From: "Anthony Crifasi" <crifasi-AT-hotmail.com>
Subject: Re: Liberal vs. social democracy - Gestell/Gewinnst
Date: Fri, 05 Dec 2003 21:15:56 +0000


Malcolm Riddoch wrote:

>>    But this is all not so fatalistic as you and Anthony and others seem
>>    to take it, like also Gestell is not sthing absolute. Within Gestell,
>>    as the unevitable world we're in, one might, already now, go new ways,
>>    if one takes care not to be hindered by superficial forces, in or 
>>outside.
>
>Fatalist? Me? Probably, but as I always say, there's still hope, and hope 
>is all we really have. I don't think Gestell is a destiny, more a destining 
>that constantly throws us into the moment, but within that framework we are 
>essentially free to do as we please, to go on with this business of 
>everyday life and sometimes to think about its origin.

We are free to think about its origin and do as we please, but are we free 
to have ALREADY understood "as we please"? If not, then in what real sense 
can anyone or anything ever be criticized on that basis, since Gestell is 
how we already understand the world today as a whole, and therefore 
everything in it? It seems that we are just going on about freedom and 
gestell, criticizing this or that entity on the basis of an equivocation 
between factical orderings and how those factical orderings have already 
been understood in terms of ordering (i.e., gestell). This seems an enormous 
philosophical problem here, and it seems to be the basis for so many 
"Heideggerian" critiques of factical entities in terms of technology and 
gestell. What exactly is going on here?

Anthony Crifasi

_________________________________________________________________
Browse styles for all ages, from the latest looks to cozy weekend wear at 
MSN Shopping.  And check out the beauty products! http://shopping.msn.com



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