Rene writes:
i just read the beginning of Descartes' Discours how to manage reason.
he is asking the reader to value his method - the one of doubting everything
and accepting only the evident - , not to do the same, because who can say
he is fit to after taking notice of Descartes' laborious vigilance. Subjectivism
for him is just another sort of dogmatism. So that Descartes new determanation
of the subject is nothing 'subjective'.
The only possible following of Dscartes would consist in trying to attain
for oneself
the position of doubting subject, but so that only by doubting a subject is
revealing, re-presenting itself. The rest is hearsay. Interesting that he rather
would call his writing piece a fable than a history, indicating that philosophy
is never the representation of the existent, but creative.
You might be right with your authority argument - others coem to mind again -
but before the question of how to read and interpret Heidegger can be raised,
one should first have thought about subject and subjectivism. Esp. in view of the
problem Nietzsche detects, that the basis for subjective stances is no more.
When that would be done, THEN the next question would be: when Heidegger
considers tuned Dasein as more basic than reflexivity, how can i then follow
Heidegger? Surely not by representation [this is funny] , but, as Heidegger suggests,
by being the Da.
In short, you represent the common feature of these times: i don't want authority.
But that is not said, but someone else is searched for and accused of following
aother leading.
But i am looking for more than posturemaking, and that is already the beginning
of searching authority. It demands discipline and honesty, and what not.
Moreover: where to stay meanwhile as long as one is not that far, which one never is?
(Descartes' question beginning third paragraph)
And what also comes to mind is Heidegger's warning to let be the already thought.
Not copying, but thinking oneself is required for that.
It's interesting that you bring up Descartes who seems to beblamed for everything these days Heidegger contributing not a little to this. I have been thinking about doubt a lot and its relation to what I would call a pragmatic skeptical epoche that pauses and abides with questions that seem to be outstanding. Thinking here slows down to a crawl and no doubt folds in on itself to ponder more carefully any decision it might take that would determine its future direction. I'll come back to these thoughts that I have been mulling over lately. The first question is the subject as you mention but what is going on with this subject? For Nietzsche its reactive, revengefull, communicates far too easily, is full of ressentiment, it's for itself and other shows lack of respect for growth through undergoing or tragic breaking apart, it doesn't have a distended will but a needy one that takes instead of gives, etc. For Heidegger emphasis falls on more epistemic aspects such as that the subject believes in a representational theory of truth that always asks "what is ....?". This the GUIDING question to use the language of the Nietzsche volumes and contributions. In Kantian language one is looking at the way the understanding through the categories is organizing our ongoing experience. I agree Rene that this is an important subject that has to be questioned but it's complex and never done with and so constant vigilance and practice is required to resist our reactions and tendency to be lazy and complacent in this matter. I have been reading a chapter in Epictetus's discourses (24, book three) and he reminds me how physical this is for me. Thinking is a PHYSICAL exercise when it is ACTIVE rather than reactive. It is the overcoming of a real obstacle. Because philosophy in this regard is a physical exercise the thinking mind that ponders things slowly and therefore is a kind of incubator of what is yet to be thought is cooking up new ideas whose novelty can be a real fermention of activity that makes wordsmiths happy campers on their nomadic travels over this supportive medium that just lays itself out and waits to be impressed. Oh yes, God lives Rene! LOL... It is not about following Heidegger. I think you are being too dogmatic and possibly restricting what is possible to anyone who cares about the open quality of highminded thinking that as Heidegger teaches us is always a kind of gift that is thankful for this brief spark of I don't know what. The GROUNDING question where we find ourselves in an another beginning as if we were recycling our old approach which now is sooo broken down and cut up into little pieces bordering on nothingness; that it is a tragic sight for human pity and a tempatation for Zarathustra. It's like the old subject is food, rich topsoil on which Dasein emerges if we only allow it to break apart and disintegrate into airy nothing. I don't know everyone has to find their own way to change to self-transformation where an old skin is shed and a new one emerges that places us in the DA. To be in this regard I take to be in state of awareness where one is attentive to just whatever happens to be our current situation and I think the approach to this mode of being is very individualistic. Otherwise what? What happens otherwise is that we start believing in some dogmatic doctrine that then has to be followed like a model which is protected by authoritative representatives. People have to be encouraged to think through things for themselves because in the end what works for you as far as getting you more attuned to being-t/here might not work for someone else whose character is not like yours. All the great philosophers who are also teachers are aware of this and are not afraid of being an 'origin' -- usually of a school that differentiates itself from what has been because it is identified as corrupt. Higher education in particular today is bankrupt and this list proves it because all our academics are pretty dumb imo not knowing how to describe anything in a brief and clear manner, not knowing how to respond to the smallest provocation without coming across as father knows best, not knowing how to defend their faith because they don't really have one aside from the visible marks of institutional affiliation. I don't know it's a sad sad situation whose only hope is the kids who are growing up interacting through writing on the net today who will find pleasure and happiness outside all visible order and will recognize how gifted they are by squandering their intelligence in astonishing works of admiration for themselves and life.
I'm going to finish responding later Rene,
tympan
_________________________________________________________________
Take charge with a pop-up guard built on patented Microsoft® SmartScreen Technology http://join.msn.com/?pgmarket=en-ca&page=byoa/prem&xAPID=1994&DI=1034&SU=http://hotmail.com/enca&HL=Market_MSNIS_Taglines Start enjoying all the benefits of MSN® Premium right now and get the first two months FREE*.
--- from list heidegger@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx ---