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

39238Re: Cabin Death

Expand Messages
  • louise
    Jul 31, 2006
      Nick, I concur, with your views as here expressed, then, how might
      we know, if what I suppose to understand may form genuine meeting-
      place with what you thought to communicate. Old is new, and the
      much-read are not necessarily known at all. All I do is Nooist,
      here or elsewhere, making my neurons happy because that's what
      they're for, posting loved stuff, whose possession, do I care.
      Incoherence often suitable, in discourse fraught with varied peril.
      What I learnt here, in thirty months, is, why fret. Anguish is so
      much more important. Human bigotry against that annoys: poetry,
      prophetic, epic, or tragic drama, or else Dionysiac release, these
      reconcile me to (by lifting me above) the petty cruelties of
      incomprehension, that bloody daily farce. Louise

      --- In existlist@yahoogroups.com, Nick Widger <nawidger@...> wrote:
      >
      > Yes, good old Nietzsche, I know all his works quite well. I also
      know another man with a hammer: Heidegger, who wrote:
      >
      > Being and Time: The Being of Beings Encountered in the
      Surrounding World
      >
      > "Association geared to useful things which show themselves
      genuinely only in this assosiation, that is, hammering with the
      hammer, neither graps, these beings thematically as occuring things
      nor does it even know of using or the structure of useful things as
      such. Hammering does not just have a knowledge of the useful
      character of the hammer; rather, it has appropriated this useful
      thing in the most adequate way possible. When we take care of
      things, we are subordinate to the in-order-to constitutive for the
      actual useful thing in our association with it. The less we just
      stare at a thing called a hammer, the more actively we use it, the
      more original our relation to it becomes and the more undisguisedly
      it is encountered as what it is, as a useful thing."
      >
      > He later explains the difference between "present-at-hand"
      and "ready-at-hand." Descartes sees items, such as his candle, as
      being "present-at-hand," meaning "things of contemplation."
      Heidegger sees items, as tools, for use, hence "ready-at-hand." But
      I'm sure you knew that. The irony of the hammer as use item, a tool,
      is that it can be used as a weapon to bash out some persons brains.
      Bashing out some persons brains with a hammer is unethical; yet, war
      holds the weapon as a device for promoting ethics (seems ironic to
      me). Killing shortens our already temporary life--hence, the next
      line of my writing--and it leads to unclear choices, such as: Do I
      truly want to support blatantly foolish idealogies? Is there a
      better solution to the problem? Can I find a more beneficial way to
      use these tools? And, if I had a way to end our problems, would
      anyone support and act on that solution---hence, "Why give tools to
      those who won't use them"--because, sometimes a tool is a hammer
      > and sometimes a tool is a plan or idea. But since very few people
      listen,or support, authentic ideas or plans, they end up following
      blindly the words of men clueless of their own truth--
      hence, "Blindly follow the blind."
      >
      > If it didn't make sense to you that's because it wasn't meant
      for you. These lines are pointers, meant for me, on the state of
      affairs (from my perspective). "I've got your hammer," for instance,
      pointed to your post "CROSS," and what I thought of your post. My
      initial system came from your post, "cross." I won't explain the
      other lines, but they follow the same pattern, a philosophical
      passage and a corresponding post on existlist. Okay?
      >
      > Umm...louise, you seem to be closely attached to certain
      passages from different existential authors. Are there any thoughts
      of your own you would like to express? Just wondering. I've been
      through enough classes where I had to memorize and explain and
      debate the passages of philosophers. Anything knew feels like a
      godsend. If not, it's okay. I've seen a pattern of people being
      attached to quotes from certain philosophers, which is also okay.
      >
      > louise <hecubatoher@...> wrote:
      > hmm, dont think i recognise your tool.
      >
      > 'How to Philosophise with a Hammer', sub-title to "Twilight of the
      > Idols", written by Friedrich Nietzsche between June and September
      > 1888, the clear explication supplied within the author's
      > foreword: 'to *sound out idols*'.
      >
      > this my own attempt also, even when providing quotation without
      > comment.
      >
      > in spite of Bill's distrust, still plenty to learn from the Dane,
      > for whom irony stands in relation to aesthetics, humour to ethics.
      > contemplation and action are of different nature, the pains and
      > pleasures proper to each sphere distinct, attracting each its mode
      > of communication. irony repels, humour reconciles. if there be
      > responsibility, thought is oriented, uttered, in relation to love.
      > where is failure or misunderstanding, instead of irony and humour
      we
      > are yielded sarcasm and mockery.
      >
      > subjectivity the greatest gift, potential for affirmation. time,
      > however, resolves all contradiction. are you willing to wait?? we
      > are human, witnesses to suffering. too much for the mind.
      > stuttering, silence, these trail into the nothing, where are no
      > questions. it is Sunday. worship takes many forms. i shudder.
      > blinded, yes, we all fall into the ditch.
      >
      > --- In existlist@yahoogroups.com, "Nicholas Widger" <nawidger@>
      > wrote:
      > >
      > > I've got your hammer
      > >
      > > Ethics and Irony
      > >
      > > a temporary life
      > >
      > > Choices unclear
      > >
      > > Why give tools to those who won't use them?
      > >
      > > Blindly follow the blind
      > >
      >
      >
      >
      >
      >
      >
      > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
      >
    • Show all 20 messages in this topic