>From: "Bakker, R.B.M. de" <R.B.M.deBakker@xxxxxx>
>To: <heidegger@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
>Subject: RE: pain/peinne a ma coeur
>Date: Wed, Sep 22, 2004, 12:09 pm
>
> -----Oorspronkelijk bericht-----
> Van: owner-heidegger@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> [mailto:owner-heidegger@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx]Namens michaelP
> Verzonden: woensdag 22 september 2004 13:56
> Aan: heidegger@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> Onderwerp: pain/peinne a ma coeur
>
>
> Rene recently:
>
>> We seem too weak
>> to even willing to analyze, and question the relation of politics and
>> philosophy, between 'this world' and 'world'. I'm the only one not
>> stopping, and look how i bore everyone.
>> That's all right with me, but the others are not all right: they're
>> pretending to do philosophy, but they're only in it for themselves.
>> All right again! Those with eyes can see.
>
> Rene, I for one have never found your posts boring, mostly the opposite and
> sometimes to such an extreme of stimulating that I find myself bewildered
> and unable to articulate even that bewilderment. As for the questions of the
> relations between politics and philosophy (and your suggestion that to avoid
> such in your terms, is itself a pretence of philosophy), that itself (the
> questioning, asking the right questions so as to gain some sort of access,
> some rightful fitting way to the articulation of the 'real' problems) is a
> philosophical problematic, and may not necessarily be accomplished in a
> direct or crude (cf Jud) manner. You tend to hit things head on with a
> frightening and such frightful passion (I love it, but) that sometimes
> brings you into a certain proximity with Jud in a certain accusatory mode of
> speech.
>
> That's inevitable, Michael, and i won't argue with it.
> You've made this move ('but you too...) several times lately, it's your
> choice.
Mea culpa, Rene, but there is a but: but such an accusatory tone is not my
norm; your speech marbled through recently with mentions of "lies" without
much elaboration on what you mean by "lies" (of course I know what the word
means in an everyday sense; I presume you mean it in a more philosophical
sense...) can become somewhat oppressive whilst being fascinating.
> This can be off-putting, since few of us enjoy being on trial from
> the outset of a possible discussion.
>
> I understand. It is not, though, my intention to bring thugs to justice,
> but to show some first steps, which, when not taken (my or another way),
> leave no possible discussions at all. For instance, i liked your last mail,
> but still there is this not-getting-from-the-spot, because you bind
yourself,
> like others, to some last distinction*.
I have looked, Rene, at the asterixed note and I am still confused as to
what "last distinction" you mean... are you speaking of my retention of the
ontological difference? Do you see this as a stumbling block to some kind of
moving on or progress?
> But please, consider my critics to be
> positive:
I do Rene, otherwise I would not be so eager to continue to respond...
> sometimes i'm really amazed, for instance, at what you and others
> are capable of saying in a language that i consider to be a big handicap in
> dealing with German philosophy. I'm happy to be linguistically closer, and
all
> i can say is: as long as people don't simply start learning German, i can't
take
> them seriously. And i can't take them seriously, because *they* are not
serious.
I can see and have already experienced what a handicap an absence of German
is for someone, like me, exploring Heidegger et al. But, slightly in tune
with Allen's mention of the Euthyphro, which I read quickly this morning, I
wonder whether you might be more gracious in taking more seriously the
impoverished recipients of your gifts. Is it not a splendid feature of a
list such as this that we can share in the diverse gifts given daily from
equally diverse backgrounds and foregrounds, jumping and flitting across the
abyss? I, for example, am a composer not an academic, and I hope I bring a
different tonality as a result of listening in that composerly kind of way
to the (good and bad) music of others on this here list, no?
I delight in the apocalypsos you bring to the list.
> *this too is not reproach. The reason for it lies in the metaphysics itself,
> that is in our body. Last distinctions have been cleared away by absolute
> idealism, because it went, had to go after the unconditional, despite Kant's
> warnings. We just don't tolerate, despite all structuralism, that something
> else is thinking in us, but i cannot help exposing it, because anonymous
> self-evidence is the real terror. And global Americanism its most dangerous
form.
> And as long as it is sought elsewhere, the room for 'possible discussion' is
> really cut off. So, looking for the origin in oneself, is inevitably painful
yes,
> and it is easier to blame Slim Shady. If necessary, i play that part.
Sometimes I perform a kurt cobain** [see below]
> IF it is true what you say, and what others who went away, said, why can't
they
> just go on, why do they leave?
I do not think Anthony left because of his (seemingly bitter) differences
with you anymore than Michael did. It seems to me that the list had become
so bitchy and bitty and bitter (mea culpa in some degree) and so little to
do with enjoying Heidegger (etc) and the good grace of stimulating
discussions between mutually respecting interlocutors whatever the
differences. And Allen did not leave so much as take a holiday. And, I am
always leaving...
> Dies it point to a lack of confidence, they simply
> are not capable of acknowledging? But then what about the confidence of this
our
> Western world, is it not another lie, hiding behind automatic weapons? When
i'm right,
> and there is no real confidence, THEN what happens now, is irresponsible,
and my
> doggish insistence really quite innocent.
Exactly. But taking too much notice of "confidence" is itself a confidence
trick. I think we should be thinking (or rather smelling) of 'taste' for
reasons of the absence of concrete others and the desultory absent presence
of yet others, perhaps...
And the "hiding behind automatic weapons" can take many forms, often
unacknowledged, no?
regards
michaelP
>
>
>
**
I am buried up to my neck in
Contradictionary flies
I take pride as the king of illiterature
I'm very ape and very nice
If you ever need anything please don't hesitate to ask someone else first
I'm too busy acting like I'm not naive.
I've seen it all I was here first
Out of the ground
Into the sky
Out of the sky
Into the dirt
(Very Ape [from Nirvana 'In Utero'])
--- from list heidegger@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx ---
>To: <heidegger@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
>Subject: RE: pain/peinne a ma coeur
>Date: Wed, Sep 22, 2004, 12:09 pm
>
> -----Oorspronkelijk bericht-----
> Van: owner-heidegger@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> [mailto:owner-heidegger@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx]Namens michaelP
> Verzonden: woensdag 22 september 2004 13:56
> Aan: heidegger@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> Onderwerp: pain/peinne a ma coeur
>
>
> Rene recently:
>
>> We seem too weak
>> to even willing to analyze, and question the relation of politics and
>> philosophy, between 'this world' and 'world'. I'm the only one not
>> stopping, and look how i bore everyone.
>> That's all right with me, but the others are not all right: they're
>> pretending to do philosophy, but they're only in it for themselves.
>> All right again! Those with eyes can see.
>
> Rene, I for one have never found your posts boring, mostly the opposite and
> sometimes to such an extreme of stimulating that I find myself bewildered
> and unable to articulate even that bewilderment. As for the questions of the
> relations between politics and philosophy (and your suggestion that to avoid
> such in your terms, is itself a pretence of philosophy), that itself (the
> questioning, asking the right questions so as to gain some sort of access,
> some rightful fitting way to the articulation of the 'real' problems) is a
> philosophical problematic, and may not necessarily be accomplished in a
> direct or crude (cf Jud) manner. You tend to hit things head on with a
> frightening and such frightful passion (I love it, but) that sometimes
> brings you into a certain proximity with Jud in a certain accusatory mode of
> speech.
>
> That's inevitable, Michael, and i won't argue with it.
> You've made this move ('but you too...) several times lately, it's your
> choice.
Mea culpa, Rene, but there is a but: but such an accusatory tone is not my
norm; your speech marbled through recently with mentions of "lies" without
much elaboration on what you mean by "lies" (of course I know what the word
means in an everyday sense; I presume you mean it in a more philosophical
sense...) can become somewhat oppressive whilst being fascinating.
