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

Heiddger, Buckley and authenticity

Expand Messages
  • bhvwd
    Yhe incomprehensible verbage of recent posts seem to have overwhelmed Jim`s ability to control whatever point he was trying to make. As our moderator
    Message 1 of 13 , Feb 27, 2008
      Yhe incomprehensible verbage of recent posts seem to have
      overwhelmed Jim`s ability to control whatever point he was trying to
      make. As our moderator mentioned, Heiddeger was a right wing
      apologist with close ties to the Nazi. That is a substantial charge
      and in retrospect should take him out of contention as a serious
      existentialist. A man who supplies the intellectual underpinnings for
      deadly political upheavel is not one I wish to study or emulate. Now
      Jim, can you in good mind call Heidegger a seminal existentialist?
      You seem a great believer in responsibility so where is yours in
      this topic. It seems you may have picked Heidigger as your
      intellectual anchor in existentialism so you could talk about a
      contrast with Descartes. That is clever but not original. William F
      Buckley passed today. He, like Heiddger acted as the intellectual
      sponser of right wing bigotry and political mischief. The Nazi needed
      the patina of respectability in order to spread their message of of
      hate and prejudice just as their american right wing children needed
      a psudo intellectual base to ligetimise the conservative revolutions
      of Reagan , Bush and Bush. Buckley, with his idiosyncratic speach and
      dense style proved just what was needed. Heidegger became the
      intellectual excuse for Goebbles . Buckley is the acedemic excuse
      for Carl Rove. I think you are existlists antithisis of continental
      thought. Without Heidegger your postings become unattached to
      existentialism . They cantilever off Descartes who is not an
      existentialist. Does your propensity for non existential topic
      overflow into some political agenda or are you just drawn to
      antiquated material by your christian past? If you could write like
      Buckley it might be worth the tour but the last posts not only lacked
      style but rationality. Please do better or do not do at all. Bill
    • jimstuart51
      Bill, You write:
      Message 2 of 13 , Feb 27, 2008
        Bill,

        You write:

        << As our moderator mentioned, Heidegger was a right wing apologist
        with close ties to the Nazi. That is a substantial charge and in
        retrospect should take him out of contention as a serious
        existentialist. A man who supplies the intellectual underpinnings for
        deadly political upheaval is not one I wish to study or emulate. Now
        Jim, can you in good mind call Heidegger a seminal existentialist? >>

        I have not read much Heidegger – I am sure Wil and Louise have read
        much more, so they are probably better people to answer the points
        you raise in your thought-provoking post.

        I think "Being and Time" has a lot of good and true things to say.
        The text presents a novel way of looking at the world and ourselves,
        a way which I think is superior to both Cartesianism and reductive
        physicalism.

        I agree with you that Heidegger was an unpleasant, nasty individual,
        but I think nasty people can sometimes come up with worthwhile ideas.

        Also Being and Time was written in the early 1920's before Nazism
        developed. Perhaps Heidegger was a better person as a young man than
        he was later in life when he fell under the spell of Nazism.

        I think Heidegger probably was a `seminal existentialist', but I can
        appreciate your criticism. I am not completely sure in my own mind
        what is the correct attitude to take to Heidegger's existentialism as
        expressed in "Being and Time", given Heidegger's behaviour from the
        late 1920's onwards.

        Jim
      • bhvwd
        ... gods and plunder. It is easy to slither away from the corrupt plans of this sort of enemy. Just leave it for others to deal with and keep yourself safe. I
        Message 3 of 13 , Feb 27, 2008
          --- In existlist@yahoogroups.com, "jimstuart51" <jjimstuart1@...>
          wrote:
          >Jim, I fear the right wing as I fear the priests and zealots of
          gods and plunder. It is easy to slither away from the corrupt plans
          of this sort of enemy. Just leave it for others to deal with and
          keep yourself safe. I am not accusing you of being a Nazi or even
          being a friend of Carl Rove. In my mind certain markers pop up when
          men of such virulance are honored. I was raised in what is now called
          a social conservative environment and the stench remains keen in my
          olfactory apparatus. You have to have been one to recognise them
          early on. I enjoyed listening to Buckley on "firing line" and often
          preferred him personally to his left wing opponents. I really did not
          meet anyone of the left until collage and other than their superior
          cache of thoughts I wanted little to do with them. The only place we
          are going with Bush or Rove is to war. Heidegger and Hitler presented
          a similar future and it is not what I want to be about. Michael
          Kinsey was the perfect foil for Buckley and I fear you are setting
          yourself up for that kind of cruel usage. Many disliked Kinsey so
          fervently they forgot to disparage the sick bully, Buckley. Operating
          on the edges of Heidegger is a dangerous course with pitfalls of
          racism and arian superiority. As the right wing digs up photographs
          of Barak Hussian Obama and Limbaugh like radio gurus insult his
          lineage, I become especially sensitive to the dirty tricks I have
          come to expect of the clan. Heidegger crossed a line that we need to
          redraw if we are to expose the operant factions in conflict today. I
          am not fearful of Heideggers thought but super educated front men
          like Buckley have sent millions down the wrong path. It is the
          witching season and giving such apologists a hand up could be deadly
          to the personal liberty of such as we. Bill
          >
          > Bill,
          >
          > You write:
          >
          > << As our moderator mentioned, Heidegger was a right wing apologist
          > with close ties to the Nazi. That is a substantial charge and in
          > retrospect should take him out of contention as a serious
          > existentialist. A man who supplies the intellectual underpinnings
          for
          > deadly political upheaval is not one I wish to study or emulate.
          Now
          > Jim, can you in good mind call Heidegger a seminal existentialist?
          >>
          >
          > I have not read much Heidegger – I am sure Wil and Louise have read
          > much more, so they are probably better people to answer the points
          > you raise in your thought-provoking post.
          >
          > I think "Being and Time" has a lot of good and true things to say.
          > The text presents a novel way of looking at the world and
          ourselves,
          > a way which I think is superior to both Cartesianism and reductive
          > physicalism.
          >
          > I agree with you that Heidegger was an unpleasant, nasty
          individual,
          > but I think nasty people can sometimes come up with worthwhile
          ideas.
          >
          > Also Being and Time was written in the early 1920's before Nazism
          > developed. Perhaps Heidegger was a better person as a young man
          than
          > he was later in life when he fell under the spell of Nazism.
          >
          > I think Heidegger probably was a `seminal existentialist', but I
          can
          > appreciate your criticism. I am not completely sure in my own mind
          > what is the correct attitude to take to Heidegger's existentialism
          as
          > expressed in "Being and Time", given Heidegger's behaviour from the
          > late 1920's onwards.
          >
          > Jim
          >
        • jimstuart51
          Bill, You write: Being and Time is a text
          Message 4 of 13 , Feb 27, 2008
            Bill,

            You write:

            << Operating on the edges of Heidegger is a dangerous course with
            pitfalls of racism and arian superiority. >>

            "Being and Time" is a text about the nature of the human being and his
            relationship to his world. I do not think it is a political book, and I
            have not detected any racist ideas within its pages. It is abstract
            philosophy, with an individualist slant.

            I honestly don't think that anybody today will read "Being and Time"
            and be inspired to try and invade Poland.

            Jim
          • eupraxis@aol.com
            There is a marked conservatism in Being and Time. I would even say a Romantic conservatism (Destiny, Origins, etc., golden age (pre-Platonic) vs modernity,
            Message 5 of 13 , Feb 27, 2008
              There is a marked conservatism in Being and Time. I would even say a
              Romantic conservatism (Destiny, Origins, etc., 'golden age'
              (pre-Platonic) vs modernity, etc.). But there is nothing even remotely
              fascist, in any normal sense of the term, to B&T or, in fact, any of
              Heidegger's works, including the early Intro to Metaphysics where (on
              pg 199, if I remember right) he actually mentions National Socialism.

