----- Original Message -----
From: "Bakker, R.B.M. de" <R.B.M.deBakker@xxxxxx>
To: <heidegger@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Sent: Monday, September 27, 2004 7:13 AM
Subject: RE: Rene and Philosophy II
>
>
> -----Oorspronkelijk bericht-----
> Van: owner-heidegger@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> [mailto:owner-heidegger@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx]Namens bob scheetz
> Verzonden: zaterdag 25 september 2004 16:49
> Aan: heidegger@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> Onderwerp: Re: Rene and Philosophy II
>
>
>
> the trouble with the categorical dismissive, liar, imho, is the imputation
> of willful deceit, which, if apposite the tendentious usages of power,
> politicians, strausians, etc., traduces a class of non-power-freeky
(xians,
> marxians, humanist scientists, buddhists, nso on) albeit non-heideggerians
> honestly struggling for meaning, ...gross simplification worthy the
> exhuberance of youth, eminem, but not philosophy. imho truth is not
simple;
> disclosed-ness is also and simultaneously constructed-ness, ...and for
which
> the apodictical declaration that german/gk (groundless, subjectivist,
> aprioristic constructs) be essential to serious heideggerian thinking, at
> the same time denouncing all other believers (metafisicians) for liars,
is,
> for the contradiction, a luminous if melancholy demonstration
>
> yours,
> bob
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> Lying:
>
> 1.: Everyday lies by and for everyone.
>
>
> economics:
> "This car is friendly to the environment. Buy and drive it, and
> the couple will be a friend of nature."
>
> health:
> Your child is schizophrenic/your parent has Altzheimer. They have
> many of its symptoms. You can't do nothing about it. That's science.
>
>
> politics:
> "Support us to bring freedom and democracy to the whole world."
>
> family:
> "Better leave that boy alone, otherwise he'll come back strong"
> (Eminem)
>
> No philosophy is needed to perceive the cheating. One can feel it
> clearly when one is the victim, vaguely when one is (part of) the agent.
> It makes no sense to go to (2), if (1) is not *experienced*.
Philosophers
> often are unknowingly troubled by (1), and therefore go quickly to (2).
> But for the same reason they cannot recognize lying there.
>
>
> 2. Basic lies. They lie at the basis of 'what is today'. But as lies they
> don't present themselves as the truth of what is today. Rather, what is
> today, tends to remain hidden. It remains the best hidden, when there
is
> no (belief in) truth. The consequent insecurity opens the door to
terror.
> Massive weakness asks for a master. Truth then is no longer a problem.
> Because everyone lives actually in (1), everydaylife is more and more
> corrupted. (progress)
> Once again: the concrete, physical consequences of a metaphysics that
> is so fundamental, that, if its legacy is denied (lied about), only
> will reign stronger.
frankfurt'rs would completely agree, ...marxists have been indefatigably at
this critique, -the ideological enculturation inflicted on the defenseless
by bourgeois power, for near a century and half now. The discourse of Power
is strategic and therefore "lies". I think this level is almost universally
comprehended.
but what follows now seems to me a level #3, -an argument with ari's
categories, ...perhaps even problematizing "formality" altogether...
>
> The one, thanks to who this more than complex situation, can be
unraveled,
> is the one covered with the most and the worst lies. Look what the
subject-object
> relation does: "Heidegger is a Nazi"." "Nihilism is always to be
fought".
> "Always humans have used the subject-object relation, and they'll
always will."
...deconstructing the category "facticity"? certainly, here, "heid is nazi"
is a lie as used by the holocaust industry; nor even, tendentiousness aside,
does it capture the global vastness of the subject, the object, or the
predication; but, substitute the entire lit on the area and theoretically it
could. So, though partial, it still seems to me "h is n" is at bottom
factical and "true".
>
> But metaphysics, the s-o relation, or: ontological difference are
nothing
> absolute, but they 'are' [stop] geschichtlich.
rene, you began above on "victims" and "agents", and everyday factical life.
i can't get over that the "mine-ness" and "there-ness" of being has to
necessitate the primordiality of s-o. certainly an iraqi torture victim
today experiences the absoluteness of his subjecticity and objecticity, as
did a jew in himmler's camps, ...and as surely iphigenia felt the same long
before the pre-socratics began programming the western mind. At the same
time a sublating of s-o, facticity, for one-ness with being, -formerly das
heilege, is "true" and absolute, ...only not exclusively, eh?
thanks,
bob
Metaphysics is nothing in
> a book, it 'is', insofar it is continued, or left out. So metaphysics
is
> not a subject, of which essential attributes can be predicated -
already
> a CONSEQUENCE of subjectivist thinking - this subject is NOW rather a
lie -
> the way metaphysics is now, as what it 'is' (reigns) now rather
thoroughly
> unclear. When THIS is seen, noticed, THEN the realm of
questionworthiness,
> of possibility is opened. Starting with the s-o relation, that has
gotten
> meaningless, and therefore brought to its ground, that still 'is', but
hidden
> behind, and in, this same s-o distinction. Metaphysics is not thrown
away,
> on the contrary, it is the angle, by which solely a turning can be
made.
>
>
> must go (really)
>
> rene
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> --- from list heidegger@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx ---
--- from list heidegger@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx ---