File spoon-archives/heidegger.archive/heidegger_2003/heidegger.0302, message 168


Date: Tue, 18 Feb 2003 12:42:09 +0000
Subject: war: what is it good for (absolutely nothing)
From: michaelP <michael-AT-sandwich-de-sign.co.uk>


> This message is in MIME format. Since your mail reader does not understand
this format, some or all of this message may not be legible.

--MS_Mac_OE_3128416929_206626_MIME_Part

just a thought in these thoughtless times:

if peace be good

if peace is the absence of war

and not just an armed peace

if war presumes sides

and the taking of sides

{is war the very presence of sides?}

then peace is the absence of sides

and the non taking of sides {not-taking}

not even taking no sides {no sides to be taken}

but their very utter absence

then the absence of sides is good {is peace}

but what can this mean? how can this be thought?

[I am looking for a Heideggerian response to (the) war]

what do yo'all think?

regards

michaelPeace

ps: is peace good? 

--MS_Mac_OE_3128416929_206626_MIME_Part

HTML VERSION:

war: what is it good for (absolutely nothing) just a thought in these thoughtless times:

if peace be good

if peace is the absence of war

and not just an armed peace

if war presumes sides

and the taking of sides

{is war the very presence of sides?}

then peace is the absence of sides

and the non taking of sides {not-taking}

not even taking no sides {no sides to be taken}

but their very utter absence

then the absence of sides is good {is peace}

but what can this mean? how can this be thought?

[I am looking for a Heideggerian response to (the) war]

what do yo'all think?

regards

michaelPeace

ps: is peace good? --MS_Mac_OE_3128416929_206626_MIME_Part-- --- from list heidegger-AT-lists.village.virginia.edu ---

Driftline Main Page

 

Display software: ArchTracker © Malgosia Askanas, 2000-2005