User talk:Lestrade

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search

Disambiguation link notification for February 15[edit]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited On Vision and Colors, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Bernard Bosanquet (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 09:15, 15 February 2014 (UTC)

Reference Errors on 23 February[edit]

Hello, I'm ReferenceBot. I have automatically detected that an edit performed by you may have introduced errors in referencing. It is as follows:

Please check this page and fix the errors highlighted. If you think this is a false positive, you can report it to my operator. Thanks, ReferenceBot (talk) 01:15, 24 February 2014 (UTC)

Nomination of Arthur Schopenhauer's criticism of the proofs of the parallel postulate for deletion[edit]

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Arthur Schopenhauer's criticism of the proofs of the parallel postulate is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Arthur Schopenhauer's criticism of the proofs of the parallel postulate until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article. JohnBlackburnewordsdeeds 02:05, 13 October 2014 (UTC)

Thanks![edit]

Trophy.png Your message of 2006 on Xenophanes
Only just saw it. Haven't been much of a clued-in user of wikepedia. Thanks for the note of appreciation. J. Sheldon (talk) 11:59, 18 October 2014 (UTC)

Three of Spinoza's ideas[edit]

Back in 2006, you have added the some lines to the topic Baruch Spinoza:

The attraction of Spinoza's philosophy to late eighteenth-century Europeans was that it provided an alternative to Materialism, Atheism, and Deism. Three of Spinoza's ideas strongly appealed to them:
the unity of all that exists;
the regularity of all that happens; and
the identity of spirit and nature.

I am very interested to know where these three ideas are to be found as a list in any literature on the subject? Thanks!

Ingmardb (talk) 19:30, 10 November 2015 (UTC)

It looks like it is from Lange, The History of Materialism and Criticism of Its Present Importance [1]goethean 20:34, 10 November 2015 (UTC)

Thx, this is very helpful! I will add references in both articles (Pantheism controversy and Baruch Spinoza). Ingmardb (talk) 23:59, 10 November 2015 (UTC)

you added Schopenhauer to Mortal Coil[edit]

I tried to look up your addition to the Mortal Coil page, made awhile back, 9 February 2008. I found Parerga und Paralipomena in Google Books and while I don't read German, it sure doesn't look like he's talking about Shakespeare. https://books.google.com/books?id=WuUOAAAAIAAJ&dq=Parerga%20und%20Paralipomena&pg=PA371#v=onepage&q=Parerga%20und%20Paralipomena&f=false You say that he is? 68.175.11.48 (talk) 22:02, 22 May 2016 (UTC)

Schopenhauer began § 232a with a reference to Shakespeare’s Hamlet. “The story in Apuleius, of the widow with a vision of her husband who had been murdered at the chase, is wholly analogous to that of Hamlet.” In Apuleis’s Metamorphoses, or The Golden Ass, Book 8, 1-14, Charite’s husband appears to her in a dream and tells her that her suitor Thrasyllus killed him and arranged the murder to look like a hunting accident. Schopenhauer then added: “Here I would like to insert a conjecture concerning Shakespeare’s masterpiece. It is, of course, very bold, yet I would like to submit it to the judgment of those who really know. In the famous monologue: ‘To be or not to be,’ we have the words: ‘when we have shuffled off this mortal coil,’ which have always been considered obscure and even puzzling, and yet have never been thoroughly explained. Should there not have been originally ‘shuttled off’? This verb itself no longer exists, but ‘shuttle’ is an implement used in weaving. Accordingly, the meaning might be: ‘when we have unwound and worked off this coil of mortality.’ A slip of the pen could easily have occurred.” Your Google Books citation does not include § 232a. It goes from § 232 to § 233, skipping §232a.Lestrade (talk) 23:35, 29 May 2016 (UTC)Lestrade
I do not know why § 232a is not included in the German-language editions of Parerga and Paralipomena, Volume 2, that are found on the Internet. My copy of the book is published by Suhrkamp Taschenbuch Wissenschaft and it contains § 232a. “Sei hier einer das Meisterstück des Shakespeare betreffenden Konjektur eine Stelle gegönnt, welche zwar sehr kühn ist, die ich jedoch dem Urteil der wirklichen Kenner vorlegen möchte. In den berühmten Monolog ‘To be, or not to be’ ist der Ausdruck: ‘When we have shuffled off this mortal coil’ stets dunkel und sogar rätselhaft befunden und nie ganz aufs reine gebracht worden. Sollte nicht ursprünglich gestanden haben: ‘shuttled off’? Dies Verbum selbst existiert nicht mehr; aber ‘shuttle’ heißt ‘das Weberschiffchen’ und ‘coil’ ein ‘Knäuel,’ wonach der Sinn wäre: ‘Wenn wir diesen Knäuel der Sterblichkeit abgewickelt, abgearbeitet haben.’ Der Schreibfehler konnte leicht entstehn." Lestrade (talk) 01:36, 30 May 2016 (UTC)Lestrade