> I haven't got the hermeneutic stamina to decipher this kind of 'writing.'
> Do you take pleasure in giving people a hard time understanding your
> thoughts? If your motivation is vastly more complex, I'd indulge you to
> explain something of it to me, and perhaps give me a 'translation' (with
> all of the Heideggerian difficulty it may entail) of this last statement,
> as I find quite interesting the relation of the polis and being, but am
> incapable of reading your message. Is such writing meant to be
> decipherable? Parts of it, like the '(w)ort...' make especially little
> sense to me, nor the addition of the occasional inexplicable
> parenthetically-bracketed vowel or consonant.
>
> Colin F. Wilder
> niloc@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
The Internet is a joke. It's this sort of marginization of new attempts
at expression, and the replication of the exact sort of philosophic
activity that occurs in up-tight graduate class-rooms that leads me to
believe that nothing new is going on, especially not the sort of
"thinking" that should be taking place. This is not to celebrate the
sort of "post-apocalyptic"? disruption which is being criticized above,
but I don't think anyone on the list is in any 'place' to talk. It
should be obvious what this guy is attempting to do, successful or not.
The sort of hostile and uninviting environment that exists on most of
these philosophy groups is unbearable, and nothing new. So much for the
hopes that we might enter into a novel form of expression, even
"thinking." Take it back to the class-rooms; back to the drawing
board. I know this message isn't making anyone defensive, because I know
that defensiveness is what characterizes most of what goes on for these
groups, each standing in relation to the other behind the technological
armoring instead of reaching out and accepting, lovingly, through
windows, welcoming each other into a new place, into new forms of
expression.
--- from list heidegger@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx ---