nel ringraziarla del suo scritto, la invitiamo caldamente ad utilizzare, nei suoi prossimi invii di email agli indirizzi della sua rubrica, la funzione ccn copia nascosta. Questo per evidenti motivi di 1. Protezione dei dati sensibili 2. Prevenzione dello spam 3. Protezione da virus e malware.

Cordiali saluti,

 

Società Filologica Friulana

"Graziadio Isaia Ascoli"

Via Manin, 18 - 33100 Udine

tel. + 39 0432 501598

 

www.filologicafriulana.it

 

Daûr dal Regolament (UE) 2016/679 si precise che lis informazions dentri di chest messaç a son riservadis e a pro dal destinatari. Se al ves di vê ricevût par erôr il messaç, Lu preìn di scancelâlu cence copiâlu, di no mandâlu a altris personis e di visânus. Graziis.

Ai sensi del Regolamento (UE) 2016/679 si precisa che le informazioni contenute in questo messaggio sono riservate ed a uso esclusivo del destinatario. Qualora il messaggio in parola Le fosse pervenuto per errore, La invitiamo ad eliminarlo senza copiarlo e a non inoltrarlo a terzi, dandocene gentilmente comunicazione. Grazie.

 

 

 

Da: Ermes Culos <ermesculos@me.com> 
Inviato: martedì 10 dicembre 2024 06:37
A: cultura@gazzettino.it
Cc: Angelo Floramo <angelo.floramo@istruzione.it>; Angelo Bertolo <a_bertolo@libero.it>; Almuth Abbe <A.Abbe@dnb.de>; attualita@messaggeroveneto.it; arlef@regione.fvg.it; ARTI ELASTICHE <1755649074486391@groups.facebook.com>; San Vito al Tagliamento IAT <iat.sanvitoaltagliamento@gmail.com>; Casarsa della Delizia Biblioteca <biblioteca@comune.casarsadelladelizia.pn.it>; Bruno Chiaranti <bruno.chiaranti@gmail.com>; Sportel de Basse Furlane <sportel.furlan@bassefurlane.eu>; Sault Ste Marie President - Roberto Bressan <fogolarssm@gmail.com>; cisilute@fogolarsfederation.com; cultura.spettacoli@messaggeroveneto.it; cultura.spettacoli@messaggeroveneto.it; Centro Friulano <friulanosantafe@hotmail.com>; cronaca@ilmessaggero.it; Calgary Presidente - Sonia Bertolissi <fogolarfurlancalgary@gmail.com>; Roger Culos <erceqlos@gmail.com>; Direttore <direttore@filologicafriulana.it>; ditelo@ilmattino.it; Posta Lettori del Messaggero Veneto <posta.lettori@messaggeroveneto.it>; esteri@gazzettino.it; Pordenone EFASCE <info@efasce.it>; Sportello Friulano Basiliano <furlan.basilian@gmail.com>; Sonia Bertolissi <federationsecretary@gmail.com>; Friûl La Patrie dal <info@lapatriedalfriul.org>; fogolar.baviera@gmail.com; Formazione <formazione@filologicafriulana.it>; Jean-Luc Fauconnier <jean.luc.fauconnier@skynet.be>; gotart.mitri@libero.it; Giacomo Vit <vitg@teletu.it>; info@centrostudipierpaolopasolinicasarsa.it; info@friulinelmondo.com; istitutladinfurlan@libero.it; Josephine <dodojos@hotmail.com>; lettere@corriere.it; lettere@lastampa.it; larepubblica@repubblica.it; Posta Lettori del Messaggero Veneto <posta.lettori@messaggeroveneto.it>; nordest@gazzettino.it; Mimi (Income Tax) <kopanyas@telus.net>
Oggetto: Holderlin in lingua friulana

 

Gentile direttore e gentili lettori,

è con grande piacere che condivido questo piccolo brano della mia traduzione, in friulano occidentale, del capolavoro di Friedrich Hölderlin. La traduzione nel suo formato integrale apparirà fra qualche giorno nel sito lulu.com/spotlight/ermesculos, oppure presso Amazon.it sotto il nome del sottoscritto.

Un cordiale saluto,

Ermes Culos

Ashcroft British Columbia Canada

 

 

…Il prin frut da la bielesa umana, da la bielesa divina, a è l'Art.  In ic a si rinova e a si ripèt il omp divìn stes. Al vòu sìntisi se stes, e par chèl a si mèt davànt la so bielesa. A è cussì che l'umanitàt a si à dàt i so dèos. Al inisi il omp e i so dèos a èrin un, che, sensa ch'a lu savèsin, a era la bielesa eterna.—I parli di mistèris, ma cussì a era.

