Lets assume we all like apples. We have apple tree with some fruits which are not ripe yet, ripe just right and already rotten. We have three choices: picking all kinds, no kind or only the best with the most goodness for the body. What is the best practical decision to make ? Picking and choosing. Boris Shoshensky To: [email protected] Subject: RE: Heidegger and thingness Date: Tue, 21 Apr 2009 13:12:53 GMT
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) ____________________________________________________________ ____________________________________________________________ Click here to find the perfect picture with our powerful photo search features. http://thirdpartyoffers.netzero.net/TGL2241/fc/BLSrjpYR2bn8HYzF4jDIQ2iilmvVZw tQQXC4FOKb9pXQV5FqX33Nz58Kxbi/