              Let us also remember that H dedicated B&T to Husserl long after the
              anti-semitic actions were in effect.

              I can, again, recommend Zizek's book, The Ticklish Subject, for a very
              insightful look into this issue, vis-a-vis Kant and Hegel.

              Wil


              -----Original Message-----
              From: jimstuart51 <jjimstuart1@...>
              To: existlist@yahoogroups.com
              Sent: Wed, 27 Feb 2008 3:45 pm
              Subject: [existlist] Re: Heiddger, Buckley and authenticity

























              Bill,



              You write:



              << Operating on the edges of Heidegger is a dangerous course with

              pitfalls of racism and arian superiority. >>



              "Being and Time" is a text about the nature of the human being and his

              relationship to his world. I do not think it is a political book, and I

              have not detected any racist ideas within its pages. It is abstract

              philosophy, with an individualist slant.



              I honestly don't think that anybody today will read "Being and Time"

              and be inspired to try and invade Poland.



              Jim
            • bhvwd
              ... his ... and I ... Time ... slant as Heidegger, invaded Iraq. You have accused me of being a war monger but I was against that invasion and only in favor
              Message 6 of 13 , Feb 27, 2008
                --- In existlist@yahoogroups.com, "jimstuart51" <jjimstuart1@...>
                wrote:
                >
                > Bill,
                >
                > You write:
                >
                > << Operating on the edges of Heidegger is a dangerous course with
                > pitfalls of racism and arian superiority. >>
                >
                > "Being and Time" is a text about the nature of the human being and
                his
                > relationship to his world. I do not think it is a political book,
                and I
                > have not detected any racist ideas within its pages. It is abstract
                > philosophy, with an individualist slant.
                >
                > I honestly don't think that anybody today will read "Being and
                Time"
                > and be inspired to try and invade Poland.
                >
                > Jim
                >Few will read "Being and Time" but some, with the same right wing
                slant as Heidegger, invaded Iraq. You have accused me of being a war
                monger but I was against that invasion and only in favor of winning
                the war after the right had blundered into the quagmire. If "Being
                and Time" was politically neutral, standing with Hitler was not. I
                deny you can be a Nazi and a existentialist. Why must you relate to
                such a pig of an author when many of clean mind and history are open
                for examination. Look at the german aversion to islamic immigration.
                The right wing Xenophobes are as problamatic as the Islamic radicals.
                Modern humanism is needed here not the concussions of hate blasting
                from both sides. If we followed your prescription we would still be
                taking casualties in the streets of Warsaw. Or perhaps you would
                prefer a hundreds years war in Bagdad. Yet it seems someone has
                already suggested that. Bill
              • eupraxis@aol.com
                Bill, As you already know, I am quite sure, I am the last person to let any Nazi affiliation go without any accusations, but Heidegger had no effect on Nazi
                Message 7 of 13 , Feb 27, 2008
                  Bill,

                  As you already know, I am quite sure, I am the last person to let any
                  Nazi affiliation go without any accusations, but Heidegger had no
                  effect on Nazi propaganda -- in fact, word is that no one knew what the
                  hell he was talking about! Moreover, Heidegger's right-wing attitude
                  did not extend to warmongering. He was anti-modernity and a
                  crypto-religious.

                  He is indeed still very much read, by the way, and is big in Catholic
                  and Lutheran circles. In fact, my reservations about H notwithstanding,
                  I recommend B&T. You should give it a go.

                  Wil


                  -----Original Message-----
                  From: bhvwd <v.valleywestdental@...>
                  To: existlist@yahoogroups.com
                  Sent: Wed, 27 Feb 2008 4:15 pm
                  Subject: [existlist] Re: Heiddger, Buckley and authenticity

























                  --- In existlist@yahoogroups.com, "jimstuart51" <jjimstuart1@...>

                  wrote:

                  >

                  > Bill,

                  >

                  > You write:

                  >

                  > << Operating on the edges of Heidegger is a dangerous course with

                  > pitfalls of racism and arian superiority. >>

                  >

                  > "Being and Time" is a text about the nature of the human being and

                  his

                  > relationship to his world. I do not think it is a political book,

                  and I

                  > have not detected any racist ideas within its pages. It is abstract

                  > philosophy, with an individualist slant.

                  >

                  > I honestly don't think that anybody today will read "Being and

                  Time"

                  > and be inspired to try and invade Poland.

                  >

                  > Jim

                  >Few will read "Being and Time" but some, with the same right wing

                  slant as Heidegger, invaded Iraq. You have accused me of being a war

                  monger but I was against that invasion and only in favor of winning

                  the war after the right had blundered into the quagmire. If "Being

                  and Time" was politically neutral, standing with Hitler was not. I

                  deny you can be a Nazi and a existentialist. Why must you relate to

                  such a pig of an author when many of clean mind and history are open

                  for examination. Look at the german aversion to islamic immigration.

                  The right wing Xenophobes are as problamatic as the Islamic radicals.

                  Modern humanism is needed here not the concussions of hate blasting

                  from both sides. If we followed your prescription we would still be

                  taking casualties in the streets of Warsaw. Or perhaps you would

                  prefer a hundreds years war in Bagdad. Yet it seems someone has

                  already suggested that. Bill
                • bhvwd
                  ... any ... the ... attitude ... Catholic ... notwithstanding, ... appreciate a definition. Thanks, Bill ... abstract ... radicals. ... blasting
                  Message 8 of 13 , Feb 27, 2008
                    --- In existlist@yahoogroups.com, eupraxis@... wrote:
                    >
                    > Bill,
                    >
                    > As you already know, I am quite sure, I am the last person to let
                    any
                    > Nazi affiliation go without any accusations, but Heidegger had no
                    > effect on Nazi propaganda -- in fact, word is that no one knew what
                    the
                    > hell he was talking about! Moreover, Heidegger's right-wing
                    attitude
                    > did not extend to warmongering. He was anti-modernity and a
                    > crypto-religious.
                    >
                    > He is indeed still very much read, by the way, and is big in
                    Catholic
                    > and Lutheran circles. In fact, my reservations about H
                    notwithstanding,
                    > I recommend B&T. You should give it a go.
                    >
                    > Wil
                    > Wil, I am not familiar with the term crypto-religous. I would
                    appreciate a definition. Thanks, Bill>
                    > -----Original Message-----
                    > From: bhvwd <v.valleywestdental@...>
                    > To: existlist@yahoogroups.com
                    > Sent: Wed, 27 Feb 2008 4:15 pm
                    > Subject: [existlist] Re: Heiddger, Buckley and authenticity
                    >
                    >
                    >
                    >
                    >
                    >
                    >
                    >
                    >
                    >
                    >
                    >
                    >
                    >
                    >
                    >
                    >
                    >
                    >
                    >
                    >
                    >
                    >
                    >
                    >
                    > --- In existlist@yahoogroups.com, "jimstuart51" <jjimstuart1@>
                    >
                    > wrote:
                    >
                    > >
                    >
                    > > Bill,
                    >
                    > >
                    >
                    > > You write:
                    >
                    > >
                    >
                    > > << Operating on the edges of Heidegger is a dangerous course with
                    >
                    > > pitfalls of racism and arian superiority. >>
                    >
                    > >
                    >
                    > > "Being and Time" is a text about the nature of the human being and
                    >
                    > his
                    >
                    > > relationship to his world. I do not think it is a political book,
                    >
                    > and I
                    >
                    > > have not detected any racist ideas within its pages. It is
                    abstract
                    >
                    > > philosophy, with an individualist slant.
                    >
                    > >
                    >
                    > > I honestly don't think that anybody today will read "Being and
                    >
                    > Time"
                    >
                    > > and be inspired to try and invade Poland.
                    >
                    > >
                    >
                    > > Jim
                    >
                    > >Few will read "Being and Time" but some, with the same right wing
                    >
                    > slant as Heidegger, invaded Iraq. You have accused me of being a war
                    >
                    > monger but I was against that invasion and only in favor of winning
                    >
                    > the war after the right had blundered into the quagmire. If "Being
                    >
                    > and Time" was politically neutral, standing with Hitler was not. I
                    >
                    > deny you can be a Nazi and a existentialist. Why must you relate to
                    >
                    > such a pig of an author when many of clean mind and history are open
                    >
                    > for examination. Look at the german aversion to islamic immigration.
                    >
                    > The right wing Xenophobes are as problamatic as the Islamic
                    radicals.
                    >
                    > Modern humanism is needed here not the concussions of hate
                    blasting
                    >
                    > from both sides. If we followed your prescription we would still be
                    >
                    > taking casualties in the streets of Warsaw. Or perhaps you would
                    >
                    > prefer a hundreds years war in Bagdad. Yet it seems someone has
                    >
                    > already suggested that. Bill
                    >
                  • eupraxis@aol.com
                    Crypto-religious: Secretly, covertly religious. The term may be a little strong, but it is truer than not. Wil ... From: bhvwd
                    Message 9 of 13 , Feb 27, 2008
                      Crypto-religious: Secretly, covertly religious. The term may be a
                      little strong, but it is truer than not.

