23 Comments
User's avatar
Chuck kendrick's avatar

This article is certainly thought provoking. What strikes me is the congruence of this piece with the ideas of loss of enchantment discussed by Carl Truman, for example. Thanks.

Expand full comment
Eugene Terekhin's avatar

I agree. Modern consciousness equates thinking with computing because it has forgotten Wonder. Thanks!

Expand full comment
Jeff Cook-Coyle's avatar

I love this! Thinking comes from thanking. Yes, of course!

I can't speak for others, but my Substack has heavy doses of thanking and thinking. I never understood consciously how they were linked.

And I absolutely can see it now!

Expand full comment
Eugene Terekhin's avatar

Me too. I loved Heidegger's etymological analysis, which springs from thanking.

Expand full comment
Lynn Jericho's avatar

Eugene, I have been wondering for decades and encouraging others to wonder. But there is a shadow to wondering and it is a strange loneliness. The Inklings had each other - a glorious community of wonderers. So few can sing with fugitive gods.

Thanks for sharing all your wonder-filled thoughts.

Expand full comment
Eugene Terekhin's avatar

Thanks, Lynn! Yes, it can be lonely but there's much more chance to find other wonderers if you keep wondering. I think.

Expand full comment
Mike Mills's avatar

Philosophers like to point out that people aren't paying attention to the important things. I think it's important that once you've said that you need to show how to pay attention to the right things.

Expand full comment
Eugene Terekhin's avatar

The how part is important, yes. I guess personal example is key. Thanks, Mike!

Expand full comment
Edgar's avatar

Very interesting, but I’m completely unfamiliar with phenomenology. I feel like I’m peeping into a secret world. What is the best starting place with this? Especially Heidegger, which book ought one to start with?

Expand full comment
Eugene Terekhin's avatar

Thanks, Edgar. I wouldn't start with Heidegger even though he's intriguing. And vague. I guess I would start with the Inlkings because they do exactly that - thinking through thanking. I like C.S. Lewis' essay The Weight of Glory.

Expand full comment
Edgar's avatar

Probably very sensible, Heidegger seems like almost an endpoint in western thinking, something you only get once familiar with everything that has come before. Thank you!

Expand full comment
Eugene Terekhin's avatar

Yes, interesting!

Expand full comment
Federica's avatar

I'll take the liberty to suggest these introductory essays on practical phenomenology of thinking, to begin with: https://docs.google.com/document/d/1QVoo5wcdUgaz_wgqssrHokNEhzYaXjIHoY4tH-XjmZg/edit?tab=t.0

Expand full comment
Eugene Terekhin's avatar

Thanks, Federica!

Expand full comment
Stephen Janson's avatar

This is an awesome essay. Thank you.

Expand full comment
Eugene Terekhin's avatar

Thanks, Stephen!

Expand full comment
Colin B Gallagher's avatar

''Nihilsm is forgetfulness of the wonder of being''-Heddigger

Expand full comment
Eugene Terekhin's avatar

True!

Expand full comment
william brown's avatar

Psalm 19:1-7

Romans 1:18-32

Expand full comment
Federica's avatar

This reminds me of Rudolf Steiner's words: “When people thought about something, they felt that they were involved in a process that was objective, not merely subjective. Even as late as the 15th century - and, in its after effects, even in still later times - people had a certain feeling in regard to the more profound thinking about things, a feeling people today do not have anymore. Nowadays human beings do not have the feeling that thinking about something should be carried out in a certain mood of soul. Up until the 15th century, people had the feeling that they produced something evil if they were not morally good and yet engaged in thinking. In a sense, they reproached themselves for thinking, even though they were bad persons. This is something we no longer experience properly nowadays. People believe: “In my soul I can be as bad as I want to be, and I can still engage in thinking”. Up to the 15th century people did not believe that. They actually felt that it was a kind of insult to the divine cosmic intelligence to think about something while in an immoral soul condition. Hence, already in the act of thinking, they saw something real. In a manner of speaking, they viewed themselves as submerged with their soul in the overall cosmic intellect.”

https://youtu.be/reI46yJdE_w?si=LOiLdA1XwoXk35E-&t=699

Expand full comment
Eugene Terekhin's avatar

Amazing and true. An immoral soul can't think.

Expand full comment
Regina's avatar

Yes! Food for thought.

Isn't thinking simply communicating with something? It's a response, I think, like you say above, to the invisible.

Expand full comment
Eugene Terekhin's avatar

Exactly! True thinking is not abstract. It's a response to an encounter.

Expand full comment