From: "henry sholar" <H_SHOLAR-AT-marta.uncg.edu>
Date:          Fri, 26 Jun 1998 9:25:43 EST
Subject:       Re: heidegger/pomoism and law



Anthony Crifasi:
>The very characterization of the categories as "slots" is already a break from 
>modern and pre-modern thought. Aristotle treats his categories as 
>representative of the way "things really are," and the moderns characterize their 
>"categories" similarly, whether the way the "psyche" really is, or the way "our 
>perceptions" really are, etc. This is just another way to say that they 
>considered their "first principles" to be indicative of the "way something is." So 
>by characterizing these first principles as mere "slots" which are based on 
>patriarchy, class, etc, post-modernism is rejecting the absoluteness of first 
>principles as such, which is incompatible with both pre-modern and modern 
>thought as such. This is all I was saying before.
>


"slots" is my very hasty word for a variety of 'numinal' and 'phenomenal'
descriptions of definabilities.  The point is post-modernists claim to see
prejudice adhering to just about any first principle anyone decides to choose.

Such prejudice is "seeable" following structuralist theories and hermeneutical
 methodologies developed in Europe.  

Certainly Heidegger provides grist for this mill in _Identity and Difference_.

Thanks for your clarifications on the other points, too.

Kindest regards,
henry



     --- from list heidegger-AT-lists.village.virginia.edu ---