                      Wil


                      -----Original Message-----
                      From: bhvwd <v.valleywestdental@...>
                      To: existlist@yahoogroups.com
                      Sent: Wed, 27 Feb 2008 5:10 pm
                      Subject: [existlist] Re: Heiddger, Buckley and authenticity

























                      --- In existlist@yahoogroups.com, eupraxis@... wrote:

                      >

                      > Bill,

                      >

                      > As you already know, I am quite sure, I am the last person to let

                      any

                      > Nazi affiliation go without any accusations, but Heidegger had no

                      > effect on Nazi propaganda -- in fact, word is that no one knew what

                      the

                      > hell he was talking about! Moreover, Heidegger's right-wing

                      attitude

                      > did not extend to warmongering. He was anti-modernity and a

                      > crypto-religious.

                      >

                      > He is indeed still very much read, by the way, and is big in

                      Catholic

                      > and Lutheran circles. In fact, my reservations about H

                      notwithstanding,

                      > I recommend B&T. You should give it a go.

                      >

                      > Wil

                      > Wil, I am not familiar with the term crypto-religous. I would

                      appreciate a definition. Thanks, Bill>

                      > -----Original Message-----

                      > From: bhvwd <v.valleywestdental@...>

                      > To: existlist@yahoogroups.com

                      > Sent: Wed, 27 Feb 2008 4:15 pm

                      > Subject: [existlist] Re: Heiddger, Buckley and authenticity

                      >

                      >

                      >

                      >

                      >

                      >

                      >

                      >

                      >

                      >

                      >

                      >

                      >

                      >

                      >

                      >

                      >

                      >

                      >

                      >

                      >

                      >

                      >

                      >

                      >

                      > --- In existlist@yahoogroups.com, "jimstuart51" <jjimstuart1@>

                      >

                      > wrote:

                      >

                      > >

                      >

                      > > Bill,

                      >

                      > >

                      >

                      > > You write:

                      >

                      > >

                      >

                      > > << Operating on the edges of Heidegger is a dangerous course with

                      >

                      > > pitfalls of racism and arian superiority. >>

                      >

                      > >

                      >

                      > > "Being and Time" is a text about the nature of the human being and

                      >

                      > his

                      >

                      > > relationship to his world. I do not think it is a political book,

                      >

                      > and I

                      >

                      > > have not detected any racist ideas within its pages. It is

                      abstract

                      >

                      > > philosophy, with an individualist slant.

                      >

                      > >

                      >

                      > > I honestly don't think that anybody today will read "Being and

                      >

                      > Time"

                      >

                      > > and be inspired to try and invade Poland.