Il prin frut da la bielesa divina a è l'Art. Cussì a era paj atenèis.

La seconda fìa da la bielesa a è la religiòn. La religiòn a è il amòu da la bielesa. Il sàviu a ghi vòu ben a la bielesa stesa—sensa fin, che dut a contèn; il pòpul a ghi vòu ben ai so fioj, i dèos, che luj al jòt in ta la so multiformitàt. Pròpit cussì a era cuj atenèis. E sensa chista sorta di amòu pa la bielesa, sensa chista religiòn ogni stat al è un scheletri sec, sensa vita e spìrit, e dùcjus a pènsin e a fàn sù un àrbul sensa un insima, na colona cul capitèl butàt jù.

Chèl al era pròpit il cašu cuj grecs, màsima cuj atenèis, che la so art e la so religiòn, i fioj autèntics da la bielesa eterna—la natura perfeta dal omp—a sòn, e scaturì a pòsin doma da la natura dal omp in ta la so perfesiòn; chistu a si fà jodi in maniera clara se un al oserva cun imparsialitàt i ogès da la so art sacra e da la so religiòn, che cun chej a la amàvin e onoràvin. 

 

…Das erste Kind der menschlichen, der göttlichen Schönheit ist die Kunst. In ihr verjüngt und wiederholt der göttliche Mensch sich selbst. Er will sich selber fühlen, darum stellt er seine Schönheit gegenüber sich. So gab der Mensch sich seine Götter. Denn im Anfang war der Mensch und seine Götter Eins, da, sich selber unbekannt, die ewige Schönheit war. – Ich spreche Mysterien, aber sie sind. –

Das erste Kind der göttlichen Schönheit ist die Kunst. So war es bei den Athenern.

Der Schönheit zweite Tochter ist Religion. Religion ist Liebe der Schönheit. Der Weise liebt sie selbst, die Unendliche, die Allumfassende; das Volk liebt ihre Kinder, die Götter, die in mannigfaltigen Gestalten ihm erscheinen. Auch so wars bei den Athenern. Und ohne solche Liebe der Schönheit, ohne solche Religion ist jeder Staat ein dürr Gerippe ohne Leben und Geist, und alles Denken und Tun ein Baum ohne Gipfel, eine Säule, wovon die Krone herabgeschlagen ist.

Daß aber wirklich dies der Fall war bei den Griechen und besonders den Athenern, daß ihre Kunst und ihre Religion die echten Kinder ewiger Schönheit – vollendeter Menschennatur – sind, und nur hervorgehn konnten aus vollendeter Menschennatur, das zeigt sich deutlich, wenn man nur die Gegenstände ihrer heiligen Kunst, und die Religion mit unbefangenem Auge sehn will, womit sie jene Gegenstände liebten und ehrten.   

 

Sci-Am vs Supreme Court

 

So, Scientific American’ s Editorial Board doesn’t exactliy hold a shining view of the US Supreme Court, or at least of the conservative members of that court, as made amply clear by Sci-Am’s opinion piece (October 2024). Given the Board’s wokishness, one would hardly expect it to feel otherwise on the several cases touched on in the article. All the same, the Board is right in quoting John Adams in his view that “facts are stubborn things.” Indeed, they burst out of the fuzz, as they do when the board proclaims that abortion has saved countless lives, when in reality the adjective “countless” can and should, for sure, be applied to the aborted lives. The conservative members of the Court may have prejudices, granted; but are the liberal members of the court any less prejudiced? Would someone like Justice Jackson, a person for whom males and females are only two of an x number of genders, be a more reliable adjudicator of facts? And, incidentally, if nitrous oxide makes you laugh, nitric (nitrogen) oxide gives you an erection, which sort of suggests that Justice Gorsuch may have been pokingly tongue-in-cheek when he made his assertion.

Kamala’s dilemma

 Dear Editor

That Kamala Harris is a supporter of the Green New Deal won’t come as a surprise to anyone. The Green New Deal, as we also know, claims that by 2050 the world, led by the US, needs to get to net-zero emissions. To get to net-zero emissions the US (the world, really) needs to drastically reduce the use of anything that contributes to greenhouse gas emissions, and it's a pretty good bet that petroleum products are among the top emission offenders.

Ms. Harris also supports fracking, i.e., a method of extracting oil and gas from deep underground with more efficiency and in greater quantities than is the case with more conventional methods.

Given these two positions, Ms. Harris, it seems to me, is in a bit of a quandary. Can she really, and honestly, be in favour of both—fracking and the Green New Deal?