On Tue, 30 Jan 1996, Babette Babich wrote:
> Dear Stephen Whitehill:
> While I was impressed by your first remarks, although I thought
> them incompletely well-informed, I remain a "philosophy professor"
> enough to note manifest self-contradiction. You cannot chide me
> for ad hominem style remarks while engaging in them yourself.
One can draw a useful distinction between author and text, both for the
purposes of criticisms and evaluations of etiquette. Mr. Whitehill's
post simply criticizes a posting syle, whereas "your" posts attack
biographical constructs for their "lack of intelligence." The authorial
Mr. Whitehill does not involve himnself in a ny contradiction; he issues
a criticism of the ad hominen style, not of the "hominen" making the "ad
homs."
> Moreover my offering of ascii art (dragon or not)
had to do > NOT (and here your lack of intelligence betrays itself on
> the most metonymic of levels) with claiming myself as a
> dragon lady, but as a peace offering, a friendly gesture.
>
> Your criticism and critique undermine any such hopes on my part.
It seems absurd to expect your readers to interpret such an ambiguous
post in a way congruent to your intent. "Oh, a picture of a dragon from
someone who calls me an idiot! How nice! They must want to kiss and
make up!" Hardly a predictable thought sequence.
> Moreover, I repeat, it is a gender issue. I critique. I
draw > an extraordinary amount of flak for the same, and I detect
> a level of ressentiment
I think you are confusing ressentiment and boredom in this case. Even if
you do detect resentment (your importation for GoM scarcely seems
appropriate here), rigor demands that you demonstrate the connection
between this resentment and your gender. I resent "you," or posts with
the name Babette Babich attached to them, because such posts tend to
consume space in my inbox without making substantive contributions to
discussions of Heidegger. I really don't care very much about the
biographical Babich associated with these posts, her gender, her
qualifications, or the availability of her books in British libraries.
as part of the same. Rigor is as
> rigor does. Your first two paragraphs were fine, then
> you descended into exactly that against which your post
> purported to be opposing.
>
> Tsk. Tsk.
This type of condescension and pity does not seem appropriate to your
professed admiration for Nietzsche.
Sincerely,
Michael Antonucci
--- from list heidegger@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx ---