I'm reading Sartre again at bedtime. It fascinates me to read Being And Nothingness. A lot of times I wouldn't believe for a moment that I actually understand what he writes about. Not until I'm actually in the process of reading itself. This translated version of what he did say in French, but only what his translator thought he expressed in English, combines to inspire to at least try to understand what he writes about. I don't know whether the two of them got together in person to mull it over, and come up with a more precise English copy.
Not caring about the veracity or accuracy of the translation was the only way I could progress through the book. The content is so burdensome (in any language I suspect), that I couldn't read from the book for any appreciable amount of ti-me before I collapsed into sleep from the sheer overload and weight of the words. The next day, however, what I thought was impossible to understand sometime appeared in my blog entry and the e-mails I wrote.
I'm reading the Introduction again. I think it was the translator who recommended doing that. I certainly understand after reading the first few sections of it why I need to read it again. I learned how to read Sartre as I read him. By the time I got to the end of the book I felt as though I understood what Sartre attempts to communicate, and so it appears reasonable to re-read the part where I hadn't learned how to interpret his meaning yet.
There is one particular statement that fascinates me, and it puzzles me somewhat too. That statement is "Negation can never be derived from Being." I seem to understand this better than I can write about it, and that's what worries me. It seems to be similar to Rembrant's comment that a person can only see as well as they can draw. Given that, I may not understand Sartre at all. I enjoy reading him anyway.
The insurance adjuster for the company representing the sixteen year old kid came by yesterday to figure out how much to compensate me for the damage done. The woman I talked to a couple of days ago led me to believe that the adjuster would take care of all the arrangements to get my car repaired, and that they would rent me a car to drive while that happened.
The adjuster didn't see it that way. He told me that he was going let me decide where I wanted to get it fixed. When I explained the difference between what he and the office lady said, he told me that all he had to do to change what she said was to mark one entry on his report that stated he was going the customer a choice about where they wanted it fixed, and the insurance company would just send me a check for that amount.
Now, I have to decide whether to take the money and fix the car or keep the money to use as I please. I think we already know the answer to that. The car runs very well. It's only the front passenger's door that's damaged, and as the adjuster kindly pointed out to me, that door will open from the inside.
I have two "big ticket" items I'm interested in purchasing before the Depression hits full stride. A new digital 1080p television with a 240 Mhz refresh rate. I've been reading about how if the refresh on these TV sets is so fast, people are wondering how much further do they need to go in order to combine a computer inside them. The other item I got on my mind is a new computer, but I'm waiting for the new Mac Operating System called Snow Leopard to get here next summer.
I'm probably not going to buy another computer until two upgraded technologies come on the market. One is USB3, and the other is a fast SSD. Both are coming to the trades shows next week in some form or fashion. In any case, they're well on their way. The SSD's developed and already on the market by Intel gets really great reviews. They just cost an arm and a leg to buy presently. This link will take you to where Newegg.com has the one I want for sale:
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16820167013