File spoon-archives/heidegger.archive/heidegger_2003/heidegger.0311, message 357


From: GEVANS613-AT-aol.com
Date: Fri, 21 Nov 2003 13:08:48 EST
Subject: Nietzsche/Nazism - truth - Part Two


Part Two

Malcolm:
Will to power as a 'life' affirming reaction against nihilist bourgeois 
values thus becomes "a question of the positing of the principle of all 
value-positing - a positing that values differently" (Heidegger, 1977, 'The word of 
Nietzsche: God is dead', in The question concerning technology and other essays, 
trans. William Lovitt, Harper and Row, New York, p. 70). 

Jud:
Life doesn't need any 'affirmation.' To be aware of the fact of being alive 
[I think therefore I am] is sufficient evidence if evidence is required to 
establish the actuality of being alive. No further evidence is needed to 
strengthen as with new evidence or facts this fact of reality. There is no need to 
declare or affirm solemnly and formally as true the fact that one is alive, and it 
is impossible for anyone to accuse another person of not being alive.
It is possible for somebody to accuse another of not living up to their 
potential - and one often hears the contemptuous retort: 'Why don't you get a 
life?' But this jibe is not meant to infer that the addressee is not an actual 
living person, but rather that the addressee is perceived as not to be living a 
life or experiencing the world in a way which is more in accord with the way 
that the addressor lives his or her life.  And so it is with Nietzsche and 
Goebells' who exhort people to get off their ass and live the kind of life which 
THEY perceive to be the 'true' way to live which is to harness the will to power 
to dominate and work towards personal Ubermenchship, or in the case of 
Goebbels, Hitler and Heidegger and that crowd, to submerge this will to power in the 
all enveloping will to power of the German Volk in order that they may take 
their rightful place as the inheritors of the Greeks and boss everybody else 
around, and force them to read Holderlin, and make them eat sauerkraut and 
sausages, and shave their heads into yobbo haircuts, and to sing the Horst Wessel 
song and to yap away in their ridiculous language.


Malcolm|:
Value nonetheless remains as the all-inclusive foundation of modern truth 
where "the highest purposes, the grounds and principles of whatever is, ideals 
and the suprasensory, God and the gods - all this is conceived in advance as 
value" (p. 70). 

Jud:
There is no such thing as 'value' in economic terms, but only the human 
valuers who impose their ideas of how many units of currency equals a pound of 
bananas. If one trader says the bananas are 'worth' two pounds, and I know that 
the same sort of bananas can be had for £1.50 around the corner then there is 
another conflict between the trader's notion of 'truth' and mine.
Truth and value are moveable feasts - like all the other abstract words in 
the transcendentalist lexicon aren't worth the paper they are written on. As for 
the: the highest purposes, the grounds and principles of whatever is, ideals 
and the suprasensory, God and the gods - all this is conceived in advance as 
value - if you can find me two individual people who are in absolute agreement 
as to the value or character of these 'grounds' not to mention the great 
differences of opinion in these matters which motivates people to fly aircraft into 
tall buildings, or sees the value of an agonisingly slow death in the desert 
as a sacrifice for the highest purposes, when these 'purposes' are patently 
the wish of certain people in positions of power to get their greedy little 
hands on Iraqi oil or to take measures which will ease the way for the Israelis to 
get their hands on more Palestinian soil.  I doubt if the average American GI 
or British squaddie would happily watch his life-blood seep away and be 
comforted in the knowledge that he is making a worthwhile forfeiture for the US oil 
companies, or for the Jewish settlers itching to grab more of the rapidly 
diminishing land belonging to the wretched Arabs of Palestine?


Malcolm:
These supersensuous values are a function of the will to power, whether that 
is recognised or not, and as the originator of all values this will becomes 
"the fundamental characteristic of everything real" (p. 75).

Jud:
There is no difference between these 'supersensuous values' and 'the will to 
power,'
The desire to dominate has no 'function' other than the biological 
balled-fist which smashes into the face of the other, or the wagging tongue of the 
politician, salesman or seducer who gets his way using verbal methods of 
persuasion.  The embrained body is no different from the embodied brain in these matters 
- the processes which result in an act of dominance [whether physical or 
mental] is a unified act of the animal holism, which is the human being. There is 
no mental - physical dichotomy, it is one of the greatest myths of philosophy. 
The fundamental characteristic of everything real is the individual human 
being in his or her actions in relation to the environment, which surrounds them. 



