“Suppose you're teaching math. You assume that parallel lines meet at infinity. You'll admit that adds up to something like transcendence.”
In this quote, Günter Grass uses the example of teaching math to illustrate the idea of transcendence. He suggests that believing parallel lines meet at infinity is a way of acknowledging something beyond our earthly understanding.
In this quote by Günter Grass, he discusses the concept of transcendence in the context of teaching mathematics. Grass suggests that the assumption in mathematics that parallel lines meet at infinity can be seen as a form of transcendence. This quote highlights the idea that even in the realm of logic and rationality, there can be elements that hint at something beyond the tangible and observable. Grass's use of mathematics as an example demonstrates how seemingly mundane concepts can contain layers of deeper philosophical significance.
In this quote by Günter Grass, the idea of parallel lines meeting at infinity is used as a metaphor for transcendence in mathematics. This notion can be interpreted in a more abstract sense to reflect the concept of infinite possibilities and connections in various aspects of life. In the modern world, where technology and globalization have made the world more interconnected than ever before, the idea of transcendence through parallel lines meeting at infinity can be seen as a representation of the boundless opportunities and connections that exist in our interconnected world.
In considering the quote by Günter Grass about parallel lines meeting at infinity in mathematics, it prompts reflections on the concept of transcendence. How can this idea be applied beyond mathematics and into our own lives and understanding of the world around us? Consider the following questions to delve deeper into this thought-provoking concept:
“...if I were asked to think up a new name for temptation, I should recommend the word 'doorknob', because what are these protuberances put on doors for if not to tempt us...”
“We struck up a conversation, but took pains to keep to small talk at first. We touched on the most trivial of topics: I asked if he thought the fate of man was unalterable. He thought it was.”
“...there is no such thing as a parttime partisan. Real partisans are partisans always and as long as they live. They put fallen governments back in power and overthrow governments that have just been put in power with the help of partisans. Mr Matzerath contended - and his thesis struck me as perfectly plausible - that among all those who go in for politics your incorrigible partisan, who undermines what he has just set up, is closest to the artist because he consistently rejects what he has just set up.”
“But every time I shunned books, as scholars sometimes do, cursed them as verbal graveyards, and tried to make contact with the common folk, I ran up against the kids in our building and felt fortunate, after a few brushes with those little cannibals, to return to my reading in one piece.”
“You American intellectuals—you want so desperately to feel besieged and persecuted!”
“We struck up a conversation, taking pains at first to give it an easy flow and sticking to the most frivolous topics. Did he, I asked, believe in predestination? He did. Did he believe that all men were doomed to die? Yes, he felt certain that all men would absolutely have to die, but he was less sure that all men had to be born...”