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

heideggers view

Expand Messages
  • louise
    ... Modern metaphysics first comes to the full and final determination of its essence in the doctrine of the Overman, the doctrine of man s fully absolute
    Message 1 of 12 , Jan 1, 2005
    • 0 Attachment
      " ... Modern metaphysics first comes to the full and final
      determination of its essence in the doctrine of the Overman, the
      doctrine of man's fully absolute preeminence among beings. In that
      doctrine, Descartes celebrates his supreme triumph.
      Because the will to power unfolds its pure powerfulness without
      restraint in man - that is to say, in the figure of the Overman -
      "psychology" in Nietzsche's sense as the doctrine of the will to
      power is therefore always simultaneously* and *from the outset* the
      realm of the *fundamental questions of metaphysics*. Thus Nietzsche
      can say, in *Beyond Good and Evil* (VII, 35 ff.),

      All psychology to date has got stuck in moral prejudices and fears:
      it has not dared to descend into the depths. To conceive of
      psychology as the morphology and *doctrine of the development of
      will to power*, as I do - no one has yet come close to this in his
      thought.

      At the end of the section, Nietzsche says it is imperative "that
      psychology be recognized again as the queen of the sciences; the
      other sciences must minister to her. For psychology is once again
      the path to the fundamental problems." We could also say that the
      path to the fundamental problems of metaphysics is the Cartesian
      Meditationes* on man as subiectum*. Psychology is the name for the
      metaphysics that posits man (that is, mankind as such, not simply
      the individual "I", as subiectum*) as measure and center, as ground
      and aim of all being. If nihilism is construed as a "psychological
      state", this means that nihilism concerns the position of man amid
      beings as a whole, the way in which man puts himself in contact with
      the being as such, the way he forms and sustains that relationship
      and thereby himself."


      A fierce downpour of rain distracts me, blasts of wind hurling the
      water at the windowpane so that even my typing fingers feel the
      draught, notwithstanding the insulating effect of thick curtains.
      However.

      This passage is copied from 'Nietzsche', by Martin Heidegger.
      Volume Four, Nihilism, [pp28-9] tr. Frank A. Capuzzi
      Harper & Row 1982.

      Louise
    • bhvwd
      ... that ... the ... Nietzsche ... fears: Louise, I find you consistant but the present does not respect the past. The individual can seldom find the comfort
      Message 2 of 12 , Jul 12, 2006
      • 0 Attachment
        --- In existlist@yahoogroups.com, "louise" <hecubatoher@...> wrote:
        >
        >
        > " ... Modern metaphysics first comes to the full and final
        > determination of its essence in the doctrine of the Overman, the
        > doctrine of man's fully absolute preeminence among beings. In
        that
        > doctrine, Descartes celebrates his supreme triumph.
        > Because the will to power unfolds its pure powerfulness without
        > restraint in man - that is to say, in the figure of the Overman -
        > "psychology" in Nietzsche's sense as the doctrine of the will to
        > power is therefore always simultaneously* and *from the outset*
        the
        > realm of the *fundamental questions of metaphysics*. Thus
        Nietzsche
        > can say, in *Beyond Good and Evil* (VII, 35 ff.),
        >
        > All psychology to date has got stuck in moral prejudices and
        fears: Louise, I find you consistant but the present does not
        respect the past. The individual can seldom find the comfort of
        sanctuary of ancient academy. I would rather be a buccaneer than a
        monk and on the run, in the present, I find the winds of change more
        fragrant than the molds of ancient texts.I write about the world I
        see about me while you write about writers of the past. I think we
        both have a place here and prove my hypothesis by reading your ideas
        and contrasting them with my own.
        On Saturday I will leave with an itenary known only to the open
        road. I will be somewhere in the new, wild west and hope you will
        find interest in a tale not yet written. Bill
        > it has not dared to descend into the depths. To conceive of
        > psychology as the morphology and *doctrine of the development of
        > will to power*, as I do - no one has yet come close to this in his
        > thought.
        >
        > At the end of the section, Nietzsche says it is imperative "that
        > psychology be recognized again as the queen of the sciences; the
        > other sciences must minister to her. For psychology is once again
        > the path to the fundamental problems." We could also say that the
        > path to the fundamental problems of metaphysics is the Cartesian
        > Meditationes* on man as subiectum*. Psychology is the name for
        the
        > metaphysics that posits man (that is, mankind as such, not simply
        > the individual "I", as subiectum*) as measure and center, as
        ground
        > and aim of all being. If nihilism is construed as
        a "psychological
        > state", this means that nihilism concerns the position of man amid
        > beings as a whole, the way in which man puts himself in contact
        with
        > the being as such, the way he forms and sustains that relationship
        > and thereby himself."
        >
        >
        > A fierce downpour of rain distracts me, blasts of wind hurling the
        > water at the windowpane so that even my typing fingers feel the
        > draught, notwithstanding the insulating effect of thick curtains.
        > However.
        >
        > This passage is copied from 'Nietzsche', by Martin Heidegger.
        > Volume Four, Nihilism, [pp28-9] tr. Frank A. Capuzzi
        > Harper & Row 1982.
        >
        > Louise
        >
      • Trinidad Cruz
        There is no will to power . There is hunger, and the desolation of a planet that has spawned and then abandoned you. It is a desperation of being together and
        Message 3 of 12 , Jul 13, 2006
        • 0 Attachment
          There is no "will to power". There is hunger, and the desolation of a
          planet that has spawned and then abandoned you. It is a desperation of
          being together and apart in action. There is nothing to psychology
          other than new nomenclature for hunger and abandonment. For the
          existentialist the question has always been and always will be: are
          hunger and abandonment a reason for murder? We are not made sick. We
          are hungry and abandoned. Living and dying are the same paradigm. It
          is the positivists who slaughter the sheep and differentiate between
          living and dying. They are simply afraid of dying. Hillariously it is
          they who have the dialectical issue of acting courageously. Those
          running for the hills have no issue with it, nor are they afraid as
          they work to live and die. They live and die at once, a kind of smear
          across the dust. The world will go on. "Better" days may come; but the
          man who seperates his living and dying is dialectically fractured into
          actions that can only bring misery to others. "If you build it some
          will die." What kind of game then if the dead did come out of the
          corn? There is no will to power. There are fractured men acting out of
          cowardice, and there are the whole deaths of endurance, neither brave
          nor terrified, only facts of a planet - becoming after all food and
          hope ground together into porridge for the solace of the fractured
          terrified ones. March on to the altar with brave swords and bright
          torches. It is full again. I head for the hills. I am not ready to be
          interrupted.

          Trinidad


          --- In existlist@yahoogroups.com, "bhvwd" <v.valleywestdental@...> wrote:
          >
          > --- In existlist@yahoogroups.com, "louise" <hecubatoher@> wrote:
          > >
          > >
          > > " ... Modern metaphysics first comes to the full and final
          > > determination of its essence in the doctrine of the Overman, the
          > > doctrine of man's fully absolute preeminence among beings. In
          > that
          > > doctrine, Descartes celebrates his supreme triumph.
          > > Because the will to power unfolds its pure powerfulness without
          > > restraint in man - that is to say, in the figure of the Overman -
          > > "psychology" in Nietzsche's sense as the doctrine of the will to
          > > power is therefore always simultaneously* and *from the outset*
          > the
          > > realm of the *fundamental questions of metaphysics*. Thus
          > Nietzsche
          > > can say, in *Beyond Good and Evil* (VII, 35 ff.),
          > >
          > > All psychology to date has got stuck in moral prejudices and
          > fears: Louise, I find you consistant but the present does not
          > respect the past. The individual can seldom find the comfort of
          > sanctuary of ancient academy. I would rather be a buccaneer than a
          > monk and on the run, in the present, I find the winds of change more
          > fragrant than the molds of ancient texts.I write about the world I
          > see about me while you write about writers of the past. I think we
          > both have a place here and prove my hypothesis by reading your ideas
          > and contrasting them with my own.
          > On Saturday I will leave with an itenary known only to the open
          > road. I will be somewhere in the new, wild west and hope you will
          > find interest in a tale not yet written. Bill
          > > it has not dared to descend into the depths. To conceive of
          > > psychology as the morphology and *doctrine of the development of
          > > will to power*, as I do - no one has yet come close to this in his
          > > thought.
          > >
          > > At the end of the section, Nietzsche says it is imperative "that
          > > psychology be recognized again as the queen of the sciences; the
          > > other sciences must minister to her. For psychology is once again
          > > the path to the fundamental problems." We could also say that the
          > > path to the fundamental problems of metaphysics is the Cartesian
          > > Meditationes* on man as subiectum*. Psychology is the name for
          > the
          > > metaphysics that posits man (that is, mankind as such, not simply
          > > the individual "I", as subiectum*) as measure and center, as
          > ground
          > > and aim of all being. If nihilism is construed as
          > a "psychological
          > > state", this means that nihilism concerns the position of man amid
          > > beings as a whole, the way in which man puts himself in contact
          > with
          > > the being as such, the way he forms and sustains that relationship
          > > and thereby himself."
          > >
          > >
          > > A fierce downpour of rain distracts me, blasts of wind hurling the
          > > water at the windowpane so that even my typing fingers feel the
          > > draught, notwithstanding the insulating effect of thick curtains.
          > > However.
          > >
          > > This passage is copied from 'Nietzsche', by Martin Heidegger.
          > > Volume Four, Nihilism, [pp28-9] tr. Frank A. Capuzzi
          > > Harper & Row 1982.
          > >
          > > Louise
          > >
          >
        • eupraxis@aol.com
          Trin, You write, For the existentialist the question has always been and always will be: are hunger and abandonment a reason for murder? I don t recall
          Message 4 of 12 , Jul 13, 2006
          • 0 Attachment
            Trin,

            You write, "For the existentialist the question has always been and always will be: are hunger and abandonment a reason for murder?"

            I don't recall anyone saying that. Who do you have in mind? No existentialist that I have read, and I have read most of the literature. Sounds like your own projections. Sorry if your life has been so dark as that.

            WS


            -----Original Message-----
            From: cruzprdb@...
            To: existlist@yahoogroups.com
            Sent: Thu, 13 Jul 2006 11:21 AM
            Subject: [existlist] Re: heideggers view

            There is no "will to power". There is hunger, and the desolation of a
            planet that has spawned and then abandoned you. It is a desperation of
            being together and apart in action. There is nothing to psychology
            other than new nomenclature for hunger and abandonment. For the
            existentialist the question has always been and always will be: are
            hunger and abandonment a reason for murder? We are not made sick. We
            are hungry and abandoned. Living and dying are the same paradigm. It
            is the positivists who slaughter the sheep and differentiate between
            living and dying. They are simply afraid of dying. Hillariously it is
            they who have the dialectical issue of acting courageously. Those
            running for the hills have no issue with it, nor are they afraid as
            they work to live and die. They live and die at once, a kind of smear
            across the dust. The world will go on. "Better" days may come; but the
            man who seperates his living and dying is dialectically fractured into
            actions that can only bring misery to others. "If you build it some
            will die." What kind of game then if the dead did come out of the
            corn? There is no will to power. There are fractured men acting out of
            cowardice, and there are the whole deaths of endurance, neither brave
            nor terrified, only facts of a planet - becoming after all food and
            hope ground together into porridge for the solace of the fractured
            terrified ones. March on to the altar with brave swords and bright
            torches. It is full again. I head for the hills. I am not ready to be
            interrupted.

            Trinidad

            --- In existlist@yahoogroups.com, "bhvwd" <v.valleywestdental@...> wrote:
            >
            > --- In existlist@yahoogroups.com, "louise" <hecubatoher@> wrote:
            > >
            > >
            > > " ... Modern metaphysics first comes to the full and final
            > > determination of its essence in the doctrine of the Overman, the
            > > doctrine of man's fully absolute preeminence among beings. In
            > that
            > > doctrine, Descartes celebrates his supreme triumph.
            > > Because the will to power unfolds its pure powerfulness without
            > > restraint in man - that is to say, in the figure of the Overman -
            > > "psychology" in Nietzsche's sense as the doctrine of the will to
            > > power is therefore always simultaneously* and *from the outset*
            > the
            > > realm of the *fundamental questions of metaphysics*. Thus
            > Nietzsche
            > > can say, in *Beyond Good and Evil* (VII, 35 ff.),
            > >
            > > All psychology to date has got stuck in moral prejudices and
            > fears: Louise, I find you consistant but the present does not
            > respect the past. The individual can seldom find the comfort of
            > sanctuary of ancient academy. I would rather be a buccaneer than a
            > monk and on the run, in the present, I find the winds of change more
            > fragrant than the molds of ancient texts.I write about the world I
            > see about me while you write about writers of the past. I think we
            > both have a place here and prove my hypothesis by reading your ideas
            > and contrasting them with my own.
            > On Saturday I will leave with an itenary known only to the open
            > road. I will be somewhere in the new, wild west and hope you will
            > find interest in a tale not yet written. Bill
            > > it has not dared to descend into the depths. To conceive of
            > > psychology as the morphology and *doctrine of the development of
            > > will to power*, as I do - no one has yet come close to this in his
            > > thought.
            > >
            > > At the end of the section, Nietzsche says it is imperative "that
            > > psychology be recognized again as the queen of the sciences; the
            > > other sciences must minister to her. For psychology is once again
            > > the path to the fundamental problems." We could also say that the
            > > path to the fundamental problems of metaphysics is the Cartesian
            > > Meditationes* on man as subiectum*. Psychology is the name for
            > the
            > > metaphysics that posits man (that is, mankind as such, not simply
            > > the individual "I", as subiectum*) as measure and center, as
            > ground
            > > and aim of all being. If nihilism is construed as
            > a "psychological
            > > state", this means that nihilism concerns the position of man amid
            > > beings as a whole, the way in which man puts himself in contact
            > with
            > > the being as such, the way he forms and sustains that relationship
            > > and thereby himself."
            > >
            > >
            > > A fierce downpour of rain distracts me, blasts of wind hurling the
            > > water at the windowpane so that even my typing fingers feel the
            > > draught, notwithstanding the insulating effect of thick curtains.
            > > However.
            > >
            > > This passage is copied from 'Nietzsche', by Martin Heidegger.
            > > Volume Four, Nihilism, [pp28-9] tr. Frank A. Capuzzi
            > > Harper & Row 1982.
            > >
            > > Louise
            > >
            >


            ________________________________________________________________________
            Check out AOL.com today. Breaking news, video search, pictures, email and IM. All on demand. Always Free.


            [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
          • Chris Macchione
            Sounds more like Nihilism, great discussion, look forward to reading more from you all. ... __________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!?
            Message 5 of 12 , Jul 13, 2006
            • 0 Attachment
              Sounds more like Nihilism, great discussion, look
              forward to reading more from you all.

