Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.

Re: Decker's revisionism betrays Sartre and Heidegger in the existential

Expand Messages
  • bjunius30
    ... bringing up the abstraction of consciousness. Consciousness is at best emptiness or nothingness until I create a potential, projecting possibility and do
    Message 1 of 2 , May 1, 2003
      --- In Sartre@yahoogroups.com, "Richard Radandt"
      <richardradandt@s...> wrote:
      > One poisons the conversation in talking about the existential in
      bringing up the abstraction of consciousness. Consciousness is at
      best emptiness or nothingness until I create a potential, projecting
      possibility and do something. Regardless, if I'm aware or not the
      Being in the world exists and if I discover or encounter no use for
      it isn't a determination. The need for a rational response isn't a
      requirement. The measurement of experience into [a] experience, [b]
      heighten experience, [c] creative experience, [d] direct experience,
      and or [e] what ever experience gets us nowhere fast. No
      existentialist places the psyche under the control of brute force.
      The existential recognizes [a] Being in the world, [b] the body in
      flesh, blood, and skin does exist in the world, and [c] the body is
      in movement, touching, and breathing. This is in an ever-creating use
      of labor power in the sense of Eros and in changing [a] the animal,
      [b] the vegetable, and [c] the mineral contents in nature. The
      existential is about the use of the labor power in body. How the
      capitalist society changes the labor power. How this occurs through
      deification into commodity labor power. How this creates wealth for
      the capitalist class. The expanding analysis includes the industrial,
      the military and the state. These exist in instruments of
      reification. They deny through exploitation and suppression the
      ability in body in Being in the world. The ability to live in its
      primordial conditions and situations in care and concern in the in
      its there-alone becomes only nihilism and the absurdity of the
      condemnation and abandonment in the world.
      > The reduction of the existential to language analysis and meaning
      does much harm to achieve Being in the world in the sense of the
      primordial. It tends to maintain the rational for the commodity power
      of labor justification by the legal system in capitalism. The search
      for primordial speech is silly at best when one doesn't accept Being
      in the world and doesn't favor a revolution in the capitalist system.
      It's no more than going into one's closest and closing the door and
      meditating until they discover your body is dead. Being isn't a
      collection. Being isn't a gathering and its just Being as I can't
      measure it or compare it. Experience isn't a gathering. I do
      experience, I either use it or store it or loose it. Since I'm living
      in the finite time experience, I continue to create potential,
      projecting possibilities, and I through away the rest of the
      experience. The experience still exists in the world and yet I'm in
      body in constant change in movement, touch, and breathing and I
      acquire the new experience and I use it or not and I don't gather it.
      > How is it when you are walking at night you aren't using a camera
      to record the cracks in the sidewalk. Can't you ever find a friend to
      go walking with you? Can't you develop your body and go swimming
      instead. You seem to own a very serious psychological problem of not
      being able to say yes as Nietzsche describes in the will to power of
      the rapture of life. To bring Aristotle into the discussion when one
      can't even deal with the modern philosophers of Heidegger serves no
      useful purpose in clearing up your acceptance in a wholesale fashion
      of the deifications and reifications in capitalism. This is what
      Sartre is trying to point out to us. Your position is that of a
      counter revolutionary and we in the United States just will not
      accept the Queen of England as our monarch.
      > Being in the world is one of abandonment and condemnation and this
      is alienation as I discover the beauty and the truth and I discover
      the dread and it's all in the world. Even if I commit suicide and I
      go through aging, dying, and death, it's still in the there. You are
      seeing the gathering as a collective consciousness or a universal and
      Sartre spends pages and pages debunking this idea. I know some police
      psychologist probably still believes in this gathering and teaches it
      to rookie cop and he goes out and uses it to capture a robber and
      faces final death and everyone feels sad. The psychologist though
      does get a raise. In Being in the world, I don't need [a] total
      immersion, and [b] direct gathering, as I'm in the world and never in
      separation or divorce from it. It's not a question of [a]
      disconnection or [b] connection. When my father and mother twist in
      the womb, and I experience the irritation of egg and sperm I'm in
      irritation and the pristine finite time of the primordial is no gone
      if it ever was. There's no essential here, there's no consciousness,
      and there's no psyche. I'm in pain and I want care and concern for my
      > Copyright April 27, 2003 by Richard Radandt at Harriet824@y... page
      one of one
      > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
    Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.