Malcolm:
All modern truth which is founded in the delusion of Platonism becomes merely 
an unconscious willing of truth. 

Jud:
Bravo!  Quite right.  But again, why stop there?  What about the other 
inanities of Platonism?        Most importantly what about 'Being' which has got to 
be the 'Mother of all Platonic inanities?' 

Malcolm:
>From Nietzsche onwards however, there is a new relation to this will, and "it 
is new because for the first time it takes place consciously out of the 
knowledge of its principle" (p. 75). The will to power is an emergence into a 
self-conscious relation to truth, and it seems obvious to me that Heidegger sees 
this self-consciousness in Hitlerism.

Jud:
I still maintain it was old hat or a commonality which any beer-hall boozer 
could have told you at the time.  The reality of position and power and the 
human appetite for such delights has been known for thousands of years what was 
new was Nietzsche's assertion that we shouldn't be ashamed of such a striving 
to dominate, and that we should honour it as a way of thinking and behaving 
that sorted the men from the boys - the Overman from the pathetic Underman who 
struggled pathetically in the coils and commandments of the Christian 
admonitions to 'be nice to everyone.'
Heidegger was aware of this long before he ever clapped eyes on Hitler.  
Heidegger was a ruthless opportunist who was never nice to anyone in his life.  An 
inveterate liar he had long before recognised Goebbels' truism that all 
propaganda is good propaganda - in Heidegger's case all lies were good lies and so 
he felt perfectly at home in the company of the Nazi lie-machine with its 
constant statements that Jews were no better than vermin. Did Heidegger ever 
contest the racialist filth in Die Sturmer? Did he ever put on record his distaste 
for the racialist abuse of the Jews - the book-burnings - the treatment of his 
colleagues?  Did he apologise for the treatment of Husserl - even in later 
years?


Malcolm:
This is to say that will to power is as its own truth, it is its own 
certainty.

Jud:
The will to power can't 'own' anything - neither can it be certain or 
uncertain - for it doesn't exist. Only those that exhibit a form of behaviour that 
others discern as certainly  'ambitious' exist, and only that form human 
behaviour engaged in by those which is deemed to be truthful or in line with the 
observer's conception of truth exist.

Malcolm:
Metaphysics attempted to fix this certainty in a Platonic realm of 
transcendental truth, but Nietzsche has destroyed this delusion for the certainty of 
that which constituted this idealized truth in the first place: The value 
positing of the will to power. Certainty, in the sense of that which endures as 
truth, now resides in the constant return to willing truth as a 
"holding-to-be-true.... Thus, according to Nietzsche's judgement, certainty as the principle of 
modern metaphysics is grounded, as regards its truth, solely in the will to 
power" (p. 83). 

Jud:
It was ever so and it was ever known to be so long before Nietzsche ever 
existed. Metaphysics doesn't exist - only metaphysicians.
People have always believed in what it suited them to believe. What was so 
groundbreaking in Nietzsche?  Only that one shouldn't be ashamed of admitting 
that one believes in the truths which suits one to believe to be true - that it 
doesn't really matter - that all protestations of what is the truth have the 
same value as long as they are instrumental in furthering the will to power.
This is exactly what Goebbels was saying later - that all protestations of 
truth [propaganda] are good protestations of truth - even if they are lies. 
Nietzsche, Heidegger, Goebbels were philosophical thugs. 


Malcolm:
 What do you think about this strident anti-transcendentalism Jud? It's 
exceedingly realpolitik in a way, and something that seems to me to be a rather 
self-conscious if somewhat cynical part of modern political life nowadays.

