sure, let's have some apple plie & ice cream, i know a great place in brooklyn.
luc




----- Original Message ----
From: armando baeza <[email protected]>
To: [email protected]
Cc: armando baeza <[email protected]>
Sent: Tuesday, April 21, 2009 9:26:33 PM
Subject: Re: Heidegger and thingness

Any thing wrong,with reading him to find out what his meaning is
on one particular thing ?He may like apple pie ,like as I do,with ice-cream.

mando

On Apr 21, 2009, at 6:32 PM, Luc Delannoy wrote:

> reading and studying the works of a philosopher (any philosopher, or artist) 
> is not subscribing to the contents of what you read, or study. i do subscribe 
> to phenomenology and applied phenomenology (in psychology and education in 
> particular). i find the encounter of hermeneutics with phenomenology 
> fascinating (gadamer, ricoeur, derrida etc - they all approached art) i like 
> some husserl, in particular the late husserl (genealogy) - and not this 
> singular entity business of his. i am not sure we have been talking about 
> ideology, we just approached lightly some philosophical concepts like 
> essence,techne, thingness and the like. of course some ideologies take 
> hostage various of these concepts.  i admire m.h. as a philosopher - without 
> having to subscribe to all his work nor his political and social views. yes, 
> i like what he wrote about art and technology. but you know what, i also like 
> some frege and russell, and there are not exactly phenomenologists; so i
>  guess i am in the picking and choosing business after all.
> luc
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ----- Original Message ----
> From: armando baeza <[email protected]>
> To: [email protected]
> Cc: armando baeza <[email protected]>
> Sent: Tuesday, April 21, 2009 2:46:15 PM
> Subject: Re: Heidegger and thingness
> 
> I will have to read Heidegger to clarify "thingness" in his meaning, for 
> myself.
> mando
> 
> On Apr 21, 2009, at 6:12 AM, Chris Miller wrote:
> 
>> There would seem to be three possible responses to  an ideology: 
>> subscription,
>> rejection, and selection (i.e. picking and choosing favorable elements).
>> 
>> Regarding the one under discussion (call it German Idealism?) -- here's how
>> our group seems to be sorting out:
>> 
>> *subscription: (Saul, Luc)
>> *rejection: (Cheerskep, Mando, Miller)
>> *picking and choosing: William, Boris, Kate
>> 
>> In response the query that began this thread, it's interesting that even Saul
>> did not find M.H.'s  discussion of thingness to be  especially enlightening.
>> (i.e. -- it's  just Kantian discourse embedded in MH's phenomenology).
>> 
>> I suppose there's no point in arguing matters of faith -- either you 
>> subscribe
>> to Kantian discourse, or you don't -- but I do think that the middle ground 
>> is
>> very problematic - since it's an essentialist program -- and if you're
>> rejecting the essentials, you're rejecting the whole thing.
>> 
>> And there have been some rather catastrophic consequences when branches of
>> this discourse, Marxism and Fascism,  were adopted by totalitarian regimes in
>> the previous century.
>> 
>> (regarding the dire consequences of German idealism in the artworld, I 
>> suppose
>> that's just a matter of taste)
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> ____________________________________________________________
>> Largest network of startups. Find new startup opportunities. Click here.
>> http://thirdpartyoffers.netzero.net/TGL2231/fc/BLSrjnxPtu6gmO3e1k6Ar2WCK0ZiOF
>> GMEO3BY8zHeCmgBqs662rSNcn3zby/

Reply via email to