File spoon-archives/heidegger.archive/heidegger_2003/heidegger.0312, message 362


From: "bob scheetz" <rscheetz-AT-cboss.com>
Subject: Re: Comical Christmastide Credendum
Date: Mon, 22 Dec 2003 23:38:30 -0500



----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Bakker, R.B.M. de" <R.B.M.deBakker-AT-uva.nl>
To: <heidegger-AT-lists.village.Virginia.EDU>
Sent: Monday, December 22, 2003 11:36 AM
Subject: RE: Comical Christmastide Credendum


>
>
> -----Oorspronkelijk bericht----- 
> Van: owner-heidegger-AT-lists.village.Virginia.EDU namens bob scheetz
> Verzonden: zo 21-12-2003 20:08
> Aan: heidegger list
> CC:
> Onderwerp: Re: Comical Christmastide Credendum
>
>
>
>
> like socrates we all have a problem with the cultus.  cosmopolitan cynical
> reason and naive intuitionism are dialectically opposed (maybe you've seen
> the brazilian movie "central station"?); but he still listened carefully
to
> his doppleganger, ...ie, as opposed to no-nonsense aristotle (whom rene
> accuses for our present straussian predicament).
>
>
>
>   Bob,
>
>    Without Aristotle and metaphysics we understand nothing of the current
>
>   world situation, as the terrified faces of Indonesian and Palestinian
politicians
>
>    show, over against one-track English journalists, who act superiorly,
but
>
>    who merely don't know that they don't know. The so-called factical
situation
>
>    as such  - the brute facts -   cannot tell anything about what really
happens.
>
>    We see violence, greed, fear , and all those commenting it less and
less
>
>    convincingly. (Baudrillard effect)
>
>    Whether we use the name Heidegger or not, it is the metaphysical
>
>   stream, the beginning of which has been completed by Aristotle,
>
>   and which is now heading for a completely levelled main sea, that
>
>   determines the world situation now.
>
>    So Aristotle can be 'accused' of being responsible for the sole
perspective
>
>   we have now  to assess what is behind the straussian predicament.
>
>    I've reread  in  Heidegger's first Griechenlandreise, and it's amazing
how blind
>
>    one is  (me).
>
>    Greece is a belief. His, Heidegger's belief. The journey was a test.
What if
>
>    NOTHING of what he had from his earliest days - the  gymnasium of
Koblenz
>
>   - suspected in Greek words, and what he had  remained loyal to for 50
years -
>
>   what if nothing could be noticed anymore in the modern Greece,  was his
image
>
>    of Greece then not a mistake?
>
>    He behaves with great vigilance to Eigensinn and widerwille of any
sort.
>
>   How to behave in the midst of gestell?
>
>    Korfu is Italian, Olympia not giving.  On board he stares in the dark
water.
>
>    Quotes Pindaros: "Water is the most  precious..."  It's the element to
start with,
>
>    when one  suspects the origin of the Greeks' ownmost in the islands,
and lastly
>
>    in their most inconspicious one in the centre, Delos, the birthplace of
>
>   Artemis and Apollo, where he suspects  the origin of Aletheia.
>
>    Here, at last, is found confirmation.
>
>
>
>     So, starting with Wolfowitz, back to the Greeks, and then see that
>
>     there is no back to Wolfowitz again, that's my anti-Platonic strategy.
>
>     'Fascist' still suggests alternatives, but in nominalistic times it's
merely
>
>     an (ominous) name.
>
>     According to Nietzsche, 30 or 300  - i forgot - free spirits,
believers
>
>    (not meditators)  are enough to cause a fundamental shock. But awe,
>
>     cannot be effected, but rather a way is to go in order to reach it,
says
>
>     Heidegger,  all the way back to where we already are, but never have
>
>     been really.  What else could we respect than Aristotle's stars that
shine,
>
>     also when  not looked at?  What we make ourselves, seems less and less
>
>    satisfactory, gets instead more and more frightening.
>
>   The strange thing is: Aristotle writes it, and that's it.  Does this
saying of the
>
>   (being of) the stars, belong to one of the manifold ways of saying what
is?
>
>   Hardly. But however that is - what A touches here, the already-being of
the
>
>   present, independent of being perceived, would still be sthing decisive

with
>
>   regard to the (im)possibilities of what we want today. In an ever more
urgent
>
>   and threatening way, and in all fields.
>
>   This angst and that awe, are, as he writes in the postciptum to What is
>
>   metaphysics, neighbours.  In the end, one makes no sense without the
other.
>
>   regards
>
>   rene


thanks rene, you've got me convinced.  can we carry it further?  would you
agree the frank pomos are these
wild men for our time, the al qaida in our aristotelean cloud-capped towers?
and as it still seems unsatisfactory to just leave it at that, 300 free
spirits. with angst and awe mustn't there be a third moment, bildung? don't
we have
to follow in their wake, laying foundation stones?
and what else do we have to build with but tradition of resistance, jesus &
marx, authentic ownmost being of western dasein?

bob



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

   

Driftline Main Page

 

Display software: ArchTracker © Malgosia Askanas, 2000-2005