File spoon-archives/heidegger.archive/heidegger_2003/heidegger.0309, message 132


Subject: RE: Fichte - rider
Date: Mon, 15 Sep 2003 13:46:25 +0200
From: "Bakker, R.B.M. de" <R.B.M.deBakker-AT-uva.nl>




-----Oorspronkelijk bericht-----
Van: michaelP [mailto:michael-AT-sandwich-de-sign.co.uk]
Verzonden: vrijdag 12 september 2003 17:33
Aan: heidegger-AT-lists.village.Virginia.EDU
Onderwerp: Re: Fichte - rider


on 12/9/03 3:55 pm, Bakker, R.B.M. de at R.B.M.deBakker-AT-uva.nl wrote:

> (Likewise, all 'critics' of the Latin, of the
> fundamental changes it brings to Greek notions, can be no critics, because
> without Rome and Caesar we and you would not even be here and there)

Rene, it has suddenly ( and I'm so so    s  l  o  w   ) occurred in a
shattering way (thunderbolt & lightening, very very frightening...) to me
that you are a 'carrier' of Nietzsche's amor fati: how could anything have
been different to what it is and has been, even an atom, etc.

There is something so simultaneously liberating and hideous about that
notion that I feel you embody in your writing, but, how can have ever been
other in any way? And how could I not respond with this thunderbolt
surprise? :-)

regards

mP

  Nietzsche proudly wrote that the beat of his heart was extremely slow.
  Slow is good for understanding necessity. It's a sign of strength:
  it does not allow itself to be dragged on by Florence Nightingale's
  or other sentimentalities.  

  Bob Scheetz:  
  
  cardinal bourgeois piety.
  ...........................
  in a world where the norm is
  the somme and verdun and auschwitz and nagasaki,   

  (Edward Teller was at least man enough to say that Nagasaki was a mistake,
   and that the showing of weapons would have been enough. "Mistake" means
   here: massive crime. Why are the Theresians so silent on these things?) 
   
  
  Not necessity, I'd say, of the process itself, but mystery, perhaps
  now more than ever, while it is not seen. (dove-feet noise)
  Is not necessity itself something mysterious (and therefore not an end
  but a beginning?)

  I myself was rather thinking of Heidegger and the Thai monk. That one
  should realize where one is coming from. But amor fati does it too.
  I mean: get torn off suddenly from one's commonplaces. 
  
  But I would keep Nietzsche's quasi-scientific exemplifications of ER
  at a distance, and follow Heidegger in that ER is mysterious and
  REMAINS mysterious, and that atoms don't help. They organize matter,
  but disintegrate thinking. Remember that Heidegger emphasizes that ER
  is only in the THINKING of ER. 


  I, for my part, remembered again lately your "Has it to be always so
  difficult"?  Heidegger: the near, the easy is for us the difficult.
  "The nearest of the near."  To get where we always already are, and not
  to lie: I guess that is H's contribution to the god question.
  
  regards

  rene



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

   

Driftline Main Page

 

Display software: ArchTracker © Malgosia Askanas, 2000-2005