From: "Tudor Georgescu" <tgeorgescu-AT-home.nl>
Subject: RE: Method
Date: Tue, 26 Feb 2002 10:17:46 +0100


> R:
> Also the last man has 2 eyes. But the choice to look or to blink is
ours.

"only true strength should have access to the right path, but not
halfheartedness ...

"University study must again become a risk, not a refuge for the
cowardly. Whoever does not survive the battle, lies where he falls."

The above are Heidegger's sayings, which some found fit to quote in a
defamatory context. I see no shame in assuming such mottos.

To be is to become, to exist.

Jethro, Priest of On

 

Intellect Club mailgroup at http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Intellect_Club


> -----Original Message-----
> From: owner-heidegger-AT-lists.village.virginia.edu [mailto:owner-
> heidegger-AT-lists.village.virginia.edu] On Behalf Of Rene de Bakker
> Sent: Monday, 25 February 2002 17:54
> To: heidegger-AT-lists.village.virginia.edu
> Subject: Re: Method
> 
> At 13:40 22-2-02 -0600, Allen Scult wrote:
> 
> 
> R:
> Rather, that when human talk of things is robbed from its metaphysical
> dimension, ...
> 
> A:
> Does this "when" mean to suggest that sometimes human talk is not
robbed
> from its metaphysical dimension?
> Is the "when" here an epochal occurrence, suggesting that the robbery
> takes
> somewhat different forms in different epochs?
> 
> R:
> According to the philosopher we all read here, we live in the epoch of
> completed senselessness. The most senseless (nihilistic) act then,
> would be the bestowing of sense on the senseless. Adding sugar
> to sand only helps the desert growing.
> 
> 
> [Of this Hoelderlin, Heidegger says, that while being (dead and)
> forgotten,
> he WAS . as he says of , in the Heraclit seminar, that he still IS
> 
> Sorry, it was Karl Reinhardt, who still is]
> 
> That's why some of us like rummaging around in these old texts,
apparently
> reduced to ashes, but still containing some embers which perhaps can
be
> ignited.
> 
> I think, that what Heidegger is at, is a radical turning of position:
> in a Hoelderlin poem, or in a text of Leibniz, is the opening, which
> is enough for itself. They don't need us. At most, we need them.
> A very strange use of the word 'is',  that must be admitted, but
> the only one, that can free the historical from the available.
> 
> Nietzsche 2, German p. 9, heading "ER and WtP":
> 
> "Die Gewesenheit ist die Befreiung des scheinbar nur Vergangenen
> in sein Wesen [...]   Das WESENDE Vergangene, die je entworfene
> Seiendheit als verhuellte Wahrheit des Seins, ueberherrscht alles,
> was als gegenwaertig und, kraft seiner Wirksamkeit, als das Wirkliche
> gilt."
> 
> (compare Wiederholung/repetition in BT)
> 
> R:
> There is a passage in "The principle of reason", where H writes: "Why
does
> this not knock us over?"
> If there would be no limit to the power of indication, one could knock
> over
> everybody.
> 
> A:
> It's extraordinary how these "protections" are built into the design
of
> language to keep large numbers of us safe from "destruktion."  Is it
some
> sort of natural selection which "arranged" things so everybody didn't
get
> knocked over?
> 
> R:
> Also the last man has 2 eyes. But the choice to look or to blink is
ours.
> 
> regards  rene
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> -----------------------------------
> drs. Ren de Bakker
> Universiteitsbibliotheek Amsterdam
> Afdeling Catalogisering
> tel. 020-5252309
> 
> 
>      --- from list heidegger-AT-lists.village.virginia.edu ---




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