Carlo Rovelli on a problem with some philosophers.
In the post-Heideggerian atmosphere that dominates some philosophy departments on the
‘continent’, ignorance of science is something to exhibit with pride. Science is not “authentic”
knowledge; it misses true knowledge. “The botanist's plants are not the flowers of the hedgerow;
the 'source' which the geographer establishes for a river is not the 'springhead in the dale’”
implying in the context that the only thing that counts is the latter.
Central to Confucius’ thinking is the concept of virtue, known as “Ren”. Ren, is a complex idea, very similar to what we call “rahma”, which could be translated as “genuine or transcendental care”. Perhaps the closest approach in terms of Western terminology would what Heidegger called Sorge, which is often translated as ‘authentic care’.
Since the emergence of the Chinese President Xi Jinping, a new governing ideal has also appeared what Jinping refers to as “socialism with Chinese characteristics”. In this new socialism Confucius has been reinstated. Since the West rejected or refused to understand Heidegger’s Sorge it is likely that they will also fail to understand the revolutionary meaning of President Xi Jinping’s “Socialism with Chinese characteristics” but we should not fail to recognize its meaning.
Rachel Coventry reads "Are the sunglasses a metaphor? Some Heideggerian Considerations of the Essence of Sunglasses".
Heidegger claims that in the technological age truth withdraws or things stop ‘thinging.’ Despite this, a good deal of contemporary poetry is preoccupied with things as metaphors, perhaps demonstrating Heidegger’s thesis that in the technological age the possibility of great art is threatened.
As is well known, the radical temporalization of thinking in the 1920s and the rejection of transcendental subjectivity, along with its constitutive analysis, distinguish Heidegger’s phenomenology from Husserl’s. The emphasis on time, born from finite existence itself, is sufficient to throw into doubt the spatially based interpretations of German, as opposed to Jewish, being. Along these lines, I argue, in the spirit of Heidegger, that national existence no longer hinges on rootedness in a given territorial domain but in a tradition, that is to say, the historical temporality of Mitdasein. Departing from and constantly circling back to the temporality of Dasein, we must therefore be more—not less—Heideggerian than Heidegger himself in order to right the philosophical wrongs scattered on the margins of his works.
In the Lahore The News on Sunday, radicalizing Islamdom beginning from the "religious incoherence of Ghazali".
Islamdom has remained within the boundaries of religious dogma and liberal limits for a long time now. Let Islamdom transgress the epistemological boundaries of sacred and profane. Only by crossing over the boundaries of thought, we can explore new vistas of life and dimensions of religion because “a boundary is”, in the words of Martin Heidegger, “not that at something stops, but that from which something begins.” The act of crossing the boundaries will help in opening of new pathways for nomadic thought to emerge. Such a nomadic knowledge is in a better position than fixed ones to deploy hybridity in its epistemological posture. In the intellectual domain, the nomadic scholarship will help in destroying the fixity of ideologies of liberalism and Islamism, determinacy of epistemological structures, authority of scholarship and purity of guardians of liberal and puritan Islam.
The quote's on page 154 of this version of BDT (GA 7/PLT); "that from which something begins its presencing." [presencing = Wesen]. It should be a scandal in Heidegger studies that in 2018 we still don't have an English edition of Vorträge und Aufsätze. Who's going to translate Was heisst Denken? then? Leave it for the Tessier-Ashpool AI labs?
¶ 6:51 AM0 comments
Saturday, July 28, 2018
Thales: ὕδως, "moisture," is that being which is constant, always already
present-at-hand, and lying at the foundation of everything that is and changes.
The first cause is the ὕλη, the "material." Anaximenes: ἀήρ, "breath." Heraclitus:
πῦρ, "fire." Empedocles: γῆ, earth; although he grasps all the previously
mentioned four elements together. Anaximander: his questioning is
further advanced. If beings are conceived to be in constant change, but such
that something unchanging lies at their foundation, then this that is unchanging
must be infinite-in order for the change to be infinite. The ἀπειρία
is the basic principle that lies at the foundation of all beings. In this sense, the
ὁμοιομεγῆ, the "elements whose parts are alike," are limitless; σύγκρισις
and διάκρισις. These theories seem very primitive. But what is decisive is the
principle that is investigated and the progress of the research. In order to find
correctly the genuine cause of beings, the basic determinations of beings
themselves must be disclosed and grasped in advance.