File spoon-archives/heidegger.archive/heidegger_2003/heidegger.0302, message 147


From: "Anthony Crifasi" <crifasi-AT-hotmail.com>
Subject: Re: neither/nor (was: Righteous War? Or bluff?)
Date: Sun, 16 Feb 2003 18:29:58 +0000


michaelP wrote:

>I wonder whether it is possible to live in a
>political/ethical/aesthetic (non)position of being neither for nor against
>'the war' (anything actually, but the war that is now presencing, coming
>close, will do nicely); and furthermore, neither for {neither for nor
>against} nor against {neither for nor against}? Can this be lived? Can this
>be thought? (other than trivially, other than merely claiming/stating it).
>
>This non-position is in some way, I think, connected with a central
>problematic in the thinking of Heidegger; some way connected that I cannot
>yet elaborate.

I think I can elaborate. Heidegger's philosophy does not imply that we can 
actually live neutrally. We are already thrown into the world. What is 
"neutral" is not our actual living, but the ontological structure of that 
living. As the structure of being-in-the-world in general, it must encompass 
ANY possible existence in the world, and therefore any possible "side" 
whatsoever. But some mistake the ontological for the ontic (for example, 
mistaking being-with for an ontic "community" such as the UN), and therefore 
try to claim that Heidegger's philosophy has more of an affinity with this 
or that side. They therefore think that Heidegger's philosophy of living 
cannot be neutral, without specifying the precise way that it is neutral, 
and the way it is not.

Anthony Crifasi

_________________________________________________________________
The new MSN 8: smart spam protection and 2 months FREE*  
http://join.msn.com/?page=features/junkmail



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

   

Driftline Main Page

 

Display software: ArchTracker © Malgosia Askanas, 2000-2005