M.P. wrote:
>erik champion asks (amongst other diverse questions) whether
> >Heidegger rejects Nietzsche's philosophy of art
> well, in my reading of Heidegger, he neither rejects nor accepts Nietzsche's
>philosophy of art: simply because Heidegger will have nothing to do with such a
>categorisation as 'philosophy of X' or any such division of philosophy as
>'metaphysics' or 'political philosophy' etc (except as conventional modes of
>speech).
1. I do not agree with you at all about virtually anything you wrote. Only I will
respond in brief to your 'Statements' in another email because I am interested here
in answers to what I wrote, not polemics on how everyone gets Heidegger wrong,
institutionalises him, whatever:
2. No one has answered my question.
3. I do not have to accept your interpretation of Heidegger's terminology to ask for
other people's opinion's on Heidegger's "thinking about Being".
4. To use Heidegger's own terminology may get one into even more communication
problems than using standard academic discourse for
5. Heidegger himself uses words of standard discourse even if he spends his lifetime
re or retro or whatever defining essential words and when one talsk about thinking
about Being one runs the risk that thinking about Being itself may be impossible,
perhaps even our thinking about our relation to Being is impossible, if Being is
that which cannot be thought etc.
6. I do not deem it very Heideggerean of others to tell me to "Think again", nor do
I find Heidegger consistently role-model speaking Heideggerean (for obvious reasons)
nor do I wish to be embroiled in a flame war.
I am simply interested in Heidegger's response to Nietzshe's views on art, and if
you say I have to BE Heidegger in order to talk about such, or that Heidegger never
categorised, then I suggest that you in turn read Heidegger more closely.
Those who do not wish to talk about art/the work of art/revealing/ etc please just
disregard my thread on art, and concentrate instead on your own interests, for that
is what you all have used my sincere questions for, springboards for your own views.
I respectfully ask that you do not continue to implicate me in some grand style
misreading of Heidegger, rather that if you wish to respond to my questions in this
"area" (sigh),then please respond in the spirit of what I asked, rather than in the
"Spirit" or "Eternal Flame" of Heidegger, which is no doubt what one or (logically
implausible) two of you are sole guardian of. Unless I have stumbled on some
Heidegger as returned messiah society, I would rather both Heidegger and myself were
treated as THROWN individuals whose sincerity in their questioning is greeted with
same; not derision. I do not think, sir, that you know enough of what I think to ask
me to think again. Nor, perhaps, is it possible for me to, when I see no forthcoming
reason for doing so. Let us, rather, share some horizon, for that is the birth place
of the dawning.
erik champion M.Arch
schools of design & performing arts
UNITEC
tel: 64 9 815 4321 ext 7140
fax: 64 9 846 7369
email: echampion@xxxxxxxxxxxx
--- from list heidegger@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx ---
>erik champion asks (amongst other diverse questions) whether
> >Heidegger rejects Nietzsche's philosophy of art
> well, in my reading of Heidegger, he neither rejects nor accepts Nietzsche's
>philosophy of art: simply because Heidegger will have nothing to do with such a
>categorisation as 'philosophy of X' or any such division of philosophy as
>'metaphysics' or 'political philosophy' etc (except as conventional modes of
>speech).
1. I do not agree with you at all about virtually anything you wrote. Only I will
respond in brief to your 'Statements' in another email because I am interested here
in answers to what I wrote, not polemics on how everyone gets Heidegger wrong,
institutionalises him, whatever:
2. No one has answered my question.
3. I do not have to accept your interpretation of Heidegger's terminology to ask for
other people's opinion's on Heidegger's "thinking about Being".
4. To use Heidegger's own terminology may get one into even more communication
problems than using standard academic discourse for
5. Heidegger himself uses words of standard discourse even if he spends his lifetime
re or retro or whatever defining essential words and when one talsk about thinking
about Being one runs the risk that thinking about Being itself may be impossible,
perhaps even our thinking about our relation to Being is impossible, if Being is
that which cannot be thought etc.
6. I do not deem it very Heideggerean of others to tell me to "Think again", nor do
I find Heidegger consistently role-model speaking Heideggerean (for obvious reasons)
nor do I wish to be embroiled in a flame war.
I am simply interested in Heidegger's response to Nietzshe's views on art, and if
you say I have to BE Heidegger in order to talk about such, or that Heidegger never
categorised, then I suggest that you in turn read Heidegger more closely.
Those who do not wish to talk about art/the work of art/revealing/ etc please just
disregard my thread on art, and concentrate instead on your own interests, for that
is what you all have used my sincere questions for, springboards for your own views.
I respectfully ask that you do not continue to implicate me in some grand style
misreading of Heidegger, rather that if you wish to respond to my questions in this
"area" (sigh),then please respond in the spirit of what I asked, rather than in the
"Spirit" or "Eternal Flame" of Heidegger, which is no doubt what one or (logically
implausible) two of you are sole guardian of. Unless I have stumbled on some
Heidegger as returned messiah society, I would rather both Heidegger and myself were
treated as THROWN individuals whose sincerity in their questioning is greeted with
same; not derision. I do not think, sir, that you know enough of what I think to ask
me to think again. Nor, perhaps, is it possible for me to, when I see no forthcoming
reason for doing so. Let us, rather, share some horizon, for that is the birth place
of the dawning.
erik champion M.Arch
schools of design & performing arts
UNITEC
tel: 64 9 815 4321 ext 7140
fax: 64 9 846 7369
email: echampion@xxxxxxxxxxxx
--- from list heidegger@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx ---