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

39244Re: Cabin Death

Expand Messages
  • Nicholas Widger
    Jul 31 1:11 PM
      Thanks, No need for your assistance. I don't see a meeting-place in
      our future.

      --- In existlist@yahoogroups.com, "louise" <hecubatoher@...> wrote:
      >
      > --- In existlist@yahoogroups.com, Nick Widger <nawidger@> wrote:
      > >
      > > You gave me the idea for the post, so where is the "genuine
      > meeting-place" in "CROSS?"
      >
      > No. My words gave you the idea. Don't confuse ontical categories
      > with ontological. My position, this is philosophical list. There
      > is no meeting-place for as long as you do not comprehend my
      intents,
      > context, etc.
      >
      > > Why respond if you do not fret?
      >
      > If I were fretting, I would react in possibly ill-tempered
      manner.
      > Instead I was calm, attempting to be constructive. Maybe that was
      > rash, since you are newbie.
      >
      > > If old is new, then how many times should you read the new
      > before it becomes old?
      >
      > A sophistical question. Seventy times seven?
      >
      > > And then is it new? Why ever read more than one book, if this is
      > true?
      >
      > I am subjectivist. Nietzschean-Kierkegaardian. Try using the
      > admirable search-facility, explore the archives.
      >
      > > Again, why respond to the incoherent and incomprehendable views
      > stated in a post, if you do not care about the possession or the
      > response?
      >
      > No, my own trust is in the incoherent, for good reason. Indirect
      > communication. Your views are comprehendable, though that is my
      > belief. I cannot prove this, except to you, perhaps, eventually.
      >
      > > Would you like to rethink your response?
      >
      > No.
      >
      > > If so, I'll advise you that it'll take more effort on your part,
      > and it'll be against the views stated here.
      >
      > Are you a teacher??
      >
      >
      > > louise <hecubatoher@> wrote:
      > > 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]
      > > >
      > >
      > >
      > >
      > >
      > >
      > >
      > > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
      > >
      >
    • Show all 20 messages in this topic