              --- eupraxis@... wrote:

              > Trin,
              >
              > You write, "For the existentialist the question has
              > always been and always will be: are hunger and
              > abandonment a reason for murder?"
              >
              > I don't recall anyone saying that. Who do you have
              > in mind? No existentialist that I have read, and I
              > have read most of the literature. Sounds like your
              > own projections. Sorry if your life has been so dark
              > as that.
              >
              > WS
              >
              >
              > -----Original Message-----
              > From: cruzprdb@...
              > To: existlist@yahoogroups.com
              > Sent: Thu, 13 Jul 2006 11:21 AM
              > Subject: [existlist] Re: heideggers view
              >
              > There is no "will to power". There is hunger,
              > and the desolation of a
              > planet that has spawned and then abandoned you. It
              > is a desperation of
              > being together and apart in action. There is
              > nothing to psychology
              > other than new nomenclature for hunger and
              > abandonment. For the
              > existentialist the question has always been and
              > always will be: are
              > hunger and abandonment a reason for murder? We are
              > not made sick. We
              > are hungry and abandoned. Living and dying are the
              > same paradigm. It
              > is the positivists who slaughter the sheep and
              > differentiate between
              > living and dying. They are simply afraid of dying.
              > Hillariously it is
              > they who have the dialectical issue of acting
              > courageously. Those
              > running for the hills have no issue with it, nor
              > are they afraid as
              > they work to live and die. They live and die at
              > once, a kind of smear
              > across the dust. The world will go on. "Better"
              > days may come; but the
              > man who seperates his living and dying is
              > dialectically fractured into
              > actions that can only bring misery to others. "If
              > you build it some
              > will die." What kind of game then if the dead did
              > come out of the
              > corn? There is no will to power. There are
              > fractured men acting out of
              > cowardice, and there are the whole deaths of
              > endurance, neither brave
              > nor terrified, only facts of a planet - becoming
              > after all food and
              > hope ground together into porridge for the solace
              > of the fractured
              > terrified ones. March on to the altar with brave
              > swords and bright
              > torches. It is full again. I head for the hills. I
              > am not ready to be
              > interrupted.
              >
              > Trinidad
              >
              > --- In existlist@yahoogroups.com, "bhvwd"
              > <v.valleywestdental@...> wrote:
              > >
              > > --- In existlist@yahoogroups.com, "louise"
              > <hecubatoher@> wrote:
              > > >
              > > >
              > > > " ... Modern metaphysics first comes to the
              > full and final
              > > > determination of its essence in the doctrine of
              > the Overman, the
              > > > doctrine of man's fully absolute preeminence
              > among beings. In
              > > that
              > > > doctrine, Descartes celebrates his supreme
              > triumph.
              > > > Because the will to power unfolds its pure
              > powerfulness without
              > > > restraint in man - that is to say, in the
              > figure of the Overman -
              > > > "psychology" in Nietzsche's sense as the
              > doctrine of the will to
              > > > power is therefore always simultaneously* and
              > *from the outset*
              > > the
              > > > realm of the *fundamental questions of
              > metaphysics*. Thus
              > > Nietzsche
              > > > can say, in *Beyond Good and Evil* (VII, 35
              > ff.),
              > > >
              > > > All psychology to date has got stuck in moral
              > prejudices and
              > > fears: Louise, I find you consistant but the
              > present does not
              > > respect the past. The individual can seldom find
              > the comfort of
              > > sanctuary of ancient academy. I would rather be a
              > buccaneer than a
              > > monk and on the run, in the present, I find the
              > winds of change more
              > > fragrant than the molds of ancient texts.I write
              > about the world I
              > > see about me while you write about writers of the
              > past. I think we
              > > both have a place here and prove my hypothesis by
              > reading your ideas
              > > and contrasting them with my own.
              > > On Saturday I will leave with an itenary known
              > only to the open
              > > road. I will be somewhere in the new, wild west
              > and hope you will
              > > find interest in a tale not yet written. Bill
              > > > it has not dared to descend into the depths. To
              > conceive of
              > > > psychology as the morphology and *doctrine of
              > the development of
              > > > will to power*, as I do - no one has yet come
              > close to this in his
              > > > thought.
              > > >
              > > > At the end of the section, Nietzsche says it is
              > imperative "that
              > > > psychology be recognized again as the queen of
              > the sciences; the
              > > > other sciences must minister to her. For
              > psychology is once again
              > > > the path to the fundamental problems." We could
              > also say that the
              > > > path to the fundamental problems of metaphysics
              > is the Cartesian
              > > > Meditationes* on man as subiectum*. Psychology
              > is the name for
              > > the
              > > > metaphysics that posits man (that is, mankind
              > as such, not simply
              > > > the individual "I", as subiectum*) as measure
              > and center, as
              > > ground
              > > > and aim of all being. If nihilism is construed
              > as
              > > a "psychological
              > > > state", this means that nihilism concerns the
              > position of man amid
              > > > beings as a whole, the way in which man puts
              > himself in contact
              > > with
              > > > the being as such, the way he forms and
              > sustains that relationship
              > > > and thereby himself."
              > > >
              > > >
              > > > A fierce downpour of rain distracts me, blasts
              > of wind hurling the
              > > > water at the windowpane so that even my typing
              > fingers feel the
              > > > draught, notwithstanding the insulating effect
              > of thick curtains.
              > > > However.
              > > >
              > > > This passage is copied from 'Nietzsche', by
              > Martin Heidegger.
              > > > Volume Four, Nihilism, [pp28-9] tr. Frank A.
              > Capuzzi
              > > > Harper & Row 1982.
              > > >
              > > > Louise
              > > >
              > >
              >
              >
              >
              ________________________________________________________________________
              > Check out AOL.com today. Breaking news, video
              > search, pictures, email and IM. All on demand.
              > Always Free.
              >
              >
              > [Non-text portions of this message have been
              > removed]
              >
              >


              __________________________________________________
              Do You Yahoo!?
              Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around
              http://mail.yahoo.com
            • Albert
              Trinidad, I m sure if you went commercial with your unique brand of depression, Sony would sign you up. Philosophical discussion will not make the impact that
              Message 6 of 12 , Jul 14, 2006
              • 0 Attachment
                Trinidad,

                I'm sure if you went commercial with your unique brand of depression, Sony would sign you up.
                Philosophical discussion will not make the impact that you intend.

                Albert.


                ----- Original Message -----
                From: Trinidad Cruz
                To: existlist@yahoogroups.com
                Sent: Thursday, July 13, 2006 6:21 PM
                Subject: [existlist] Re: heideggers view


                There is no "will to power". There is hunger, and the desolation of a
                planet that has spawned and then abandoned you. It is a desperation of
                being together and apart in action. There is nothing to psychology
                other than new nomenclature for hunger and abandonment. For the
                existentialist the question has always been and always will be: are
                hunger and abandonment a reason for murder? We are not made sick. We
                are hungry and abandoned. Living and dying are the same paradigm. It
                is the positivists who slaughter the sheep and differentiate between
                living and dying. They are simply afraid of dying. Hillariously it is
                they who have the dialectical issue of acting courageously. Those
                running for the hills have no issue with it, nor are they afraid as
                they work to live and die. They live and die at once, a kind of smear
                across the dust. The world will go on. "Better" days may come; but the
                man who seperates his living and dying is dialectically fractured into
                actions that can only bring misery to others. "If you build it some
                will die." What kind of game then if the dead did come out of the
                corn? There is no will to power. There are fractured men acting out of
                cowardice, and there are the whole deaths of endurance, neither brave
                nor terrified, only facts of a planet - becoming after all food and
                hope ground together into porridge for the solace of the fractured
                terrified ones. March on to the altar with brave swords and bright
                torches. It is full again. I head for the hills. I am not ready to be
                interrupted.

                Trinidad

                --- In existlist@yahoogroups.com, "bhvwd" <v.valleywestdental@...> wrote:
                >
                > --- In existlist@yahoogroups.com, "louise" <hecubatoher@> wrote:
                > >
                > >
                > > " ... Modern metaphysics first comes to the full and final
                > > determination of its essence in the doctrine of the Overman, the
                > > doctrine of man's fully absolute preeminence among beings. In
                > that
                > > doctrine, Descartes celebrates his supreme triumph.
                > > Because the will to power unfolds its pure powerfulness without
                > > restraint in man - that is to say, in the figure of the Overman -
                > > "psychology" in Nietzsche's sense as the doctrine of the will to
                > > power is therefore always simultaneously* and *from the outset*
                > the
                > > realm of the *fundamental questions of metaphysics*. Thus
                > Nietzsche
                > > can say, in *Beyond Good and Evil* (VII, 35 ff.),
                > >
                > > All psychology to date has got stuck in moral prejudices and
                > fears: Louise, I find you consistant but the present does not
                > respect the past. The individual can seldom find the comfort of
                > sanctuary of ancient academy. I would rather be a buccaneer than a
                > monk and on the run, in the present, I find the winds of change more
                > fragrant than the molds of ancient texts.I write about the world I
                > see about me while you write about writers of the past. I think we
                > both have a place here and prove my hypothesis by reading your ideas
                > and contrasting them with my own.
                > On Saturday I will leave with an itenary known only to the open
                > road. I will be somewhere in the new, wild west and hope you will
                > find interest in a tale not yet written. Bill
                > > it has not dared to descend into the depths. To conceive of
                > > psychology as the morphology and *doctrine of the development of
                > > will to power*, as I do - no one has yet come close to this in his
                > > thought.
                > >
                > > At the end of the section, Nietzsche says it is imperative "that
                > > psychology be recognized again as the queen of the sciences; the
                > > other sciences must minister to her. For psychology is once again
                > > the path to the fundamental problems." We could also say that the
                > > path to the fundamental problems of metaphysics is the Cartesian
                > > Meditationes* on man as subiectum*. Psychology is the name for
                > the
                > > metaphysics that posits man (that is, mankind as such, not simply
                > > the individual "I", as subiectum*) as measure and center, as
                > ground
                > > and aim of all being. If nihilism is construed as
                > a "psychological
                > > state", this means that nihilism concerns the position of man amid
                > > beings as a whole, the way in which man puts himself in contact
                > with
                > > the being as such, the way he forms and sustains that relationship
                > > and thereby himself."
                > >
                > >
                > > A fierce downpour of rain distracts me, blasts of wind hurling the
                > > water at the windowpane so that even my typing fingers feel the
                > > draught, notwithstanding the insulating effect of thick curtains.
                > > However.
                > >
                > > This passage is copied from 'Nietzsche', by Martin Heidegger.
                > > Volume Four, Nihilism, [pp28-9] tr. Frank A. Capuzzi
                > > Harper & Row 1982.
                > >
                > > Louise
                > >
                >






                ------------------------------------------------------------------------------


                No virus found in this incoming message.
                Checked by AVG Free Edition.
                Version: 7.1.394 / Virus Database: 268.10.0/388 - Release Date: 7/13/2006


                [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
              • two_owl_night
                The Triumph Of Achilles by Paul Celan In the story of Patroclus no one survives, not even Achilles who was nearly a god. Patroclus resembled him; they wore the
                Message 7 of 12 , Jul 14, 2006
                • 0 Attachment
                  The Triumph Of Achilles by Paul Celan

                  In the story of Patroclus
                  no one survives, not even Achilles
                  who was nearly a god.
                  Patroclus resembled him; they wore
                  the same armor.

                  Always in these friendships
                  one serves the other, one is less than the other:
                  the hierarchy
                  is always apparent, though the legends
                  cannot be trusted--
                  their source is the survivor,
                  the one who has been abandoned.

                  What were the Greek ships on fire
                  compared to this loss?

                  In his tent, Achilles
                  grieved with his whole being
                  and the gods saw
                  he was a man already dead, a victim
                  of the part that loved,
                  the part that was mortal.

                  Mary


                  --- In existlist@yahoogroups.com, "Trinidad Cruz" <cruzprdb@...>
                  wrote:
                  >
                  > There is no "will to power". There is hunger, and the desolation
                  of a
                  > planet that has spawned and then abandoned you. It is a
                  desperation of
                  > being together and apart in action. There is nothing to psychology
                  > other than new nomenclature for hunger and abandonment. For the
                  > existentialist the question has always been and always will be: are
                  > hunger and abandonment a reason for murder? We are not made sick.
                  We
                  > are hungry and abandoned. Living and dying are the same paradigm.
                  It
                  > is the positivists who slaughter the sheep and differentiate
                  between
                  > living and dying. They are simply afraid of dying. Hillariously it
                  is
                  > they who have the dialectical issue of acting courageously. Those
                  > running for the hills have no issue with it, nor are they afraid as
                  > they work to live and die. They live and die at once, a kind of
                  smear
                  > across the dust. The world will go on. "Better" days may come; but
                  the
                  > man who seperates his living and dying is dialectically fractured
                  into
                  > actions that can only bring misery to others. "If you build it some
                  > will die." What kind of game then if the dead did come out of the
                  > corn? There is no will to power. There are fractured men acting
                  out of
                  > cowardice, and there are the whole deaths of endurance, neither
                  brave
                  > nor terrified, only facts of a planet - becoming after all food and
                  > hope ground together into porridge for the solace of the fractured
                  > terrified ones. March on to the altar with brave swords and bright
                  > torches. It is full again. I head for the hills. I am not ready to
                  be
                  > interrupted.
                  >
                  > Trinidad
                  >
                  >
                  > --- In existlist@yahoogroups.com, "bhvwd" <v.valleywestdental@>
                  wrote:
                  > >
                  > > --- In existlist@yahoogroups.com, "louise" <hecubatoher@> wrote:
                  > > >
                  > > >
                  > > > " ... Modern metaphysics first comes to the full and final
                  > > > determination of its essence in the doctrine of the Overman,
                  the
                  > > > doctrine of man's fully absolute preeminence among beings. In
                  > > that
                  > > > doctrine, Descartes celebrates his supreme triumph.
                  > > > Because the will to power unfolds its pure powerfulness
                  without
                  > > > restraint in man - that is to say, in the figure of the
                  Overman -
                  > > > "psychology" in Nietzsche's sense as the doctrine of the will
                  to
                  > > > power is therefore always simultaneously* and *from the
                  outset*
                  > > the
                  > > > realm of the *fundamental questions of metaphysics*. Thus
                  > > Nietzsche
                  > > > can say, in *Beyond Good and Evil* (VII, 35 ff.),
                  > > >
                  > > > All psychology to date has got stuck in moral prejudices and
                  > > fears: Louise, I find you consistant but the present does not
                  > > respect the past. The individual can seldom find the comfort of
                  > > sanctuary of ancient academy. I would rather be a buccaneer than
                  a
                  > > monk and on the run, in the present, I find the winds of change
                  more
                  > > fragrant than the molds of ancient texts.I write about the world
                  I
                  > > see about me while you write about writers of the past. I think
                  we
                  > > both have a place here and prove my hypothesis by reading your
                  ideas
                  > > and contrasting them with my own.
                  > > On Saturday I will leave with an itenary known only to the
                  open
                  > > road. I will be somewhere in the new, wild west and hope you
                  will
                  > > find interest in a tale not yet written. Bill
                  > > > it has not dared to descend into the depths. To conceive of
                  > > > psychology as the morphology and *doctrine of the development
                  of
                  > > > will to power*, as I do - no one has yet come close to this in
                  his
                  > > > thought.
                  > > >
                  > > > At the end of the section, Nietzsche says it is
                  imperative "that
                  > > > psychology be recognized again as the queen of the sciences;
                  the
                  > > > other sciences must minister to her. For psychology is once
                  again
                  > > > the path to the fundamental problems." We could also say that
                  the
                  > > > path to the fundamental problems of metaphysics is the
                  Cartesian
                  > > > Meditationes* on man as subiectum*. Psychology is the name
                  for
                  > > the
                  > > > metaphysics that posits man (that is, mankind as such, not
                  simply
                  > > > the individual "I", as subiectum*) as measure and center, as
                  > > ground
                  > > > and aim of all being. If nihilism is construed as
                  > > a "psychological
                  > > > state", this means that nihilism concerns the position of man
                  amid
                  > > > beings as a whole, the way in which man puts himself in
                  contact
                  > > with
                  > > > the being as such, the way he forms and sustains that
                  relationship
                  > > > and thereby himself."
                  > > >
                  > > >
                  > > > A fierce downpour of rain distracts me, blasts of wind hurling
                  the
                  > > > water at the windowpane so that even my typing fingers feel
                  the
                  > > > draught, notwithstanding the insulating effect of thick
                  curtains.
                  > > > However.
                  > > >
                  > > > This passage is copied from 'Nietzsche', by Martin Heidegger.
                  > > > Volume Four, Nihilism, [pp28-9] tr. Frank A. Capuzzi
                  > > > Harper & Row 1982.
                  > > >
                  > > > Louise
                  > > >
                  > >
                  >
                • bhvwd
                  ... ancient , strong man of arms. His death reports the end of an epoch. With clubs and stones man had survived and conquered his world. These strong men had
                  Message 8 of 12 , Jul 14, 2006
                  • 0 Attachment
                    --- In existlist@yahoogroups.com, "two_owl_night"
                    <two_owl_night@...> wrote:
                    >
                    > The Triumph Of Achilles by Paul Celan
                    >
                    > In the story of Patroclus
                    > no one survives, not even Achilles
                    > who was nearly a god.
                    > Patroclus resembled him; they wore
                    > the same armor.
                    >
                    > Always in these friendships
                    > one serves the other, one is less than the other:
                    > the hierarchy
                    > is always apparent, though the legends
                    > cannot be trusted--
                    > their source is the survivor,
                    > the one who has been abandoned.
                    > Mary and Trinidad, I view Achilles as the symbol of the
                    ancient , strong man of arms. His death reports the end of an
                    epoch. With clubs and stones man had survived and conquered his
                    world. These strong men had evolved a standard of martial conduct
                    and it served as law for the tribe from the hunter gatherers to the
                    greek city states. The standard rested on strength, aggression and
                    ferocity. After Achilles the standard was that of Agamemnon and the
                    political kings. Man had evolved from physical preditor to
                    political manipulator. Strong man rule gave way to smart man rule.
                    The collective with it`s alliances and betrayals wrested power from
                    the individual strong men. Cunning men who fought like women banded
                    togeather and ruled by the power of threat. They used faith and
                    heirarchy to hold sway over those of greater physical strength and
                    numbers. Neitche blew that all away with a cognative assailant, a
                    man of intellect and will who appealed to the honor of brave
                    Achillies. This heibermench banished obesance to metaphysical
                    collectives and thus I consider Fredrich Neitche to be the new
                    Achillies. Bill

                    n> What were the Greek ships on fire
                    > compared to this loss?
                    >
                    > In his tent, Achilles
                    > grieved with his whole being
                    > and the gods saw
                    > he was a man already dead, a victim
                    > of the part that loved,
                    > the part that was mortal.
                    >
                    > Mary
                    >
                    >
                    > --- In existlist@yahoogroups.com, "Trinidad Cruz" <cruzprdb@>
                    > wrote:
                    > >
                    > > There is no "will to power". There is hunger, and the desolation
                    > of a
                    > > planet that has spawned and then abandoned you. It is a
                    > desperation of
                    > > being together and apart in action. There is nothing to
                    psychology
                    > > other than new nomenclature for hunger and abandonment. For the
                    > > existentialist the question has always been and always will be:
                    are
                    > > hunger and abandonment a reason for murder? We are not made
                    sick.
                    > We
                    > > are hungry and abandoned. Living and dying are the same
                    paradigm.
                    > It
                    > > is the positivists who slaughter the sheep and differentiate
                    > between
                    > > living and dying. They are simply afraid of dying. Hillariously
                    it
                    > is
                    > > they who have the dialectical issue of acting courageously. Those
                    > > running for the hills have no issue with it, nor are they afraid
                    as
                    > > they work to live and die. They live and die at once, a kind of
                    > smear
                    > > across the dust. The world will go on. "Better" days may come;
                    but
                    > the
                    > > man who seperates his living and dying is dialectically
                    fractured
                    > into
                    > > actions that can only bring misery to others. "If you build it
                    some
                    > > will die." What kind of game then if the dead did come out of the
                    > > corn? There is no will to power. There are fractured men acting
                    > out of
                    > > cowardice, and there are the whole deaths of endurance, neither
                    > brave
                    > > nor terrified, only facts of a planet - becoming after all food
                    and
                    > > hope ground together into porridge for the solace of the
                    fractured
                    > > terrified ones. March on to the altar with brave swords and
                    bright
                    > > torches. It is full again. I head for the hills. I am not ready
                    to
                    > be
                    > > interrupted.
                    > >
                    > > Trinidad
                    > >
                    > >
                    > > --- In existlist@yahoogroups.com, "bhvwd" <v.valleywestdental@>
                    > wrote:
                    > > >
                    > > > --- In existlist@yahoogroups.com, "louise" <hecubatoher@>
                    wrote:
                    > > > >
                    > > > >
                    > > > > " ... Modern metaphysics first comes to the full and final
                    > > > > determination of its essence in the doctrine of the Overman,
                    > the
                    > > > > doctrine of man's fully absolute preeminence among beings.
                    In
                    > > > that
                    > > > > doctrine, Descartes celebrates his supreme triumph.
                    > > > > Because the will to power unfolds its pure powerfulness
                    > without
                    > > > > restraint in man - that is to say, in the figure of the
                    > Overman -
                    > > > > "psychology" in Nietzsche's sense as the doctrine of the
                    will
                    > to
                    > > > > power is therefore always simultaneously* and *from the
                    > outset*
                    > > > the
                    > > > > realm of the *fundamental questions of metaphysics*. Thus
                    > > > Nietzsche
                    > > > > can say, in *Beyond Good and Evil* (VII, 35 ff.),
                    > > > >
                    > > > > All psychology to date has got stuck in moral prejudices and
                    > > > fears: Louise, I find you consistant but the present does not
                    > > > respect the past. The individual can seldom find the comfort
                    of
                    > > > sanctuary of ancient academy. I would rather be a buccaneer
                    than
                    > a
                    > > > monk and on the run, in the present, I find the winds of
                    change
                    > more
                    > > > fragrant than the molds of ancient texts.I write about the
                    world
                    > I
                    > > > see about me while you write about writers of the past. I
                    think
                    > we
                    > > > both have a place here and prove my hypothesis by reading your
                    > ideas
                    > > > and contrasting them with my own.
                    > > > On Saturday I will leave with an itenary known only to the
                    > open
                    > > > road. I will be somewhere in the new, wild west and hope you
                    > will
                    > > > find interest in a tale not yet written. Bill
                    > > > > it has not dared to descend into the depths. To conceive of
                    > > > > psychology as the morphology and *doctrine of the
                    development
                    > of
                    > > > > will to power*, as I do - no one has yet come close to this
                    in
                    > his
                    > > > > thought.
                    > > > >
                    > > > > At the end of the section, Nietzsche says it is
                    > imperative "that
                    > > > > psychology be recognized again as the queen of the sciences;
                    > the
                    > > > > other sciences must minister to her. For psychology is once
                    > again
                    > > > > the path to the fundamental problems." We could also say
                    that
                    > the
                    > > > > path to the fundamental problems of metaphysics is the
                    > Cartesian
                    > > > > Meditationes* on man as subiectum*. Psychology is the name
                    > for
                    > > > the
                    > > > > metaphysics that posits man (that is, mankind as such, not
                    > simply
                    > > > > the individual "I", as subiectum*) as measure and center, as
                    > > > ground
                    > > > > and aim of all being. If nihilism is construed as
                    > > > a "psychological
                    > > > > state", this means that nihilism concerns the position of
                    man
                    > amid
                    > > > > beings as a whole, the way in which man puts himself in
                    > contact
                    > > > with
                    > > > > the being as such, the way he forms and sustains that
                    > relationship
                    > > > > and thereby himself."
                    > > > >
                    > > > >
                    > > > > A fierce downpour of rain distracts me, blasts of wind
                    hurling
                    > the
                    > > > > water at the windowpane so that even my typing fingers feel
                    > the
                    > > > > draught, notwithstanding the insulating effect of thick
                    > curtains.
                    > > > > However.
                    > > > >
                    > > > > This passage is copied from 'Nietzsche', by Martin Heidegger.
                    > > > > Volume Four, Nihilism, [pp28-9] tr. Frank A. Capuzzi
                    > > > > Harper & Row 1982.
                    > > > >
                    > > > > Louise
                    > > > >
                    > > >
                    > >
                    >
                  • two_owl_night
                    their source is the survivor, the one who has been abandoned. If I tie Bill s words together with Thoreau s prophesy of an American mythology, along with
                    Message 9 of 12 , Jul 14, 2006
                    • 0 Attachment
                      "their source is the survivor,
                      the one who has been abandoned."

                      If I tie Bill's words together with Thoreau's prophesy of an
                      American mythology, along with Nietzsche's strong man of intellect;
                      and I look at the condition of our world at this very moment, I can
                      only hope that the Gods and believers do abandon one another. This
                      bullshit is never going to end until people see this vile collective
                      for what it is, gross political manipulation.

                      "After examining each of his published works, Nietzsche concludes
                      Ecce Homo with the section, "Why I Am a Destiny." He claims that he
                      is a destiny because he regards his anti-moral truths as having the
                      annihilating power of intellectual dynamite; he expects them to
                      topple the morality born of sickness which he perceives to have been
                      reigning within Western culture for the last two thousand years. In
                      this way, Nietzsche expresses his hope that Dionysus, the god of
                      life's exuberance, would replace Jesus, the god of the heavenly
                      otherworld, as the premier cultural standard for future millennia.

                      [...]

                      That Nietzsche was able to write so prolifically and profoundly for
                      years, while remaining in a condition of ill-health and often
                      intense physical pain, is a testament to his spectacular mental
                      capacities and willpower. Lesser people under the same physical
                      pressures might not have had the inclination to pick up a pen, let
                      alone think and record thoughts which -- created in the midst of
                      striving for healthy self-overcoming -- would have the power to
                      influence an entire century."

                      Copyright © 2004
                      Robert Wicks
                      r.wicks@...

                      Mary

                      --- In existlist@yahoogroups.com, "bhvwd" <v.valleywestdental@...>
                      wrote:
                      > > Mary and Trinidad, I view Achilles as the symbol of the
                      > ancient , strong man of arms. His death reports the end of an
                      > epoch. With clubs and stones man had survived and conquered his
                      > world. These strong men had evolved a standard of martial
                      conduct
                      > and it served as law for the tribe from the hunter gatherers to
                      the
                      > greek city states. The standard rested on strength, aggression and
                      > ferocity. After Achilles the standard was that of Agamemnon and
                      the
                      > political kings. Man had evolved from physical preditor to
                      > political manipulator. Strong man rule gave way to smart man rule.
                      > The collective with it`s alliances and betrayals wrested power
                      from
                      > the individual strong men. Cunning men who fought like women
                      banded
                      > togeather and ruled by the power of threat. They used faith and
                      > heirarchy to hold sway over those of greater physical strength and
                      > numbers. Neitche blew that all away with a cognative assailant, a
                      > man of intellect and will who appealed to the honor of brave
                      > Achillies. This heibermench banished obesance to metaphysical
                      > collectives and thus I consider Fredrich Neitche to be the new
                      > Achillies. Bill
                      >
                      > n> What were the Greek ships on fire
                      > > compared to this loss?
                      > >
                      > > In his tent, Achilles
                      > > grieved with his whole being
                      > > and the gods saw
                      > > he was a man already dead, a victim
                      > > of the part that loved,
                      > > the part that was mortal.
                      > >
                      > > Mary
                      > >
                      > >
                      > > --- In existlist@yahoogroups.com, "Trinidad Cruz" <cruzprdb@>
                      > > wrote:
                      > > >
                      > > > There is no "will to power". There is hunger, and the
                      desolation
                      > > of a
                      > > > planet that has spawned and then abandoned you. It is a
                      > > desperation of
                      > > > being together and apart in action. There is nothing to
                      > psychology
                      > > > other than new nomenclature for hunger and abandonment. For the
                      > > > existentialist the question has always been and always will
                      be:
                      > are
                      > > > hunger and abandonment a reason for murder? We are not made
                      > sick.
                      > > We
                      > > > are hungry and abandoned. Living and dying are the same
                      > paradigm.
                      > > It
                      > > > is the positivists who slaughter the sheep and differentiate
                      > > between
                      > > > living and dying. They are simply afraid of dying.
                      Hillariously
                      > it
                      > > is
                      > > > they who have the dialectical issue of acting courageously.
                      Those
                      > > > running for the hills have no issue with it, nor are they
                      afraid
                      > as
                      > > > they work to live and die. They live and die at once, a kind
                      of
                      > > smear
                      > > > across the dust. The world will go on. "Better" days may come;
                      > but
                      > > the
                      > > > man who seperates his living and dying is dialectically
                      > fractured
                      > > into
                      > > > actions that can only bring misery to others. "If you build it
                      > some
                      > > > will die." What kind of game then if the dead did come out of
                      the
                      > > > corn? There is no will to power. There are fractured men
                      acting
                      > > out of
                      > > > cowardice, and there are the whole deaths of endurance,
                      neither
                      > > brave
                      > > > nor terrified, only facts of a planet - becoming after all
                      food
                      > and
                      > > > hope ground together into porridge for the solace of the
                      > fractured
                      > > > terrified ones. March on to the altar with brave swords and
                      > bright
                      > > > torches. It is full again. I head for the hills. I am not
                      ready
                      > to
                      > > be
                      > > > interrupted.
                      > > >
                      > > > Trinidad
                      > > >
                      > > >
                      > > > --- In existlist@yahoogroups.com, "bhvwd"
                      <v.valleywestdental@>
                      > > wrote:
                      > > > >
                      > > > > --- In existlist@yahoogroups.com, "louise" <hecubatoher@>
                      > wrote:
                      > > > > >
                      > > > > >
                      > > > > > " ... Modern metaphysics first comes to the full and final
                      > > > > > determination of its essence in the doctrine of the
                      Overman,
                      > > the
                      > > > > > doctrine of man's fully absolute preeminence among
                      beings.
                      > In
                      > > > > that
                      > > > > > doctrine, Descartes celebrates his supreme triumph.
                      > > > > > Because the will to power unfolds its pure powerfulness
                      > > without
                      > > > > > restraint in man - that is to say, in the figure of the
                      > > Overman -
                      > > > > > "psychology" in Nietzsche's sense as the doctrine of the
                      > will
                      > > to
                      > > > > > power is therefore always simultaneously* and *from the
                      > > outset*
                      > > > > the
                      > > > > > realm of the *fundamental questions of metaphysics*. Thus
                      > > > > Nietzsche
                      > > > > > can say, in *Beyond Good and Evil* (VII, 35 ff.),
                      > > > > >
                      > > > > > All psychology to date has got stuck in moral prejudices
                      and
                      > > > > fears: Louise, I find you consistant but the present does
                      not
                      > > > > respect the past. The individual can seldom find the
                      comfort
                      > of
                      > > > > sanctuary of ancient academy. I would rather be a buccaneer
                      > than
                      > > a
                      > > > > monk and on the run, in the present, I find the winds of
                      > change
                      > > more
                      > > > > fragrant than the molds of ancient texts.I write about the
                      > world
                      > > I
                      > > > > see about me while you write about writers of the past. I
                      > think
                      > > we
                      > > > > both have a place here and prove my hypothesis by reading
                      your
                      > > ideas
                      > > > > and contrasting them with my own.
                      > > > > On Saturday I will leave with an itenary known only to the
                      > > open
                      > > > > road. I will be somewhere in the new, wild west and hope you
                      > > will
                      > > > > find interest in a tale not yet written. Bill
                      > > > > > it has not dared to descend into the depths. To conceive
                      of
                      > > > > > psychology as the morphology and *doctrine of the
                      > development
                      > > of
                      > > > > > will to power*, as I do - no one has yet come close to
                      this
                      > in
                      > > his
                      > > > > > thought.
                      > > > > >
                      > > > > > At the end of the section, Nietzsche says it is
                      > > imperative "that
                      > > > > > psychology be recognized again as the queen of the
                      sciences;
                      > > the
                      > > > > > other sciences must minister to her. For psychology is
                      once
                      > > again
                      > > > > > the path to the fundamental problems." We could also say
                      > that
                      > > the
                      > > > > > path to the fundamental problems of metaphysics is the
                      > > Cartesian
                      > > > > > Meditationes* on man as subiectum*. Psychology is the
                      name
                      > > for
                      > > > > the
                      > > > > > metaphysics that posits man (that is, mankind as such, not
                      > > simply
                      > > > > > the individual "I", as subiectum*) as measure and center,
                      as
                      > > > > ground
                      > > > > > and aim of all being. If nihilism is construed as
                      > > > > a "psychological
                      > > > > > state", this means that nihilism concerns the position of
                      > man
                      > > amid
                      > > > > > beings as a whole, the way in which man puts himself in
                      > > contact
                      > > > > with
                      > > > > > the being as such, the way he forms and sustains that
                      > > relationship
                      > > > > > and thereby himself."
                      > > > > >
                      > > > > >
                      > > > > > A fierce downpour of rain distracts me, blasts of wind
                      > hurling
                      > > the
                      > > > > > water at the windowpane so that even my typing fingers
                      feel
                      > > the
                      > > > > > draught, notwithstanding the insulating effect of thick
                      > > curtains.
                      > > > > > However.
                      > > > > >
                      > > > > > This passage is copied from 'Nietzsche', by Martin
                      Heidegger.
                      > > > > > Volume Four, Nihilism, [pp28-9] tr. Frank A. Capuzzi
                      > > > > > Harper & Row 1982.
                      > > > > >
                      > > > > > Louise
                      > > > > >
                      > > > >
                      > > >
                      > >
                      >
                    • eupraxis@aol.com
                      You wrote: Cunning men who fought like women banded together and ruled by the power of threat. They used faith and hierarchy to hold sway over those of
                      Message 10 of 12 , Jul 14, 2006
                      • 0 Attachment
                        You wrote: "Cunning men who fought like women banded together and ruled by the power of threat. They used faith and hierarchy to hold sway over those of greater physical strength and numbers. Nietzsche blew that all away with a cognitive assailant, a man of intellect and will who appealed to the honor of brave Achilles. This Uebermench banished obeisance to metaphysical collectives and thus I consider Friedrich Nietzsche to be the new Achilles."

                        Yeah, master/slave moralities, and all that, a la Genealogy of Morality. Interesting stuff, no question -- but you may be mistaken about Nietzsche's idealization of war. In Zarathustra he writes about waging wars in relation to reading books, for example -- obviously using war as a metaphor. Acting without "resentiment" is not the same thing as going around half-cocked and inflicting damage for fun.

                        Wil, of the girded loins



                        -----Original Message-----
                        From: v.valleywestdental@...
                        To: existlist@yahoogroups.com
                        Sent: Fri, 14 Jul 2006 10:06 AM
                        Subject: [existlist] Re: Celan's view

                        --- In existlist@yahoogroups.com, "two_owl_night"
                        <two_owl_night@...> wrote:
                        >
                        > The Triumph Of Achilles by Paul Celan
                        >
                        > In the story of Patroclus
                        > no one survives, not even Achilles
                        > who was nearly a god.
                        > Patroclus resembled him; they wore
                        > the same armor.
                        >
                        > Always in these friendships
                        > one serves the other, one is less than the other:
                        > the hierarchy
                        > is always apparent, though the legends
                        > cannot be trusted--
                        > their source is the survivor,
                        > the one who has been abandoned.
                        > Mary and Trinidad, I view Achilles as the symbol of the
                        ancient , strong man of arms. His death reports the end of an
                        epoch. With clubs and stones man had survived and conquered his
                        world. These strong men had evolved a standard of martial conduct
                        and it served as law for the tribe from the hunter gatherers to the
                        greek city states. The standard rested on strength, aggression and
                        ferocity. After Achilles the standard was that of Agamemnon and the
                        political kings. Man had evolved from physical preditor to
                        political manipulator. Strong man rule gave way to smart man rule.
                        The collective with it`s alliances and betrayals wrested power from
                        the individual strong men. Cunning men who fought like women banded
                        togeather and ruled by the power of threat. They used faith and
                        heirarchy to hold sway over those of greater physical strength and
                        numbers. Neitche blew that all away with a cognative assailant, a
                        man of intellect and will who appealed to the honor of brave
                        Achillies. This heibermench banished obesance to metaphysical
                        collectives and thus I consider Fredrich Neitche to be the new
                        Achillies. Bill

                        n> What were the Greek ships on fire
                        > compared to this loss?
                        >
                        > In his tent, Achilles
                        > grieved with his whole being
                        > and the gods saw
                        > he was a man already dead, a victim
                        > of the part that loved,
                        > the part that was mortal.
                        >
                        > Mary
                        >
                        >
                        > --- In existlist@yahoogroups.com, "Trinidad Cruz" <cruzprdb@>
                        > wrote:
                        > >
                        > > There is no "will to power". There is hunger, and the desolation
                        > of a
                        > > planet that has spawned and then abandoned you. It is a
                        > desperation of
                        > > being together and apart in action. There is nothing to
                        psychology
                        > > other than new nomenclature for hunger and abandonment. For the
                        > > existentialist the question has always been and always will be:
                        are
                        > > hunger and abandonment a reason for murder? We are not made
                        sick.
                        > We
                        > > are hungry and abandoned. Living and dying are the same
                        paradigm.
                        > It
                        > > is the positivists who slaughter the sheep and differentiate
                        > between
                        > > living and dying. They are simply afraid of dying. Hillariously
                        it
                        > is
                        > > they who have the dialectical issue of acting courageously. Those
                        > > running for the hills have no issue with it, nor are they afraid
                        as
                        > > they work to live and die. They live and die at once, a kind of
                        > smear
                        > > across the dust. The world will go on. "Better" days may come;
                        but
                        > the
                        > > man who seperates his living and dying is dialectically
                        fractured
                        > into
                        > > actions that can only bring misery to others. "If you build it
                        some
                        > > will die." What kind of game then if the dead did come out of the
                        > > corn? There is no will to power. There are fractured men acting
                        > out of
                        > > cowardice, and there are the whole deaths of endurance, neither
                        > brave
                        > > nor terrified, only facts of a planet - becoming after all food
                        and
                        > > hope ground together into porridge for the solace of the
                        fractured
                        > > terrified ones. March on to the altar with brave swords and
                        bright
                        > > torches. It is full again. I head for the hills. I am not ready
                        to
                        > be
                        > > interrupted.
                        > >
                        > > Trinidad
                        > >
                        > >
                        > > --- In existlist@yahoogroups.com, "bhvwd" <v.valleywestdental@>
                        > wrote:
                        > > >
                        > > > --- In existlist@yahoogroups.com, "louise" <hecubatoher@>
                        wrote:
                        > > > >
                        > > > >
                        > > > > " ... Modern metaphysics first comes to the full and final
                        > > > > determination of its essence in the doctrine of the Overman,
                        > the
                        > > > > doctrine of man's fully absolute preeminence among beings.
                        In
                        > > > that
                        > > > > doctrine, Descartes celebrates his supreme triumph.
                        > > > > Because the will to power unfolds its pure powerfulness
                        > without
                        > > > > restraint in man - that is to say, in the figure of the
                        > Overman -
                        > > > > "psychology" in Nietzsche's sense as the doctrine of the
                        will
                        > to
                        > > > > power is therefore always simultaneously* and *from the
                        > outset*
                        > > > the
                        > > > > realm of the *fundamental questions of metaphysics*. Thus
                        > > > Nietzsche
                        > > > > can say, in *Beyond Good and Evil* (VII, 35 ff.),
                        > > > >
                        > > > > All psychology to date has got stuck in moral prejudices and
                        > > > fears: Louise, I find you consistant but the present does not
                        > > > respect the past. The individual can seldom find the comfort
                        of
                        > > > sanctuary of ancient academy. I would rather be a buccaneer
                        than
                        > a
                        > > > monk and on the run, in the present, I find the winds of
                        change
                        > more
                        > > > fragrant than the molds of ancient texts.I write about the
                        world
                        > I
                        > > > see about me while you write about writers of the past. I
                        think
                        > we
                        > > > both have a place here and prove my hypothesis by reading your
                        > ideas
                        > > > and contrasting them with my own.
                        > > > On Saturday I will leave with an itenary known only to the
                        > open
                        > > > road. I will be somewhere in the new, wild west and hope you
                        > will
                        > > > find interest in a tale not yet written. Bill
                        > > > > it has not dared to descend into the depths. To conceive of
                        > > > > psychology as the morphology and *doctrine of the
                        development
                        > of
                        > > > > will to power*, as I do - no one has yet come close to this
                        in
                        > his
                        > > > > thought.
                        > > > >
                        > > > > At the end of the section, Nietzsche says it is
                        > imperative "that
                        > > > > psychology be recognized again as the queen of the sciences;
                        > the
                        > > > > other sciences must minister to her. For psychology is once
                        > again
                        > > > > the path to the fundamental problems." We could also say
                        that
                        > the
                        > > > > path to the fundamental problems of metaphysics is the
                        > Cartesian
                        > > > > Meditationes* on man as subiectum*. Psychology is the name
                        > for
                        > > > the
                        > > > > metaphysics that posits man (that is, mankind as such, not
                        > simply
                        > > > > the individual "I", as subiectum*) as measure and center, as
                        > > > ground
                        > > > > and aim of all being. If nihilism is construed as
                        > > > a "psychological
                        > > > > state", this means that nihilism concerns the position of
                        man
                        > amid
                        > > > > beings as a whole, the way in which man puts himself in
                        > contact
                        > > > with
                        > > > > the being as such, the way he forms and sustains that
                        > relationship
                        > > > > and thereby himself."
                        > > > >
                        > > > >
                        > > > > A fierce downpour of rain distracts me, blasts of wind
                        hurling
                        > the
                        > > > > water at the windowpane so that even my typing fingers feel
                        > the
                        > > > > draught, notwithstanding the insulating effect of thick
                        > curtains.
                        > > > > However.
                        > > > >
                        > > > > This passage is copied from 'Nietzsche', by Martin Heidegger.
                        > > > > Volume Four, Nihilism, [pp28-9] tr. Frank A. Capuzzi
                        > > > > Harper & Row 1982.
                        > > > >
                        > > > > Louise
                        > > > >
                        > > >
                        > >
                        >


