"Huh? So Socrates also sat in a drafty cabin on a mountaintop and =
scrawled about=20
beyng? :-)"
"No. My comment spins out Was heisst Denken S.52. The inscribing =
thinkers are=20
those that seek shelter from standing directly in the draught of beyng. =
"
My attempt at a joke fell flat!=20
"Frozen wind? Sounds like a lot of hot air to me! Okay, seriously, =
doesn't=20
"your" formulation (we better credit Heidegger) sound more like =
pretentious=20
poetry than ruthless thinking? "
"From draught to seeking shelter from the pull/draught/Zug of beyng in=20
writing/inscribing it is not far to "freezing wind". This line of =
thinking does=20
not pretend to be anything more than it is. And where do you want to =
draw the=20
line between poetry and thinking? (As if poetry were non-rigorous or =
imprecise.)"
Okay, I'll try and be serious. I appreciate your seriousness, by the =
way. Your posts are high quality and make me embarrassed for clowning =
around! I think you are right with your remark on the line between =
poetry and thinking. It seems to me that Heidegger understands thinking =
in its proper sense as poetic thinking. Hence we abandon syllogisms and =
all the rest and move on to defining historical epochs if we are to be =
thinkers. I'm not so sure I want to follow him on that. A dangerous move =
when it becomes popularized! I don't want rock stars quoting Heidegger =
like they do Nietzsche... :-)
"To express the issue in thought: Aren't you simply saying that the =
discursive=20
intellect has its limits? If not, what is the extra dimension to which =
you=20
point?"
"I am not saying this. Heidegger distinguishes between Socrates as the =
"purest=20
thinker of the West" and all the later philosophers who wrote (seeking =
shelter=20
>from the all-too-strong pull of being). "
Yes, that is how I understand you. But isn't the finding shelter exactly =
what the discursive intellect does? Opposed to it is poetic thought with =
its analogies and metaphors?
"My (non-original) thought is that writing is thinking in a protective =
foil.=20
Thought set out in writing is still exposed to the inevitable =
misunderstandings=20
of contemporaries (as well as later generations), but the inscription =
can also=20
be read by later generations that are perhaps more in a position to =
'stomach' a=20
new historical truth. "
So writing is ambiguous. It's no guarantee that thought will be =
transmitted. This seems to me to be a pretty obvious point. Still, I =
guess philosophy has to nurture the obvious and think carefully about =
it!
--- from list heidegger@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx ---
scrawled about=20
beyng? :-)"
"No. My comment spins out Was heisst Denken S.52. The inscribing =
thinkers are=20
those that seek shelter from standing directly in the draught of beyng. =
"
My attempt at a joke fell flat!=20
"Frozen wind? Sounds like a lot of hot air to me! Okay, seriously, =
doesn't=20
"your" formulation (we better credit Heidegger) sound more like =
pretentious=20
poetry than ruthless thinking? "
"From draught to seeking shelter from the pull/draught/Zug of beyng in=20
writing/inscribing it is not far to "freezing wind". This line of =
thinking does=20
not pretend to be anything more than it is. And where do you want to =
draw the=20
line between poetry and thinking? (As if poetry were non-rigorous or =
imprecise.)"
Okay, I'll try and be serious. I appreciate your seriousness, by the =
way. Your posts are high quality and make me embarrassed for clowning =
around! I think you are right with your remark on the line between =
poetry and thinking. It seems to me that Heidegger understands thinking =
in its proper sense as poetic thinking. Hence we abandon syllogisms and =
all the rest and move on to defining historical epochs if we are to be =
thinkers. I'm not so sure I want to follow him on that. A dangerous move =
when it becomes popularized! I don't want rock stars quoting Heidegger =
like they do Nietzsche... :-)
"To express the issue in thought: Aren't you simply saying that the =
discursive=20
intellect has its limits? If not, what is the extra dimension to which =
you=20
point?"
"I am not saying this. Heidegger distinguishes between Socrates as the =
"purest=20
thinker of the West" and all the later philosophers who wrote (seeking =
shelter=20
>from the all-too-strong pull of being). "
Yes, that is how I understand you. But isn't the finding shelter exactly =
what the discursive intellect does? Opposed to it is poetic thought with =
its analogies and metaphors?
"My (non-original) thought is that writing is thinking in a protective =
foil.=20
Thought set out in writing is still exposed to the inevitable =
misunderstandings=20
of contemporaries (as well as later generations), but the inscription =
can also=20
be read by later generations that are perhaps more in a position to =
'stomach' a=20
new historical truth. "
So writing is ambiguous. It's no guarantee that thought will be =
transmitted. This seems to me to be a pretty obvious point. Still, I =
guess philosophy has to nurture the obvious and think carefully about =
it!
--- from list heidegger@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx ---