Subject: FW: Rilke and Americanism Date: Sat, 27 Sep 2003 16:53:26 +0200 From: "Bakker, R.B.M. de" <R.B.M.deBakker-AT-uva.nl> -----Oorspronkelijk bericht----- Van: Bakker, R.B.M. de Verzonden: za 27-9-2003 16:04 Aan: heidegger-AT-lists.village.Virginia.EDU CC: Onderwerp: RE: Rilke and Americanism -----Oorspronkelijk bericht----- Van: Michael Eldred [mailto:artefact-AT-t-online.de] Verzonden: za 27-9-2003 13:38 Aan: heidegger-AT-lists.village.Virginia.EDU CC: Onderwerp: Re: Rilke and Americanism sorry when doubled Cologne 27-Sep-2003 "Bakker, R.B.M. de" schrieb Fri, 26 Sep 2003 23:55:00 +0200: > Thanks Calypso for the elegant assistance. 'markets' should be read as > verb. The market markets, as the will wills. And as the nothing nullifies. > All that looks negative, without perspective. Still it's the only way to overcome > metaphysics, because what is said in these tautologies - and this said is, what > now is - , cannot be grasped metaphysically. And mostly not that what holds > the different tautologies together, the mother so to say of all tautology: Gestell. > This would be a late (and very provisional) answer to a question of a couple of > years ago: what is the unifying, the Ge-, of the Gestell? > regards > rene > > > * Next you'll be trying to tell us that Das Zeug zeugt. Right, Michael. Die Sprache spricht. Here and now. But, as Aristotle pointed out some time ago, if you bury a bed in the ground, it won't grow. That's why i said: provisional answers. But this is not what *i* am trying to tell, i point to tautology and Erschweigen in late Heidegger, not as the end of the road, but because the graving has to go till the abground. Man is ONLY the relation to being, writes Heidegger. And that is the poverty to turn into. Not willing to see, clinging to one's own idols, a widerwille that according to Heidegger comes from far, seems innocent, but there comes a moment that an abground zero opens up. And when things go on this way, i foresee trouble everywhere. The signs are everywhere. Regardless Why Michael? Do you object to my Heidegger reading? Can you give me your reading of the philosophical notions concerned? yours, rene _-_-_-_-_-_- artefact text and translation _-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_ _-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_- made by art _-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_ http://www.webcom.com/artefact/ _-_-_-_-artefact-AT-t-online.de _-_ _-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_ Dr Michael Eldred -_-_- _-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_ > > -----Oorspronkelijk bericht----- > Van: GEVANS613-AT-aol.com [mailto:GEVANS613-AT-aol.com] > Verzonden: vr 26-9-2003 18:28 > Aan: heidegger-AT-lists.village.Virginia.EDU > CC: > Onderwerp: Re: Rilke and Americanism > > Jud: > As usual you missed the point, which was Rene's claim that the repentant and > remorseful > Philosopher of Nazism Heidegger was apologising [with the metaphorical > assistance of the local church bells] for the victims of the holocaust who > were > 'sacrificed' by his pals in the death camps, [to whom we are not told - to > Hitler? > To the Germanic Gods of the forests?] > > > Rene retorts: > > > This was not rene's claim, i've asked him. you think you can do anything, > > eh? > > Well thanks for showing it. You're not talking at all of the dead. your > > nominalism > > turned them into a linguistic sign, that can be used at random. Like the > > poor can > > be used. > > > Jud: > Rene's claim was - well here it is again - read it for yourself - it must win > the gold prize for being the silliest thing that has ever appeared > on the discussion lists concerning heidegger: > To those who are willing to see and hear: > > 'Heidegger has spoken on Auschwitz. > In "Der Feldweg", after the last stroke > of the old Martinskirche the silence > has become even stiller. "It extends > to those, who have been sacrificed > by two world wars before their time.' > > Jud: > Now Rene > > Herr Judge! > > Without changing the subject to Hoelderlin, Rilke, Gadamer, > Calcutta, Nominalism, Eminem, Catholics, Anthony, Dr Eldred, > Americans, America, Eurocentrism, George Orwell and so on and so on...can I > please have a straight answer to a straight question to your assertion that > Heidegger is speaking of Auschwitz in the Felweg extract. > > > The original accusation, yours, was: Heidegger should have said something on Auschwitz. > > I write: Heidegger *has* spoken of Auschwitz. > > But not to those who are searching for excuses. But - you have it or not, judge - to who can read. > > I'll tell you the story of someone who reads. She reads: Heidegger *did* speak of Auschwitz. > > Then she reads the text from the Feldweg, misses the word "Auschwitz", but thinks: the guy > > must mean that the victims of Auschwitz belong to those, who have been sacrificed before their > > time. > > --- from list heidegger-AT-lists.village.virginia.edu --- Ҷ2)Yxmifz{l騽ɞƠzfrj)umifz{lz*+/y'֥֜g'+-JȦyq,y0JZةjj[^v{V^w/mױm_~&+-zb)ej*xn
Display software: ArchTracker © Malgosia Askanas, 2000-2005