On Monday, October 25, 2004, at 04:43 PM, James Garrabrant wrote:
When I read the third last paragraph which starts which "I personally think"
to the end I wonder why it was you seem to prefer an alternative
energy-source?
Otherwise, I might find the Green Parties more agreeable if they were honest
about their encouragement of technosis.
I'm not sure what point you are making here James. By 'technosis' do you mean techno stress? That Greens concerns about biosphere destruction and resource depletion are dishonestly amplified by fear mongering and doomsday scenarios?
I think resource depletion, biosphere destruction and global warming are increasingly valid scientific concerns as we enter the 21st century. As far as I'm concerned all these human problems are interrelated and part of a wider human problem, as factical effects of the ontological gigantism Heidegger points to in his problem concerning technology. They're effects of the structure of our own historically constituted, modern human understanding.
I've been delving back into Heidegger's Nietzsche since the run up to the invasion of Iraq and interpreting neoconservatism from the perspective of his critique of Nazism. In the current world context I do find it cause for concern that our collective approach to what seems to be an impending global economic crash brought on by an energy crisis is almost certainly going to continue down the path of war rather than the internationalism that is needed to mitigate the transition to alternative energies and the different ways of life they might support.
I certainly don't intend to stress anyone out about it all, this is just the conclusion I'm coming to given my starting proposition, which was to take Gestell seriously as the structure of our current form of modernity.
Cheers,
Malcolm Riddoch
--- from list heidegger@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx ---