a note on philosophy and rhetoric
June 8th, 2008, search relatedRelated posts :: a note on philosophy and rhetoric :: a note on philosophy and rhetoric :: a note on philosophy and rhetoric :: a note on philosophy and rhetoric, addendum
allen scult wrote:
> Pardon for the unwarranted intrusion. The following occurred in the
> course of my own researches and I thought some on the list might find
> it interesting.
>
> In “Plato’s Sophist,” Heidegger says,
>
> “Thus it happens that this dialogue manifests a peculiar
> intertwining. Precisely on the path of a reflection on the Being of
> beings, Plato attains the correct ground for interpreting the sophist
> in his Being.”
>
> The problem at issue here is how can philosophy obtain, get to, the
> true ground of its being.
the problem as stated begs the question of whether philosophy ‘itself’
has its own ground or whether a philosopher as presented just stands on
the ground of the presenting philosopher. any attempt to see philosophy
as a disguised autobiography would incline to the latter view.
> In order to even approach this task,
> philosophy had to first establish itself as the science of the
> sciences, the “true science,” as far as science goes. This, of
> course, was Husserl’s undertaking, but even if successful, Husserl’s
> way of seeing does not give philosophy a way to look in on itself,
> that is to see ITS own way of seeing as it shows (or claims to show)
> science’s way of seeing. The only way to accomplish that is for
> philosophy to “look at” its own way of showing itself, that is its
> character as a phenomenon. And at the end of the day, we must
> conclude, and thus join Plato in recognizing that philosophy is a
> rhetorical phenomenon. And then/so, the next step is for philosophy
> to understand, or to engage in understanding itself as a way of
> speaking(Precisely Aristotle’s project in the RHETORIC according to
> the Jewish interpretation). The question then becomes, can
> philosophy “hear” (I almost said “see”) itself from inside itself?
–
Philosophy is, after all, done ultimately in the first person for the
first person. — H-N Castaneda
@^@~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~@^@
http://what-am-i.net
@^@~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~@^@
