Jud proclaims:
> It is the people and the ideas BEHIND the acronym that
> disgusts people - not the acronym itself.
But, nominalistically (and I presume such a position must be taken utterly
seriously), "ideas" especially "ideas behind..." do not exist and are
therefore unworthy of worthy articulation, only worthy of occultation and
the curious practice of saying such beings do not exist; and in this sense,
neither does "Nazi(sm)", acronymously [sic] or not, and thus such crass
statements as "Heidegger is a Nazi" [or the Nazz with god-given arse
(Bowie)] are tantamount to nominalistic-wise non-sense, and, with that I
would profoundly agree (that stating "Heidegger is/was a Nazi" and such) --
saying *that* about a man is saying nothing (worthwhile) unless one means it
*essentially* (and that means, that such a man is/was *nothing else* at all:
I mean if we can say *that* then one can say that anyone and everyone who
has ever or will ever or does now own a car is *nothing but a car-driver*
and thus is responsible for all the ills cars have brought in their wake,
surely the easiest way for anyone to become an owner and user of a weapon of
mass destruction, in short a global terrorist) and not as a chosen
happenstance (however one chooses to judge the choice). If I happened to
find out Shakespeare happened to elect to begin his every day with a stew
made from the heads of freshly-killed day-old jewish babies, it would not
alter my admiration for his dramatic output of plays one iota; the plays
would be just as good (or bad according to taste...), the world would be
just as enriched (or poverty-stricken according to taste); I do not give a
monkey's fart whether Shakespeare was 'my' Shakespeare, was Marlowe, was
'black', was a baby-muncher, was a committee, was an alien from the planet
Jud... the extraordinary works remain and that's what I mean by
'Shakespeare': the author-cum-authority vis-a-vis the works. Same for
Heidegger.
So, on two counts, going on and on about "Heidegger the Nazi" is irrelevant
(to me) and nonsense (for nominalists) and worse of all: boring. But will
this be an end of it? No chance: the boring irrelevant nonsense makers will
on and on without ever questioning themselves or even the little word "is"
or "was" in "Heidegger is/was a Nazi". Far too dangerous for such
lightweights.
regards
michaelP
--- from list heidegger@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx ---
> It is the people and the ideas BEHIND the acronym that
> disgusts people - not the acronym itself.
But, nominalistically (and I presume such a position must be taken utterly
seriously), "ideas" especially "ideas behind..." do not exist and are
therefore unworthy of worthy articulation, only worthy of occultation and
the curious practice of saying such beings do not exist; and in this sense,
neither does "Nazi(sm)", acronymously [sic] or not, and thus such crass
statements as "Heidegger is a Nazi" [or the Nazz with god-given arse
(Bowie)] are tantamount to nominalistic-wise non-sense, and, with that I
would profoundly agree (that stating "Heidegger is/was a Nazi" and such) --
saying *that* about a man is saying nothing (worthwhile) unless one means it
*essentially* (and that means, that such a man is/was *nothing else* at all:
I mean if we can say *that* then one can say that anyone and everyone who
has ever or will ever or does now own a car is *nothing but a car-driver*
and thus is responsible for all the ills cars have brought in their wake,
surely the easiest way for anyone to become an owner and user of a weapon of
mass destruction, in short a global terrorist) and not as a chosen
happenstance (however one chooses to judge the choice). If I happened to
find out Shakespeare happened to elect to begin his every day with a stew
made from the heads of freshly-killed day-old jewish babies, it would not
alter my admiration for his dramatic output of plays one iota; the plays
would be just as good (or bad according to taste...), the world would be
just as enriched (or poverty-stricken according to taste); I do not give a
monkey's fart whether Shakespeare was 'my' Shakespeare, was Marlowe, was
'black', was a baby-muncher, was a committee, was an alien from the planet
Jud... the extraordinary works remain and that's what I mean by
'Shakespeare': the author-cum-authority vis-a-vis the works. Same for
Heidegger.
So, on two counts, going on and on about "Heidegger the Nazi" is irrelevant
(to me) and nonsense (for nominalists) and worse of all: boring. But will
this be an end of it? No chance: the boring irrelevant nonsense makers will
on and on without ever questioning themselves or even the little word "is"
or "was" in "Heidegger is/was a Nazi". Far too dangerous for such
lightweights.
regards
michaelP
--- from list heidegger@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx ---