I have been lurking on this list for awhile and I must say that
while I am not an active reader of _Being and Time_ that some of the
postings on this list have been helpful for the time should I turn my
attention from the later Heideggerian works and Levinas back to S&Z.
I'd like to write a few words about civility and rigor after the
recent outburst posted by Professor Babich in reply to a contribution. It
was a cheap shot adding nothing to the common fund of insight in the
writings of Martin Heidegger and I for one was not amused by it.
Civility has nothing to do with gender and I do not know any male
philosophers who would indulge in intimidation or hip shots to make a point.
The philosophical lists are a venue of possibly scholarly discourse and to
comport oneself as badly as Professor Babich has done on this most recent
occasion and in a previous incident is bluntly behavior far below that which
we should be having from a philosopher.
In no wise does rigor call for _ad hominem_ or insulting remarks.
Nor does it entail the artifice of aubjecting one to ridicule. None of
these are authentic modes of philosophical discourse.
If Professor Babich aspires to be a "dragon lady", then she shall do
so only by incisive critique carefully drawn out and reasoned. Unless
dragon ladies contribute something they become marginalized and eventually
perish in the aridity of their own hot air. Whatever bad habits we may have
acquired from Nietszche and his followers, the style of delivery has no
meaningful effect if the message delivered is empty.
When faced with what one might be tempted to think is
"tommy-twaddle", good listspersonship consists of either replying in
constructive didactic detail or in not posting a reply at all. If more
rigor is desired, then inviting it with a sustained exercise of it is far
more useful than petulant posturing.
Stephen Whitehill
dasein@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
--- from list heidegger@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx ---
while I am not an active reader of _Being and Time_ that some of the
postings on this list have been helpful for the time should I turn my
attention from the later Heideggerian works and Levinas back to S&Z.
I'd like to write a few words about civility and rigor after the
recent outburst posted by Professor Babich in reply to a contribution. It
was a cheap shot adding nothing to the common fund of insight in the
writings of Martin Heidegger and I for one was not amused by it.
Civility has nothing to do with gender and I do not know any male
philosophers who would indulge in intimidation or hip shots to make a point.
The philosophical lists are a venue of possibly scholarly discourse and to
comport oneself as badly as Professor Babich has done on this most recent
occasion and in a previous incident is bluntly behavior far below that which
we should be having from a philosopher.
In no wise does rigor call for _ad hominem_ or insulting remarks.
Nor does it entail the artifice of aubjecting one to ridicule. None of
these are authentic modes of philosophical discourse.
If Professor Babich aspires to be a "dragon lady", then she shall do
so only by incisive critique carefully drawn out and reasoned. Unless
dragon ladies contribute something they become marginalized and eventually
perish in the aridity of their own hot air. Whatever bad habits we may have
acquired from Nietszche and his followers, the style of delivery has no
meaningful effect if the message delivered is empty.
When faced with what one might be tempted to think is
"tommy-twaddle", good listspersonship consists of either replying in
constructive didactic detail or in not posting a reply at all. If more
rigor is desired, then inviting it with a sustained exercise of it is far
more useful than petulant posturing.
Stephen Whitehill
dasein@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
--- from list heidegger@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx ---