In a message dated 12/10/2004 12:44:07 GMT Standard Time,
michael@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx writes:
I fail then again at casting pearls (or even more like, stale crumbs);
enough; Jud, I fear you'd make a terrible musician: you do not know how to
*listen* (quietly, without comment, otherwise you can not hear any thing
except your self: of course, I am speaking of hermeneutics here, not the
business of accurate reception of the ear-brain), and worse, you do know
that you do not know, and so, ingenuously immediately, losing/wasting no
time over thinking/listening/digging ,fill in all the spaces offered up with
the same old turnarounds and counterattacks (as if you'd been attacked or
asked to perform an unutterably disgusting task); and that's why, despite
all your terrifying talents, wit and intelligence, you haven't the slightest
inkling (philosophy-wise), you don't have the grace to tinkle, twinkle or
tingle. Shame.
Jud:
Look Michael. I am quite capable of stepping outside of the philosophical
frame — outside of the nominalist
ring and appreciating much of what Heidegger, you, the McGonagall and many
people on this list have written, and enjoy it from
a literary point of view — even from a poetical standpoint. Also there is an
element in it like solving crossword puzzles and enjoy the hermeneutics too.
I like good writing, and there is much good [even first-class writing] on
this list.
Taken in this way, with the same suspension of belief that one adopts when
reading any book of fiction, enjoying a theatrical performance, or luxuriating
in the visual and musical delights of the ballet [our family are regular
theatre/ballet enthusiasts] or allowing oneself to drift away on the wings of
music, some transcendentalist literature can be enjoyable to read. Indeed,
though an implacable atheist, one of the delights of my life is to read the
Bible [I restrict myself to the Old Testament and it has GOT to be a King James
version.]
What I mean is that when I read Heidegger it is quite possible, [I suspect
that you will find this incredible] that if I bracket-out my natural
discrimination between fact and fiction and suspend my critical faculties, I can
*wizard myself* into a rough equivalence to the satisfaction [even joy] and
transport that you feel when you read the words of Heidegger. The big difference is
that having read the stuff and having made a closure of the book — the
rational holism rapidly asserts itself once more — and a closure is made of the
ideas [as philosophical truths] too, and I see it again as the fictional,
let's-pretend document which it is. I read [regularly] the Songs of Solomon, and
almost weep with pleasure, they have a special autobiographical significance
for me, then close the book and only retain the meaningful, emotional,
romantic, human bits, whilst dumping the cheap, religious linen-cloth upon which
the beautiful poetical word-pictures are stitched.
michaelP
ps: if you bother responding to me on this in any other way than taking up
what I have suggested, even for a brief fun interlude between the usual
headbangings, then do not expect a reply from me: no point.
Jud:
I enjoy sharing and receiving fun with/from you Michael.
Believe it or not - you have a special place in my affection.
Regards,
Jud
Personal Website:
_http://evans-experientialism.freewebspace.com/index.htm_
(http://evans-experientialism.freewebspace.com/index.htm)
E-mail Discussion List:
nominalism@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
--- StripMime Warning -- MIME attachments removed ---
This message may have contained attachments which were removed.
Sorry, we do not allow attachments on this list.
--- StripMime Report -- processed MIME parts ---
multipart/alternative
text/plain (text body -- kept)
text/html
---
--- from list heidegger@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx ---