Zamanların Sonu Üstüne Söyleşiler

by Catherine David (Editor), Frédéric Lenoir (Editor), Jean-Philippe de Tonnac (Editor)

Bu kitapta, Amerikalı paleontolog Stephen Jay Gould, Batı'da korkuların tarihçisi Jean Delumeau, tiyatro ve yazın adamı Jean-Claude Carriere ve son olarak da göstergebilimci ve romancı Umberto Eco ile gerçekleştirilmiş söyleşiler yer alıyor.

Çağdaş kaygılarımızın bu dört büyük tanığı, zaman, zamanın sonu, zamanların sonu kavramlarını, bilim, din, tarih ve felsefe açısından tartışıyor.

Gazeteci yazar C. David, F. Lenoir ve J.-Ph. de Tonnac'ın sorularına mizah ve açıkgörüşlülükle yanıt veren bu dört büyük isim, 2000 yılı, Milenyum, kıyamet ve gelecek olgularına bilimin ve felsefenin bakışını, dinsel ve dindışı yaklaşımlarını gözler önüne seriyor.

Genres: Philosophy, Science, Nonfiction, Religion, History, Essays

260 pages, Paperback

First published January 1, 1998

Reviews

[Lynne King · Rating 5 out of 5]

Sunday mornings I like to browse through my bookshelves at home and I must confess I had completely forgotten about this particular book.

I recall at the time when I saw it in the local bookshop in Chorleywood, Herts that I had to have it. There were two reasons: firstly, Umberto Eco was one of the four contributors and secondly, it was written at the end of the twentieth century when thoughts of the apocalypse in 2000 were uppermost in people's minds. The dreaded word Armageddon naturally springs to mind.

As we clicked down with time into 2000, the world held it's breath and then nothing happened. We would all live to see another day.

This book is a series of thought-provoking conversations provided by Umberto Eco, Stephen Jay Gould, Jean Delumeau and Jean-Claude Carrière "who examine our preoccupations at the end of this (now that) millennium, cast back to the fears and hopes of previous generations, and consider the challenges to come."

I started this book with hopeful anticipation at the time and I was not disappointed. Looking at it now, I'm delighted that I have it.

What is odd about the edition shown above is that I have the same cover on my book but it actually gives the four contributors' names.

An excellent read...

[Dan Ray · Rating 4 out of 5]

This was really fun to pick up 20 years later.
Excellent philosophers riffing on the idea of time and it's possible end and the millennial (millenarian) panic of the year 2000.

They uniformly agreed that it was a media-constructed panic. That nobody anywhere really though Y2K was going to be a disaster, but gov'ts had to be shown to be prepared in case it was. History proved them right on this and many (though by no means all) of their points.

I found one philosopher to hold Indian cultural beliefs and ideas in an elevated position on all points. The description of the modern explosion of information and the withdrawal of the old paradigms and how they give us New Age mysticism really clicked with me. That one thought has really helped me frame something about the current state of the world that I didn't understand.

Very worthwhile read, especially now after some time has passed in judgement of these ideas.

[Christopher Fuchs · Rating 4 out of 5]

A small but dense, cerebral book about time from interviews with four popular thinkers of the late 1990s. The book explores philosophical, scientific, and theological perspectives on time and other topics as diverse as spacetime, Armageddon, ethics, climate change, history, knowledge transfer, extinction events, and more. Although a bit dated now, with much time spent on millenarianism, dead cults, and the Y2K non-event, it is an interesting book written in question-and-answer format between the thinkers and the interviewers.

[Muriel]

Fascinating romp through the history of ideas about time with delightful authors.

[Philipp · Rating 4 out of 5]

Once in a while I teach a unit to postgrad students. About 30, 40 full-grown adults, with drivers licenses, unique stories, unique views. And then I look at the paperwork and I see their birth-dates: fully grown adults born in the year 2002! How can this be? 2002 was just yesterday! The 90s were the previous decade! People born in 2002 are by any right, by nature, by the laws of reality still babies! How can they drive cars?!?

These kids don't even remember Y2K, the thing that everybody (the TV news, the Wu-Tang Clan), and at the same time nobody (everybody else) was afraid of; the day the computers turn from 1999 to 2000 and supposedly explode, or something. Some minor bugs happened, mostly due to a monumental effort to get all computers in the world upgraded in time.

But the year also brought a lot of general end-of-the-world doom and gloom, which is why this book came out in 1999: four interviews with erudite, learned men, of which two are my favorite writers formative to who I am as a person (Stephen Jay Gould for biologist-me, Umberto Eco for interested-in-everything-me), and of which two I've never heard of (Jean Delumeau, French historian, Jean-Claude Carriere, French screen-writer).

Gould's interview was, to me, the least interesting one: perhaps because I've read most of what Gould has ever written (it wasn't that much). I can't decide if I liked Eco's or Delumeau's essays the most: both talked at length about how Christianity has introduced the concept of linear time to mankind, and how that concept necessarily implies an end of time, so now we have eschatological apocalypse cults. The other guys with their circular time don't have that: when Shiva breaks too much, Brahma will just recreate everything, no worries. Carriere's essay, to my taste, had way too much fixation on Kali Yuga. The other three interviewees are far more relaxed about a possible apocalypse.

All four interviews are impossibly erudite, the kinds of conversations where someone goes 'hey you know let's talk about how this fits in with the Thomists', so I can't really zero in on any aspect here: it's about Gott und die Welt. Wonderful reading.

[Fiona Golden · Rating 4 out of 5]

Really enjoyed this, especially Gould and Eco's interviews. Weirdly found it comforting reading about their predictions for the digital age and climate change. They had no idea how bad things would get, but they seemed to already have some notion about where the main issues would lie: loneliness, fake news, apathy, but also an equalised playing field for learning. I find a lot of solace in knowing that the anxieties we all feel now could be predicted by past historians, it's like a course we were always meant to follow.

The book is slightly pessimistic in its vision for humanity, there's not much faith expressed throughout that we can do better, and indeed we haven't. But I really do love the discussions about memory and the journey of humanity through time. Also, talking with Umberto Eco for 3 days would heal me I think.

[H. Isikgun · Rating 3 out of 5]

Sohbetlerde daha çok kehanetler ve bilgi akışı düzeyinde sorular yöneltildiğinden cevaplar da fikir alışverişinden çok bi nevi olgu aktarımları şeklinde ilerliyor. Özgün fikirler ve tartışma ortamı bekliyordum, bu açıdan beklentimi karşılamadığını söyleyebilirim.

[Neil Aplin · Rating 3 out of 5]

Had this book in my pile of books to read, but gave up before reading as the reviews and introduction looked uninspiring - sorry!

[Fatima Ohran · Rating 5 out of 5]

There’s something about Umberto Eco’s work that always brings warmth to my heart, no matter the topic. His brilliance shines through in both his writing and speaking, filled with such humor that it’s impossible not to admire him. It’s fascinating to read it today, 26 years after its original publication, as the world continues to grapple with the same enduring issues. While it’s clear that much has changed, it's equally evident that not much has truly shifted.

Even if his novels aren't to your taste, you may find his other works, such as his essays, lectures, and published conversations (I love his conversation with Cardinal Carlo Maria Martini in In cosa crede chi non crede? ), captivating. In today's world, the very one that the late Umberto Eco tried to distance himself from (he, for instance, despised mobile phones), we find ourselves trapped by the inevitable: an overwhelming flood of information that can't be filtered or ignored, with useless data everywhere.

Twenty-four years into the new millennium, and the apocalypse still hasn't come—has it?

[Andrea Hickman Walker · Rating 4 out of 5]

I found this very interesting. I hadn't heard of the two French contributors before and picked it up because I knew both Gould and Eco's writing (in fact, I have a copy of Gould's Questioning the millennium somewhere)and I thought it would be interesting to see what they had to say to each other on the subject. I enjoyed all four of the interviews and all gave me something to think about, regardless of the fact that the complete non-event of Y2K was almost a decade and a half ago (when did I get so old?).

[Tarbuckle · Rating 2 out of 5]

A thoroughly pleasant diversion from the weighty gravity of nineteenth century Germanic philosophy, one filled with stimulating discursive forays from four thinkers of remarkable acumen in their chosen fields. Though conceived with the millennial turn in mind, the tetrad's musings upon apocalyptic fervor, the contrasts between our fleeting grasp of temporal passage and the fossilized eternity of geological deep time, existential angst and the human inclination for endings, and the mytho-radical, puritan turn towards punishing/cleansing cataclysm seem even more relevant today.

[Jasmine · Rating 5 out of 5]

I don't even know where to start. This book is incredily thought provoking and really engaging. I loved reading all of the different viewpoints and was in awe of their redoubtable knowledge. I wish one day to be an authority on something...anything the way these great thinkers are. I wish the would have "onversations aboput everything" i would love to talk to these guys forever...it was a lot of fun to read.

[Dusan · Rating 5 out of 5]

This is a great read if for nothing else then for Jean Delumeau, who is far too rarely translated into English.

[Cypress Butane · Rating 4 out of 5]

Some interesting discussion here.