peep wrote:
OK, tymp, as calypso said recently, fighting (especially the wrong fight but
anyway) is a waste of energy and a distraction.
yeah let's conserve our energy get hold of ourselves and focus.
Tell me more about (your)
persephone. And who in heidegger's name is "margaret"? There is a Marilynn,
there was once an Andrea, and occasionally a Calypso, but Margaret? Mind
you, who knows who's a man or woman on a list; anyone can call themselves
anything; all we have are masks, persona... and that's what is also good
about the situation: what takes place here, takes place entirely in language
and without (a 'personal') voice, essentially; a site of linguistic drama,
or rather of grammatological theatre... be-ing is crossed out.
Let's hear you work through your thoughts which are interesting tonight. You don't unfold your thoughts deeply very often. At least I never have a sense of following a thread that's characteristic of your "form of life" to use Wittengstein and that says you are really stylin'. This is what I mean -- in the philosophical investigations Wittengstein is trying to grapple with the experience of finally getting something and being able to say "I understand". His example is learning a mathematical formula but he also uses the example of learning to play a piece of music. At first there is much frustration and getting stuck, not being able to move, uneasiness and lack of deciseveness . Philosophical problems are like this. They are a cause of anxiety that drove Wittengstein to "analyse" them to some extent as part of the analytical family romance. So he is trying to understand this "moment of vision" or experience of "aha!" or "ureka!!" or "YAHOO!!" lol... It's the moment of knowing how to go on of being able to understand the "and so on and so forth..." #323 " 'Now I know how to go on!' is an exclamation; it corresponds to an instinctive sound, a glad start." He calls this CLARITY.
This is all related to what Wittengstein says about rules: #125 is the fragment that lays out what he is trying to accomplish. He writes, "It is the business of philosophy, not to resolve a contradiction by means of a mathematical or logico-mathematical discovery, but to make it possible for us to get a clear view of the state of mathematics that troubles us: the state of affairs *before* the contradiction is resolved. (And this does not mean that one is sidestepping a difficulty.) The fundamental fact here is that we lay down rules, a technique for a game, and that then when we follow the rules, things do not turn out as we had assumed. That we are therefore as it were entangled in our own rules. This entanglement in our rules is what we want to understand (i.e., get a clear view of). Perhaps it helps to know that Wittengstein had an authoritarian father much like Freud actually.
A peson gets entangled because there is too much deliberation on how to follow the rules, one pauses... and looks at the options and then decides, makes a choice. But there is also what Wittengstein calls "exhausting all justification". One is driven into a corner so to speak, and you know you have only one shot, one opportunity and you can't choke and failure is just not option and then... "you obey the rule blindly" and that's the moment of release and you know your freestylin'. See #217 to #219.
Nietzsche somewhere says that one of the great skills in life is knowing when to command and when to obey.
tympan
regards
michaelPeep
--- from list heidegger@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx ---
_________________________________________________________________
Express yourself instantly with MSN Messenger! Download today - it's FREE! http://messenger.msn.click-url.com/go/onm00200471ave/direct/01/
--- from list heidegger@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx ---