Date: Mon, 4 Feb 2002 20:58:33 +0000
From: Tommy Beavitt <tommy-AT-scoraig.com>
Subject: RE: Dasein


At 8:43 pm +0100 4/2/02, Tudor Georgescu wrote:
>No alternative to capitalist economy. As Heidegger said, philosophy is
>not about making things easier, but telling that this or that measure is
>really a half-thought measure. All I can say: extrapolating a market
>specialisation into thinking what is to think, is an error, which, if we
>are to use the philosophy of value, gave birth to nazism, communism and
>globalisation. Its name? Humanism -- Dasein as homo animalus.

I take your point, Tudor. But I wasn't "extrapolating a market 
specialisation into thinking what is to think". On the contrary, I 
was following your train of thought which consisted of extrapolating 
a market specialisation into philosophy.

At 10:53 am +0100 26/1/02, Tudor Georgescu wrote:
>The capitalist specialization of mankind created financial speculation.
>Plato was nothing else than such a speculator. He failed to see that
>writing on a blackboard with the chalk, riding the horse, or watching
>the TV, these are not added through thinking to these objects.

I agree that value can have two meanings. One is market value. The 
other is life value. Although an actuary might put a value on a human 
life it does not bear any relation to the value the person living it 
would put on it. It is a notional extrapolation of what that person 
would have been worth in terms of his or her use to others after his 
or her death.

>"Life is not a good business; it is not a bad business either. Life 
>is not a business."

I do not mean to lump these two meanings together. My criticism of 
your concept of value was limited to its application to market 
economics which seemed to be the context of your post.

However, following from the Sartrean principles which constitute the 
ground of my thinking about economics, it is fair to talk of the two 
concepts of value as being equivalent if we are talking about a 
notional third person. I accept that others are busy trying to reduce 
me to an in-itself, viewing me in terms of the use(s) they can make 
of me. I also accept that, not only am I busy resisting that 
reduction, I am also attempting to reduce others in this way. This 
dialogue is, to my mind, what creates what we refer to as a market 
economy. It is better when people strongly resist being reduced to an 
in-itself because then creativity is enhanced and value increases. 
There is no value without humans, not even market value. The more 
human (ie. the greater the struggle against eidetic reduction) the 
greater the value.

Tommy Beavitt


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