Date: Tue, 20 Aug 1996 10:07:25 -0400 (EDT) From: Tom Blancato <tblan-AT-telerama.lm.com> Subject: Re: The Q of V On 20 Aug 1996, robert scheetz wrote: > Tom B., > > Wonderfull "polemic". > May be, despite himself, you've rescued H from scholasticism. > > The horror of existential circumstance ("the nightmare of history": > parricide, fratricide, infanticide...Diana Ortiz,Desert Storm, > Auschwitz,...) is the guilt burden of Everyman from Oedipus to us. > That the philosopher-genius-of-the-age should be abstracted > from this would seem an impossibility?..."lucky", maybe? > > > > --- from list heidegger-AT-lists.village.virginia.edu --- > And let's not forget "the only positive act", suicide... The horror is a call to re-think guilt and to free its drama from identification of locus to its conditions of possibility, and unleashs its moral imminance, intention and imprisoned knowledge to its authentic fruition as nonviolence, while the burdening of guilt promises, in spite of every *liberation*, liberation theology, etc., only and ever to break the back of nonviolence, which carries Christianity, for example, like a cross. (In the news in the last couple of days, gunmen fired in the Haitian presidential palace.) That "genius" (Heidegger's, unless you mean, rather a *locus*, something more gen-eral, I hope), which *can only rescue itself*, and which is also physis in both the self-having/being of emergence and its being beheld in others is precisely also everyman's -- though *not* for that reason stellar, but in fact hidden by everyman's Stars and star phenomena, such as Heidegger('s) -- despite the history of Genius, which is in part a history of the *capitalism* of the attribution to *how*, and a history of at-tributions in general: to luck, to will, to ability, to talent, genius, difficulty, means, method, strategy, etc. as fundamental to nonviolence in its moments of primordial genius and empowerment. Luck? Does the *attribution* to luck not therefore deserve consideration, and would such an "abstraction" (such as, and whatever, it is) not itself be founded on the refusal of both the attribution to luck and to will, and therefore affirming *both at the same time*, maintaining rather the irreducible, hybrid insistent in-between, in the "mid-zone"? Yet, there is the destinal, but this can only prompt us to renew with new vigor our resolve; its abyss our slingshot, its delights our own, and our horror, as well. Tom B. _____________________________________________________________________ "I'll take my coffee without sugar produced in slave labor camps, on third world plantations or by prison chain gangs, thank you. The same goes for the coffee itself, naturally." _____________________________________________________________________ --- from list heidegger-AT-lists.village.virginia.edu ---
Display software: ArchTracker © Malgosia Askanas, 2000-2005