                      >

                      > >

                      >

                      > > Jim

                      >

                      > >Few will read "Being and Time" but some, with the same right wing

                      >

                      > slant as Heidegger, invaded Iraq. You have accused me of being a war

                      >

                      > monger but I was against that invasion and only in favor of winning

                      >

                      > the war after the right had blundered into the quagmire. If "Being

                      >

                      > and Time" was politically neutral, standing with Hitler was not. I

                      >

                      > deny you can be a Nazi and a existentialist. Why must you relate to

                      >

                      > such a pig of an author when many of clean mind and history are open

                      >

                      > for examination. Look at the german aversion to islamic immigration.

                      >

                      > The right wing Xenophobes are as problamatic as the Islamic

                      radicals.

                      >

                      > Modern humanism is needed here not the concussions of hate

                      blasting

                      >

                      > from both sides. If we followed your prescription we would still be

                      >

                      > taking casualties in the streets of Warsaw. Or perhaps you would

                      >

                      > prefer a hundreds years war in Bagdad. Yet it seems someone has

                      >

                      > already suggested that. Bill

                      >
                    • bhvwd
                      Wil, thank you.I have spent a great deal of time with lawyers and routinely examine for cause. Did Heidegger hide his religosity because of the Nazi or for
                      Message 10 of 13 , Feb 27, 2008
                        Wil, thank you.I have spent a great deal of time with lawyers and
                        routinely examine for cause. Did Heidegger hide his religosity because
                        of the Nazi or for some other fear? If like the early christians he
                        wished to avoid a meeting with a lion in the areana, I could abide with
                        the authenticity of such a stance. Was he trying to hide his theism
                        from existential comrades? I do not admire Socrates because he drank
                        the hemlock but because he spoke back to authority. It is the self
                        service, short of extinction event, that bears close scrutany. With a
                        guy like Buckley we see no risk as he was a CIA employee, a racist and
                        a man convinced of his truth. For these reasons I group him with
                        Heidegger and find the similarities more provocative as I explore the
                        motives of these men. As Bookdoc just posted the "truth" of these
                        histories has huge down side validity and I will drop further
                        consideration of their stories because of their suspect motives. I can
                        see how religous nuts wheather catholics or lutherans have little
                        trouble with all sorts of double think. A nice discussion of
                        transubstantiation comes to mind. I will ponder more fully on the
                        duplicity of Crypto-religiosity. Bill
                      • eupraxis@aol.com
                        Bill, Did Heidegger hide his religiosity because of the Nazi or for some other fear? No, it wasn t fear. He was once a seminarian, but didn t go all the way.
                        Message 11 of 13 , Feb 27, 2008
                          Bill,

                          "Did Heidegger hide his religiosity because of the Nazi or for some other
                          fear?"

                          No, it wasn't fear. He was once a seminarian, but didn't go all the way. An
                          early work, which I may have mentioned before, is The Phenomenology of
                          Religious Life. It is the work of a religious hack, in my humble opinion. It tries to
                          defend Paul against Hellenism (Greek philosophy) and Nietzsche. If you think
                          of his later works, this should make you suspect him of a bias that makes his
                          critique of Nietzsche laughable. (Sorry Louise, H's "Nietzsche" is 6 books of
                          dishonest crap!)

                          Nevertheless, Heidegger was atheistic! He is one of the writers that have
                          contributed to the so-called "Death of God Theology". One way to grasp the gist
                          of this is to think of the Trinity without the Father (Being) and the Son
                          (presence, Dasein, parousia), leaving only the Holy Ghost through which one finds
                          the former on another authentic footing. 'Being and Time' and the 'Enowning'
                          text of the same period are the pursuit of the holy. That is my reading, in any
                          case.
                          ----
                          "I do not admire Socrates because he drank the hemlock but because he spoke
                          back to authority."

                          Yes, and because he drank Ouzo!
                          ------

                          Wil

                          In a message dated 2/27/08 6:18:35 PM, v.valleywestdental@... writes:


                          >
                          >
                          >
                          > Wil, thank you.I have spent a great deal of time with lawyers and
                          > routinely examine for cause. Did Heidegger hide his religosity because
                          > of the Nazi or for some other fear? If like the early christians he
                          > wished to avoid a meeting with a lion in the areana, I could abide with
                          > the authenticity of such a stance. Was he trying to hide his theism
                          > from existential comrades? I do not admire Socrates because he drank
                          > the hemlock but because he spoke back to authority. It is the self
                          > service, short of extinction event, that bears close scrutany. With a
                          > guy like Buckley we see no risk as he was a CIA employee, a racist and
                          > a man convinced of his truth. For these reasons I group him with
                          > Heidegger and find the similarities more provocative as I explore the
                          > motives of these men. As Bookdoc just posted the "truth" of these
                          > histories has huge down side validity and I will drop further
                          > consideration of their stories because of their suspect motives. I can
                          > see how religous nuts wheather catholics or lutherans have little
                          > trouble with all sorts of double think. A nice discussion of
                          > transubstantiation comes to mind. I will ponder more fully on the
                          > duplicity of Crypto-religiosity. Bill
                          >
                          >
                          >




                          **************
                          Ideas to please picky eaters. Watch video on AOL Living.

                          (http://living.aol.com/video/how-to-please-your-picky-eater/rachel-campos-duffy/
                          2050827?NCID=aolcmp00300000002598)


                          [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
                        • louise
                          ... Wil, I am aware of four volumes in the series. It occurs to me that Nietzsche has probably been the single greatest influence on my own life and
                          Message 12 of 13 , Feb 27, 2008
                            --- In existlist@yahoogroups.com, eupraxis@... wrote:

                            > Sorry Louise, H's "Nietzsche" is 6 books of dishonest crap!)

                            Wil, I am aware of four volumes in the series. It occurs to me that
                            Nietzsche has probably been the single greatest influence on my own
                            life and thinking. Your usual seriousness and care seem to desert
                            you when faced by these interpretations of a mode of thinking alien
                            to practical-minded people. Anyway, I remain an apprentice, and
                            merely register a protest against your, in my opinion, rather
                            meaningless dismissal. No doubt you have your, unstated, reasons,
                            but opinion and argument are not enough, in face of the kind of
                            thinking advanced by Nietzsche.

                            > Nevertheless, Heidegger was atheistic! He is one of the writers
                            > that have contributed to the so-called "Death of God Theology". One
                            > way to grasp the gist of this is to think of the Trinity without
                            > the Father (Being) and the Son (presence, Dasein, parousia),
                            > leaving only the Holy Ghost through which one finds the former on
                            > another authentic footing. 'Being and Time' and the 'Enowning'
                            > text of the same period are the pursuit of the holy. That is my
                            > reading, in any case.

                            Atheism is not an easy word to define, nor a concept I would readily
                            associate with Heidegger. There is something rather surreal about
                            asking us to imagine the Trinity without two of its persons, though
                            you seem to be suggesting that the somehow isolated third person then
                            restores relationship to the other two for the one who seeks. Could
                            this just be one way of describing what may ordinarily happen for the
                            orthodox believer? You go on to indicate that two of Heidegger's
                            works present the pursuit of the holy, an expression that does seem
                            to sit a little oddly with an attributed atheism. Louise
                          • eupraxis@aol.com
                            Louise, Louise: Wil, I am aware of four volumes in the series. Response: Yes, you are correct. My numeric pad is a blur. Four it is. ... Louise: It occurs
                            Message 13 of 13 , Feb 27, 2008
                              Louise,

                              Louise: "Wil, I am aware of four volumes in the series."

                              Response: Yes, you are correct. My numeric pad is a blur. Four it is.

                              ---------
                              Louise: "It occurs to me that Nietzsche has probably been the single greatest
                              influence on my own life and thinking."

                              Response: I would have to say the same.

                              -----------

                              Louise: "Your usual seriousness and care seem to desert you when faced by
                              these interpretations of a mode of thinking alien to practical-minded people."

                              Response: Not understanding you here. But I was being somewhat cavalier.
                              -----------

                              Louise: "Anyway, I remain an apprentice, and merely register a protest
                              against your, in my opinion, rather meaningless dismissal. No doubt you have your,
                              unstated, reasons, but opinion and argument are not enough, in face of the kind
                              of thinking advanced by Nietzsche."

                              Response: Well, that would explain it. I was being dismissive of Heidegger's
                              Nietzsche, not Nietzsche.

                              ----------------
                              Louise: "Atheism is not an easy word to define, nor a concept I would readily
                              associate with Heidegger."

                              Response: Not to mention "crypto-religious"! Heidegger disallows the personal
                              God of Christian Onto-theology. So, in the strictest sense, he would be an
                              atheist. But his philosophy is nonetheless religious, while never being openly
                              so, except where he exclaims, "only a God can save us ":

                              "Philosophy will not be able to effect an immediate transformation of the
                              present condition of the world. That is not only true of philosophy but of all
                              merely human thought and endeavor. Only a god can save us. The sole possibility
                              that is left for us is to prepare a sort of readiness, through thinking and
                              poetizing, for the appearance of the god or for the absence of the god in the
                              time of foundering; for in the face of the god who is absent, we founder."
                              Heidegger, Der Spiegel interview.
                              -------------
                              Louise: There is something rather surreal about asking us to imagine the
                              Trinity without two of its persons, though you seem to be suggesting that the
                              somehow isolated third person then restores relationship to the other two for the
                              one who seeks. Could this just be one way of describing what may ordinarily
                              happen for the orthodox believer?

                              Response: Yes, that is my, as it were, poetic interpretation, but with
                              textual support. God is traditionally associated with Being; the Son with parousia
                              (which signifies presence as Dasein from the Greek). The apprehension of
                              holiness is through the Spirit only; that is the existential revelation of the truth
                              of Being and parousia, Father and Son.
                              ------------

                              Wil

                              In a message dated 2/27/08 8:07:12 PM, hecubatoher@... writes:


                              >
                              >
                              >
                              > --- In existlist@yahoogrouexistl, eupraxis@... wrote:
                              >
                              > > Sorry Louise, H's "Nietzsche" is 6 books of dishonest crap!)
                              >
                              > Wil, I am aware of four volumes in the series. It occurs to me that
                              > Nietzsche has probably been the single greatest influence on my own
                              > life and thinking. Your usual seriousness and care seem to desert
                              > you when faced by these interpretations of a mode of thinking alien
                              > to practical-minded people. Anyway, I remain an apprentice, and
                              > merely register a protest against your, in my opinion, rather
                              > meaningless dismissal. No doubt you have your, unstated, reasons,
                              > but opinion and argument are not enough, in face of the kind of
                              > thinking advanced by Nietzsche.
                              >
                              > > Nevertheless, Heidegger was atheistic! He is one of the writers
                              > > that have contributed to the so-called "Death of God Theology". One
                              > > way to grasp the gist of this is to think of the Trinity without
                              > > the Father (Being) and the Son (presence, Dasein, parousia),
                              > > leaving only the Holy Ghost through which one finds the former on
                              > > another authentic footing. 'Being and Time' and the 'Enowning'
                              > > text of the same period are the pursuit of the holy. That is my
                              > > reading, in any case.
                              >
                              > Atheism is not an easy word to define, nor a concept I would readily
                              > associate with Heidegger. There is something rather surreal about
                              > asking us to imagine the Trinity without two of its persons, though
                              > you seem to be suggesting that the somehow isolated third person then
                              > restores relationship to the other two for the one who seeks. Could
                              > this just be one way of describing what may ordinarily happen for the
                              > orthodox believer? You go on to indicate that two of Heidegger's
                              > works present the pursuit of the holy, an expression that does seem
                              > to sit a little oddly with an attributed atheism. Louise
                              >
                              >
                              >




                              **************
                              Ideas to please picky eaters. Watch video on AOL Living.

                              (http://living.aol.com/video/how-to-please-your-picky-eater/rachel-campos-duffy/
                              2050827?NCID=aolcmp00300000002598)


                              [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
                            Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.