As to Heidegger, I wanted to mainly indicate my prejudice against him while
indicating that I haven't read his writing and can't be sure if I'm correct
or incorrect in that prejudice. I do have better inclinations toward
Husserl and Arendt, which I just am reading now in Wikipedia were
Heidegger's professor and mistress respectively! Also, "Being and Time" as
the title of Heidegger's main book may relate agreeably to my own concerns
with objects and processes so to speak.
However, I still have doubts about Heidegger in part because of his
influencees which according to Wikipedia include such diverse individuals as
Foucault, Derrida, and Gadamer. (I also have a bias in favor of Habermas
and Benjamin–and hence against those they find questionable–as underdogs
who I strongly suspect were very much on the right track but not as
successful as other more unscrupulous individuals.)
Going back to the origins of meaning and so on, getting some perspective
away from engrossment with the history of philosophy and any accumulated
errors or misperceptions it might contain, however, I agree with Heidegger
on that issue. That relates to the querelle of the ancient and modern,
antiquity and modernity, old and new, present and historical, etc.
Heidegger
-
Type: discussion
Comments
Also, it makes sense to point out the comparison of "Genius 2000" to
Heidegger's initial main book "Being and Time," genius comparing to being
and 2000 comparing to time. This is not to say however that such comparable
items might not be quite different, his incomparably better than mine, etc.,
etc.
Also, a fun jpeg from the day before yesterday:
http://www.geocities.com/genius-2000/g2kgarlic.jpg
+++
AMEN
Am 28.04.2007 um 19:51 schrieb Max Herman:
As to Heidegger, I wanted to mainly indicate my prejudice against him
while indicating that I haven't read his writing and can't be sure if
I'm correct or incorrect in that prejudice. I do have better
inclinations toward Husserl and Arendt, which I just am reading now in
Wikipedia were Heidegger's professor and mistress respectively! Also,
"Being and Time" as the title of Heidegger's main book may relate
agreeably to my own concerns with objects and processes so to speak.
However, I still have doubts about Heidegger in part because of his
influencees which according to Wikipedia include such diverse
individuals as Foucault, Derrida, and Gadamer. (I also have a bias in
favor of Habermas and Benjamin–and hence against those they find
questionable–as underdogs who I strongly suspect were very much on the
right track but not as successful as other more unscrupulous
individuals.)
Going back to the origins of meaning and so on, getting some
perspective away from engrossment with the history of philosophy and
any accumulated errors or misperceptions it might contain, however, I
agree with Heidegger on that issue. That relates to the querelle of
the ancient and modern, antiquity and modernity, old and new, present
and historical, etc.
+
-> post: [email protected]
-> questions: [email protected]
-> subscribe/unsubscribe: http://rhizome.org/preferences/subscribe.rhiz
-> give: http://rhizome.org/support
+
Subscribers to Rhizome are subject to the terms set out in the
Membership Agreement available online at http://rhizome.org/info/29.php