> This can be off-putting, since few of us enjoy being on trial from
> the outset of a possible discussion.
>
> I understand. It is not, though, my intention to bring thugs to justice,
> but to show some first steps, which, when not taken (my or another way),
> leave no possible discussions at all. For instance, i liked your last mail,
> but still there is this not-getting-from-the-spot, because you bind
yourself,
> like others, to some last distinction*.
I have looked, Rene, at the asterixed note and I am still confused as to
what "last distinction" you mean... are you speaking of my retention of the
ontological difference? Do you see this as a stumbling block to some kind of
moving on or progress?
> But please, consider my critics to be
> positive:
I do Rene, otherwise I would not be so eager to continue to respond...
> sometimes i'm really amazed, for instance, at what you and others
> are capable of saying in a language that i consider to be a big handicap in
> dealing with German philosophy. I'm happy to be linguistically closer, and
all
> i can say is: as long as people don't simply start learning German, i can't
take
> them seriously. And i can't take them seriously, because *they* are not
serious.
I can see and have already experienced what a handicap an absence of German
is for someone, like me, exploring Heidegger et al. But, slightly in tune
with Allen's mention of the Euthyphro, which I read quickly this morning, I
wonder whether you might be more gracious in taking more seriously the
impoverished recipients of your gifts. Is it not a splendid feature of a
list such as this that we can share in the diverse gifts given daily from
equally diverse backgrounds and foregrounds, jumping and flitting across the
abyss? I, for example, am a composer not an academic, and I hope I bring a
different tonality as a result of listening in that composerly kind of way
to the (good and bad) music of others on this here list, no?
I delight in the apocalypsos you bring to the list.
> *this too is not reproach. The reason for it lies in the metaphysics itself,
> that is in our body. Last distinctions have been cleared away by absolute
> idealism, because it went, had to go after the unconditional, despite Kant's
> warnings. We just don't tolerate, despite all structuralism, that something
> else is thinking in us, but i cannot help exposing it, because anonymous
> self-evidence is the real terror. And global Americanism its most dangerous
form.
> And as long as it is sought elsewhere, the room for 'possible discussion' is
> really cut off. So, looking for the origin in oneself, is inevitably painful
yes,
> and it is easier to blame Slim Shady. If necessary, i play that part.
Sometimes I perform a kurt cobain** [see below]
> IF it is true what you say, and what others who went away, said, why can't
they
> just go on, why do they leave?
I do not think Anthony left because of his (seemingly bitter) differences
with you anymore than Michael did. It seems to me that the list had become
so bitchy and bitty and bitter (mea culpa in some degree) and so little to
do with enjoying Heidegger (etc) and the good grace of stimulating
discussions between mutually respecting interlocutors whatever the
differences. And Allen did not leave so much as take a holiday. And, I am
always leaving...
> Dies it point to a lack of confidence, they simply
> are not capable of acknowledging? But then what about the confidence of this
our
> Western world, is it not another lie, hiding behind automatic weapons? When
i'm right,
> and there is no real confidence, THEN what happens now, is irresponsible,
and my
> doggish insistence really quite innocent.
Exactly. But taking too much notice of "confidence" is itself a confidence
trick. I think we should be thinking (or rather smelling) of 'taste' for
reasons of the absence of concrete others and the desultory absent presence
of yet others, perhaps...
And the "hiding behind automatic weapons" can take many forms, often
unacknowledged, no?
regards
michaelP
>
>
>
**
I am buried up to my neck in
Contradictionary flies
I take pride as the king of illiterature
I'm very ape and very nice
If you ever need anything please don't hesitate to ask someone else first
I'm too busy acting like I'm not naive.
I've seen it all I was here first
Out of the ground
Into the sky
Out of the sky
Into the dirt
(Very Ape [from Nirvana 'In Utero'])
--- from list heidegger@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx ---