Subject: RE: [fyi] What is Realism in Iraq?
Date: Tue, 18 Nov 2003 14:16:22 +0100
From: "Bakker, R.B.M. de" <R.B.M.deBakker-AT-uva.nl>




-----Oorspronkelijk bericht-----
Van: owner-heidegger-AT-lists.village.Virginia.EDU
[mailto:owner-heidegger-AT-lists.village.Virginia.EDU]Namens Anthony
Crifasi
Verzonden: maandag 17 november 2003 19:30
Aan: heidegger-AT-lists.village.Virginia.EDU
Onderwerp: Re: [fyi] What is Realism in Iraq?


Rene de Bakker wrote:

> >     Please go tell mr Wolfowitz, where the roots of his 'philosophy' 
>lie.
> >     (cf. Abraham and the Bagdad museum of archaeology)

And now you contradict yourself when you already insisted on his Straussian 
roots, which (as do most things) goes back to Greece.

> >     The Greeks developed their own in contrast with the Asian. Goethe,
>Nietzsche
> >     and Heidegger were aware of that.
> >     The Islamic reroute of a part of Aristotle's works, is, compared to
>this,
> >     merely a traffic question.

That has to be one of the most stunningly ignorant things I have ever seen 
out of any of your emails.



    Just watch the boomerang, Anthony



 And that's something. Considering a significant 
portion of my dissertation is on Islamic optics and physiology and its 
philosophical roots, we can compare notes if you like. Avicenna, Averroes, 
Hunain ibn Is-haq, Al-Kindi, Alhazen - Asian???? They only cite Aristotle 
every other sentence! It was a mere 300 year "traffic" reroute that happened 
to ram through their philosophy, medicine, physics, optics, physiology, and 
mathematics! The degree to which you are willing to blatantly distort things 
to support your worldview, and this from one who accuses others of precisely 
that.

Anthony Crifasi


    All important historically, but accidental when the (metaphysical) structure
    of the Abendland is at stake, the Europe, to which the US belongs too, if they
    still belong anywhere. According to Heidegger 'we', whether we want to know it
    or not, are standing in the beginnings of the completion of metaphysics.
    However admirable Islamic medicine, like all non-western ways of healing, they
    play only an alternative role over against our malfunctions processing industry,
    and so are antithetically determined. Just as "Reading Heidegger" is at first and
    at most an industry, arranged technologically. Already in 1929, in What is metaphysics
    - and repeated in the Spiegel interview - he states that the unity of the sciences,
    henceforth, solely consists in the technological structure of the university.
    That might sound innocent to our ears, it IS highly problematic. And it comes from far.
    All this asks for a thinking, that engages HEREWITH.

    But you can see what you do, again and again: avoid Heidegger's main point -
    historical origin as the freeing instance - by adducing all these 'things',
    all these ontical historical dealings, in order to get rid of Heidegger.
    And for this you have your reasons, like all the others have, but which all
    are reducable to an aversion to Heidegger and what HE has to say. Cos you
    turn him into a philosopher, you and your country can do without.

    rene de b





  









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