Jud:
What 'strident anti-transcendentalism' Malcolm?  I'm still waiting to see 
some. One cannot call the transcendentalising of the concept of 'truth' and 
'good' into some excuse for a cynical theory of 'he who is strongest and has the 
willingness to use force, or tells the most outrageous lies wins' what more 
Platonic can you get by claiming that there is a  'good' or a truth' and that you 
are in possession of this template or form of the 'good' or the 'truth' that 
can be used as a model or standard for making comparisons with or against the 
versions of the 'good' or the 'truth' held to by the Jewish members of the 
citizenry or the Poles into whose country the Panzers poured?


Malcolm:
However, in order to be as its own truth, will to power must constantly will 
new truths.

Jud:
Surely you mean new lies purporting to be truths?

Malcolm:
 It can never settle down with itself for fear of a petrifaction of 'life'. 
For the "will is, as the will to power, the command to more power.... The will 
must in this way posit a condition for a willing-out-beyond-itself" (p. 80). 
Art is that which fulfills this condition, and in which "the will to power 
first frees itself to itself" (p. 85). As this self-transcending movement, art "is 
the value that first opens all heights of ascent. Art is the highest value. 
In relation to the value truth, it is the higher value. 

Jud:
This is not true for many people.  It may be true for the educated 
bourgeoisie - but the masses would rather watch the Jerry Springer Show. In spite of 
what Paul Murphy says about the increasing monetary value of Nazi 'art' I still 
think it's crap. You are correct though that 'much wants more.'

Malcolm:
The one, ever in a fresh way, calls forth the other. Both values determine in 
their value-relation the unitive essence of the intrinsically value-positing 
will to power" (p. 86). This aestheticisation of power releases it from the 
delusion of a belief in modern values and subordinates truth to the service of 
the interests of power that must constantly outreach itself in securing itself 
anew as power. 

Jud:
Part of this is the successful man's realisation that the publics' perception 
of the sophisticate is he who is knowledgeable and appreciative of art. One 
can imagine Bush going through the motions of visiting an art gallery - but can 
you imagine for one moment him understanding or appreciating it? At least the 
picture-postcard artist Hitler had some understanding - but the result once 
in power?  The monstrosities of architecture, which were hymns to Nazism and 
the crude Germanium of history and myth so beloved by the Nazi philosopher 
Heidegger

Malcolm:
This abyss is modern nihilism cast adrift from any authority other than 
itself, and all ideals are now a function not of truth as such but of the 
self-interest of power that defines all values and their truths. I think it was 
Heidegger's hope that this utterly groundless 'artistic' basis of the will to power 
could be guided towards the origin of the work of art and its disclosure of the 
truth of being, and away from its petrifaction in meaningless values and 
their ideology.

Jud:
Modern nihilism cannot cast itself adrift from any authority because it 
doesn't exist to cast itself anywhere or to align itself with any authority. Ideas. 
Ideals, values, truths - its all Heidegger-speak or gibberish.
Only the goggle-eyed museum visitors exist and agree with some museum 
director or art dealer that such and such a picture is 'art.' Another viewer [say 
from Baghdad] might think that the work of art is the work of the devil and is 
not fit to desecrate a public place.

Malcolm:
This is a very fine line to tread though, and as the origin of this 
nihilistic modern relation to truth will to power constantly exceeds that truth, which 
it is itself, in constantly positing newer truths. 

Jud:
New truths, new lies, new gimmicks, new hypocrisies. It is PEOPLE that posit 
things and relate to things.  'Will to power' does nothing other than lie on 
the page or the screen, as the words 'will to power.'  'Truth' is an activity 
of the embodied brain, which makes judgements concerning the activities of 
others in relation to the effects that such activities might have on its own 
continued existence or the desire to exist in certain ways.

Malcolm:
This 'transcending' movement willing beyond itself and its present 
possibilities, is Nietzsche's art. Art and its ephemeral truths thus define the essence 
of will to power, for which "the essential unity of the will to power can be 
nothing other than the will itself. This unity is the way in which the will to 
power, as will, brings itself before itself" (p. 87).

Jud:
All of the above only applies to those who have a genuine or pretended 
interest in art.

Malcolm:
>From this perspective all modern belief in religious, political and moral 
ideals has no basis in truth apart from the power to assert these truths and make 
them true. Belief becomes a function of mass delusion, to be managed by those 
leaders who have entered into a self-conscious relation to truth as will to 
power.