                        ________________________________________________________________________
                        Check out AOL.com today. Breaking news, video search, pictures, email and IM. All on demand. Always Free.


                        [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
                      • Aija Veldre Beldavs
                        how much of what you say is based on deep study of actual societies? how much is being led to conclusions from abstractions gained from the study of some
                        Message 11 of 12 , Jul 14, 2006
                        • 0 Attachment
                          how much of what you say is based on deep study of actual societies? how
                          much is being led to conclusions from abstractions gained from the study
                          of some societies and generalized inappropriately to others?

                          hunter-gatherer-fishing societies haven't been necessarily patriarchal as
                          you suggest. in fact there is plenty of evidence that they were in the
                          past 1) diverse, moreso than now, and 2) more likely to be as close to
                          egalitarian as there is in practice. (eg nurturance doesn't become
                          totally subservient to might makes right specialized interests in everyday
                          face-to-face life of a small group dependent on each other for survival.)

                          that means that it is not only the male point of view that counts in small
                          dispersed band, homestead, or small village societies. in my view this is
                          one reason why in many northern European societies women retained,
                          relatively speaking, high and respected status long after agriculture was
                          introduced to the area. i'm interested in the Baltic where mixed economy
                          persisted to recent times. in many Baltic societies even down to the
                          beginnings of patriarchal early feudal societies, women retained ownership
                          of property, including that of the land if no mail was available to farm
                          it, alternative matrilocal marriage arrangement, and voice in council
                          especially if men were not available. i am aware of parallels also in
                          other places, such as southeastern Asia and woodlands native Americans. it
                          was pragmatic in dispersed small societies to keep fluid options and
                          balances open even in cases of gender.

                          aija

                          >> Mary and Trinidad, I view Achilles as the symbol of the
                          > ancient , strong man of arms. His death reports the end of an
                          > epoch. With clubs and stones man had survived and conquered his
                          > world. These strong men had evolved a standard of martial conduct
                          > and it served as law for the tribe from the hunter gatherers to the
                          > greek city states. The standard rested on strength, aggression and
                          > ferocity. After Achilles the standard was that of Agamemnon and the
                          > political kings. Man had evolved from physical preditor to
                          > political manipulator. Strong man rule gave way to smart man rule.
                          > The collective with it`s alliances and betrayals wrested power from
                          > the individual strong men. Cunning men who fought like women banded
                          > togeather and ruled by the power of threat. They used faith and
                          > heirarchy to hold sway over those of greater physical strength and
                          > numbers. Neitche blew that all away with a cognative assailant, a
                          > man of intellect and will who appealed to the honor of brave
                          > Achillies. This heibermench banished obesance to metaphysical
                          > collectives and thus I consider Fredrich Neitche to be the new
                          > Achillies. Bill
                        • bhvwd
                          ... societies? how ... study ... patriarchal as ... in the ... close to ... become ... everyday ... survival.) ... in small ... this is ... agriculture was ...
                          Message 12 of 12 , Jul 14, 2006
                          • 0 Attachment
                            --- In existlist@yahoogroups.com, Aija Veldre Beldavs <beldavsa@...>
                            wrote:
                            >
                            >
                            > how much of what you say is based on deep study of actual
                            societies? how
                            > much is being led to conclusions from abstractions gained from the
                            study
                            > of some societies and generalized inappropriately to others?
                            >
                            > hunter-gatherer-fishing societies haven't been necessarily
                            patriarchal as
                            > you suggest. in fact there is plenty of evidence that they were
                            in the
                            > past 1) diverse, moreso than now, and 2) more likely to be as
                            close to
                            > egalitarian as there is in practice. (eg nurturance doesn't
                            become
                            > totally subservient to might makes right specialized interests in
                            everyday
                            > face-to-face life of a small group dependent on each other for
                            survival.)
                            >
                            > that means that it is not only the male point of view that counts
                            in small
                            > dispersed band, homestead, or small village societies. in my view
                            this is
                            > one reason why in many northern European societies women retained,
                            > relatively speaking, high and respected status long after
                            agriculture was
                            > introduced to the area. i'm interested in the Baltic where mixed
                            economy
                            > persisted to recent times. in many Baltic societies even down to
                            the
                            > beginnings of patriarchal early feudal societies, women retained
                            ownership
                            > of property, including that of the land if no mail was available
                            to farm
                            > it, alternative matrilocal marriage arrangement, and voice in
                            council
                            > especially if men were not available. i am aware of parallels also
                            in
                            > other places, such as southeastern Asia and woodlands native
                            Americans. it
                            > was pragmatic in dispersed small societies to keep fluid options
                            and
                            > balances open even in cases of gender.
                            >
                            > aija,We were speaking of the Homeric world, a literary world, that
                            may or may not have existed. I still defend my generalisation of
                            female competative strategies. At half the size of ancient man a
                            language based strategy seems the better choice for ancient women. I
                            agree that such an approach , a cognative approach, has been to
                            the advantage of women. It is in the direction of the ascent of the
                            species. Nietzsche used the strategy in a fundamentally pure form,
                            an authentic form if you will. That is the analogy I draw and make
                            no statement about the sexual division of labor or authority in any
                            society. Bill
                            > >> Mary and Trinidad, I view Achilles as the symbol of the
                            > > ancient , strong man of arms. His death reports the end of an
                            > > epoch. With clubs and stones man had survived and conquered his
                            > > world. These strong men had evolved a standard of martial
                            conduct
                            > > and it served as law for the tribe from the hunter gatherers to
                            the
                            > > greek city states. The standard rested on strength, aggression
                            and
                            > > ferocity. After Achilles the standard was that of Agamemnon and
                            the
                            > > political kings. Man had evolved from physical preditor to
                            > > political manipulator. Strong man rule gave way to smart man
                            rule.
                            > > The collective with it`s alliances and betrayals wrested power
                            from
                            > > the individual strong men. Cunning men who fought like women
                            banded
                            > > togeather and ruled by the power of threat. They used faith and
                            > > heirarchy to hold sway over those of greater physical strength
                            and
                            > > numbers. Neitche blew that all away with a cognative assailant, a
                            > > man of intellect and will who appealed to the honor of brave
                            > > Achillies. This heibermench banished obesance to metaphysical
                            > > collectives and thus I consider Fredrich Neitche to be the new
                            > > Achillies. Bill
                            >
                          Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.