Heidegger

—– Original Message —–
From: “Bookwright”

>>>>>> I could point out that you lace all your “power” analyses with
>>>>>> morally loaded terms (”murder your neighbor’s children,” “murder,
>>>>>> rape and dispossession”),
>>>>>
>>>>> Interesting choice of words. Are murder, rape and dispossession not
>>>>> legal terms?
>>>>
>>>> “Slaughter”?
>>> The killing of large numbers of people in a cruel and violent way.
>>
>> So hurricanes and tidal waves “slaughter”?
>
> The dictionary definition not mine. Personally, I think ‘cruel’ is a
> little too anthropomorphic a description for the behaviour of a hurricane
> or a tidal wave,

Precisely - hence the (obvious) moral connotations beyond the merely
technical.

> although violent might fit.
>
>>> If you haven’t seen any slaughter recently then I am surprised.
>>
>> If you don’t see that you’re insulting our intelligence, I’m not
>> surprised.
>
> Anthony, I have no wish to insult your intelligence of which I have a
> very keen appreciation, but I feel that you put it to unworthy uses.

Malcolm’s proposed analysis of power relations is nothing but a facade for
hurling ideologically one-sided moral judgments. So when this is pointed
out, the attempt to conceal this through the pretense of neutral legalese
only doubles the offensiveness.

That is not only obvious, but worthy of being pointed out. Repeatedly.

Posted on Sunday, June 4th, 2006 at 1:30 am
comment | rss 2.0 | trackback