renerecently to an antiheideggerian:
> In fact one has to be antiheidegger
> in order to find one's ownmost
rene, apart from considerations of the very quality of such antiheidegger
stands, and the relation between follower and followed, leader and the lead,
it has occured to me recently and in a vaguely troubled way that one does
not necessarily have be antiheidegger since there are clues in the writing
that heidegger did it himself. In that sense, might it be needful to open up
a discussion concerning the notion of two heideggers, neither the early/late
pair, nor the pre-kehre/post-kehre, but one seeking to pietistically
preserve/recover the metaphysical tradition, the other to
demolish/deconstruct the same? Of course, I do not mean a double
'personality' or any such psychologistical tosh, but something discernible
in the texts as they battle out the future and past of thinking. [In my
planned opera, there shall be two heideggers on stage at times, but that's
the way of drama and not the path of thinking]. I think derrida was most
sensitive to these two heideggers and the way they interwove as texts which
he reperforms thoughout his complex relations (proximity and distance) with
heidegger. Is there a space to discuss this notion without recourse to pulp
and its purveyors?
regards
michaelP
--- from list heidegger@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx ---
> In fact one has to be antiheidegger
> in order to find one's ownmost
rene, apart from considerations of the very quality of such antiheidegger
stands, and the relation between follower and followed, leader and the lead,
it has occured to me recently and in a vaguely troubled way that one does
not necessarily have be antiheidegger since there are clues in the writing
that heidegger did it himself. In that sense, might it be needful to open up
a discussion concerning the notion of two heideggers, neither the early/late
pair, nor the pre-kehre/post-kehre, but one seeking to pietistically
preserve/recover the metaphysical tradition, the other to
demolish/deconstruct the same? Of course, I do not mean a double
'personality' or any such psychologistical tosh, but something discernible
in the texts as they battle out the future and past of thinking. [In my
planned opera, there shall be two heideggers on stage at times, but that's
the way of drama and not the path of thinking]. I think derrida was most
sensitive to these two heideggers and the way they interwove as texts which
he reperforms thoughout his complex relations (proximity and distance) with
heidegger. Is there a space to discuss this notion without recourse to pulp
and its purveyors?
regards
michaelP
--- from list heidegger@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx ---