[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

[Xmca-l] Re: Heidegger's Notebooks Renew Focus on Anti-Semitism - NYTimes.com



Greg,

Your question:

Personally, I've gone back and forth on this quite a bit. I tend to feel
that a tool is a tool and while some tools are better for doing certain
things than others, the tool itself has no destiny in itself. Would anyone
argue differently with Heidegger?

I am curious about the *back and forth* many times aspect of your engaging
with this question.
Could tools have a *destiny* of their own?
Could tools AS medium [prosthetics] BE the message?
 Could this destiny go beyond the *choice* to pick up or put down the
tool/prosthetic *device*
Do we exist *within* or *inside* prosthetic tools or are prosthetic tools
external objects which we can pick up or put down intentionally?

There is a third way Shotter extends this question TO *texts* as a KIND or
TYPE of prosthetic tool.

Shotter's unique answer to this question, in his exploration of agential
realism, is that all three ASPECTS [not parts] within *felt tendency* are
operative in a rapidly fluid stream of awareness/ discernment.
Shotter suggests using prosthetics is not a conscious phenomena, but when
the action breaks down the prosthetic *device* within which we exist can
become conscious and then we become aware of the prosthetic device AS a
tool.

Do we also exist within *texts* and when the texts break down we can become
aware of *texts* as devices and discern the genres within which we exist.
Greg is this destiny??

Heidegger's CONCEPT OF *ready to hand* engaged with these questions.
In exploring Heidegger's *relevance* might the greatest *value* be to
engage with his work hermeneutically AS RESPONSE or ANSWERABILITY.
I understand Gadamer as developing his project IN ANSWER TO Heidegger.

Positioning theory [or at least certain KINDS or TYPES] can also be
understood as answerability or *hearing others into voice* from WITHIN the
emerging conversations constrained by social cultural norms [which are
being transformed within the engagement]




On Mon, Mar 31, 2014 at 7:20 AM, Greg Thompson <greg.a.thompson@gmail.com>wrote:

> Audre Lourde's words seem relevant to the Heidegger debate and particularly
> to the questions that Paul raises:
> "For the master's tools will never dismantle the master's house. They may
> allow us to temporarily beat him at his own game, but they will never
> enable us to bring about genuine change. Racism and homophobia are real
> conditions of all our lives in this place and time. I urge each one of us
> here to reach down into that deep place of knowledge inside herself and
> touch that terror and loathing of any difference that lives here. See whose
> face it wears. Then the personal as the political can begin to illuminate
> all our choices."
> Personally, I've gone back and forth on this quite a bit. I tend to feel
> that a tool is a tool and while some tools are better for doing certain
> things than others, the tool itself has no destiny in itself. Would anyone
> argue differently with Heidegger?
> Are we saying that his whole system was fundamentally antisemitic? and that
> one cannot take up his thinking without being antisemitic?
> And similarly, following Paul, can we take up the ideas of any slave holder
> or slave supporter or otherwise racist individual without taking into us
> their racism?
> Interestingly, for me the antisemitism concern with Heidegger seems to be
> more problematic than the anti-African concern. (and this supports the
> issue that Paul was raising).
>
> -greg
>
>
>
> On Mon, Mar 31, 2014 at 7:54 AM, Martin John Packer <
> mpacker@uniandes.edu.co
> > wrote:
>
> > Yes, the problem runs deeper than Heidegger:
> >
> > <http://press.uchicago.edu/ucp/books/book/chicago/G/bo3645200.html>
> >
> > Martin
> >
> > On Mar 31, 2014, at 4:48 AM, Dr. Paul C. Mocombe <
> pmocombe@mocombeian.com>
> > wrote:
> >
> > > As an african/haitian, I am baffled when contemporary scholars want to
> > ban heidegger from philosophy for his so-called antisemitism.   By their
> > logic, people of African descent should be clamoring for the banishment
> of
> > almost all scholars since descartes who showed any sign of racism in
> their
> > writings.
> > >
> > >
> > > Dr. Paul C. Mocombe
> > > President
> > > The Mocombeian Foundation, Inc.
> > > www.mocombeian.com
> > > www.readingroomcurriculum.com
> > > www.paulcmocombe.info
> > >
> > > <div>-------- Original message --------</div><div>From: David Kellogg <
> > dkellogg60@gmail.com> </div><div>Date:03/30/2014  10:47 PM  (GMT-05:00)
> > </div><div>To: "eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity" <
> xmca-l@mailman.ucsd.edu>
> > </div><div>Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Heidegger's Notebooks Renew Focus on
> > Anti-Semitism -
> > >       NYTimes.com </div><div>
> > > </div>Martin:
> > >
> > > I've only seen short extracts from the "Black Notebooks", but what
> > > I've seen suggests that the real problem is not time but precisely the
> > > problem of "worlding" which was mentioned earlier.
> > >
> > > Jews, according to the "Black Notebooks", are an "unworlded" people,
> > > and because of that they are necessarily parasitic upon peoples who
> > > are deeply and profoundly in the world, i.e. his truly.
> > >
> > >
> >
> http://www.nytimes.com/2014/03/31/books/heideggers-notebooks-renew-focus-on-anti-semitism.html?_r=0
> > >
> > > It's a big world, and there are lots of other things to read. They are
> > > only short extracts, but they are more than enough.
> > >
> > > David Kellogg
> > > Hankuk University of Foreign Studies
> > >
> > > On 31 March 2014 10:02, Martin John Packer <mpacker@uniandes.edu.co>
> > wrote:
> > >> Hi David,
> > >>
> > >> Yes, this always the problem with Heidegger: his appalling politics,
> > both professional and personal.  However, the conceptual problem he was
> > working on was also important to philosophers with very different
> politics.
> > For example, Lucien Goldmann found parallels between Heidegger and Lukacs
> > (ref below). I find it helpful to (try to) understand what Heidegger was
> > trying to do, and also understand how a philosopher of human existence
> was
> > unable to prevent himself from becoming a very unpleasant human being.
> (The
> > problem lies in his treatment of time, in my view.)
> > >>
> > >> Martin
> > >>
> > >> Goldmann, L. (1979). Lukacs and Heidegger: Towards a new philosophy.
> > Routledge and Kegan Paul.
> > >>
> > >>
> > >> On Mar 30, 2014, at 7:10 PM, David Preiss <daviddpreiss@gmail.com>
> > wrote:
> > >>
> > >>> As an aside to the ongoing references to Heidegger... May be of
> > interest or not.
> > >>> DP
> > >>>
> >
> mobile.nytimes.com/2014/03/31/books/heideggers-notebooks-renew-focus-on-anti-semitism.html?referrer=
> > >>>
> > >>> Descarga la aplicación oficial de Twitter aquí
> > >>>
> > >>>
> > >>> Enviado desde mi iPhone
> > >>
> > >>
> > >
> > >
> >
> >
> >
>
>
> --
> Gregory A. Thompson, Ph.D.
> Assistant Professor
> Department of Anthropology
> 883 Spencer W. Kimball Tower
> Brigham Young University
> Provo, UT 84602
> http://byu.academia.edu/GregoryThompson
>
Status: O