Jud:
I find the above much more interesting and stimulating.  I find most of   
Heidegger's and 
Nietzsche's writing totally banal and boring because most of what they wrote 
is full of common knowledge dressed up as profundity.  The above is more 
challenging or at least appears so on a first reading.  It is interesting of course 
that to assert that all modern belief in religious, political and moral 
ideals has no basis in truth apart from the power to assert these truths and make 
them true must also apply to Heidegger and Nietzsche's own ideas. It is 
comforting for me to see that the notion of the effects of the will to power is to 
characterise itself as a function of mass delusion, to be managed by those 
thinkers who have entered into a self-conscious relation to truth as will to power. 
 Are all the members on this list aware I wonder that they are the 
unconscious dupes of a mass delusion foisted upon them by a duplicitous Heidegger and 
Nietzsche who have entered into a self-conscious relation to truth as will to 
power?


Malcolm:
It's Heidegger's contention that this modern completion of nihilism under the 
aegis of the will to power defines all social and political truths in our 
global order, and it does this by defining the self-consciousness of the modern 
subject itself. 

Jud:
As I have already said - this MUST include the cult of Heideggerianism too.

Malcolm:
It is through an artistic willing of truth that will to power is as that 
truth, and in re-presenting that truth it brings itself before itself as truth, 
where the "presence determined from out of that presenting is the mode in which 
and as which the will to power is" (p. 87). 

Jud:
Depends on the artist - some artists [depending on their methodology] throw 
the paint on the canvass or assemble their collages much in the same way that a 
diviner casts runes.
Can this be said to be a ' willing of truth'? Sounds more to me like the 
things said by gallery marketers and art salesmen? Comments?


Malcolm:
In constant representation, the will re-presences its own truth which it is 
as will. In bringing itself before itself, will becomes explicit to itself and 
certain of itself. 

Jud:
Attitudes [modes] of the embodied brain become internalised.  The will can't 
're-presence' its own truth, and it certainly can't bring itself before itself 
for a number of reasons:

1) 'Will' doesn't exist - only the willer.

2) Only human beings can intentionally present themselves. 

3) There is no such thing as 'presence' - only that which is present.

4) 'Truth' can't be 'presenced' or re-presenced' for it doesn't exist either
5) Nothing in the cosmos can: 'bring itself before itself.'


Malcolm:
An extremity of self-consciousness characterises the will to power where "in 
self-knowing-itself, all knowing and what is knowable for it gathers itself 
together. It is a gathering together of knowing, as a mountain range is a 
gathering together of mountains. The subjectivity of the subject is, as such a 
gathering together ... a gathering of knowing, consciousness (conscience)" (p. 88). 
All modern knowledge and truth has become the self-conscious value positing 
of the will to power, where will alone becomes the basis of our modern 
subjectivity and its knowable world.

Jud:
'Knowing' doesn't exist - only the knower. A mountain range is not: ' a 
gathering together of mountains' - mountains don't come together in a gathering  or 
 a dispersal - mountains simply exist in the way that they exist, and are 
oblivious as to whether the human observer considers then to be contiguous or 
separated. These are poetical constructions, and poetry has no place in 
philosophy.  Philosophy is concerned [I speak for myself as always] with thinking 
logically and not expressing feelings emotionally in beautiful or fashionable way 
designed for the evocation of feeling. Holderlin has his right place - in the 
fleeing from philosophy a la Heidegger when he was kicked out of the rectorship.

Cheers,

Jud.

<A HREF="http://evans-experientialism.freewebspace.com/ ">http://evans-experientialism.freewebspace.com/</A> 
Jud Evans - ANALYTICAL INDICANT THEORY.
<A HREF="http://uncouplingthecopula.freewebspace.com">http://uncouplingthecopula.freewebspace.com</A>


--- StripMime Warning --  MIME attachments removed --- 
This message may have contained attachments which were removed.

Sorry, we do not allow attachments on this list.

--- StripMime Report -- processed MIME parts --- 
multipart/alternative
  text/plain (text body -- kept)
  text/html
---


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

   

Driftline Main Page

 

Display software: ArchTracker © Malgosia Askanas, 2000-2005