Heidegger

_GEVANS613 at aol.com_ (mailto:GEVANS613@aol.com) writes:

Jud On a mountaintop in the Desert of Sinai wrote:

The only guy in history who was able to get away with the use of the
orphanic *AM* [the theological equivalent of Descartes’ (I *X* therefore I am…) was
the guy hiding in the burning bush, presumably because the predicational
compendium or Godly ‘Gesamtsumme,’ or total sum of God’s existential modalities,
aka, *what comes after *AM* (in the sense of *AM… WHAT?) was already
imperfectly internalised or interiorised by a large majority of the children of
Israel, thanks to the efforts of Moses and the rabbinical tradition that preceded
him.

San Bernardo of Brooklyn writes:
Then, Jud, they may have been kissing cousins with Parmenides. Indeed, what
comes after *AM* is Because I Am. Only after stating ontological presence
may WHAT proceed.

Jud:
Because I Am… What? Is a response to a What? or Why? question. Then Moses
said to God, “Indeed, when I come to the children of Israel and say to them,
‘The God of your fathers has sent me to you,’ and they say to me, ‘What is
His name?’ what shall I say to them?” And God said to Moses, “I Am Who I Am .”
And He said, “Thus you shall say to the children of Israel, ‘I Am has sent
me to you

Moses asks God: *Who shall I say sent me?* The answer to such a who question
is not: *Because I am anyrthing* The answer is *My mane is Fred, or 007, or
God, or Jehovah, or Y — W — H, or — Get lost - that my business!

San Bernardo of Brooklyn {ringing the angelus with one hand and typing with
the other)
But be it know to you onticologists of whatness that I am (because) I am is
the one and only tautology permitted in a viable logic.

Jud (The Jewish Goy)
That is what makes logic such a load of old crap -it hides behind
un-get-atable X-es and religiously inspired gobble-de-gook aping God on Mount Horeb
denying/hiding his own nominatum like a leprous ankle, whilst playing hide and
seek in a burning bush..

San Bernardo of Brooklyn
What you are confounding in your *what-is-all* view is actuality with
reality, the latter of which has to do with ontology (qua Being).

Jud:
Wrong Father, The mereological processes of the Gesamtsumme don’t exist -
only that which is totalised exists
The moving lift glides from floor to floor, but its movement does not exist..
As the tent-maker’s son said - The moving finger having writ moves on…
He did not say *it’s movement * moves on. Only the processed cheese exists -
not the *process.*

San Bernadino: And if Descartes substitutes “think” for I AM then, like
yourself, he has discarded “I Feel,” and “I Sense” or subsumed them under the
supposedly supreme aegis of “I think” I Am and all else to the crapper. But, I
suppose, half a man is better than none.

Jud: You CANNOT substitute *I think* for *I am,* for *to be* is not an
action - tranniedom says it is a state. God was wrong, *to be is ontologically
impossible - one can only
*become* [without change it is curtains for any object in the cosmos.

The Mangelwurzel Muncher from Messkirch, being a creature of Der schwarze
uniformiert Sturm strömt von Gott - the bonfire ignitors in chief - the
Jesuits, copied God, hence the Music Hall name of his Bumper Burlesque Book: *Being
and Time.* Gott geht mit Ihnen mein Sohn. Gerade zu wissen daß Sie in der
Welt existieren, genügt für mich. Dort gehen Sie! Das Tragen der Fackel von
Mißverständnis die dunklen zurückwerfend Cañons der Brooklyn Straßen entlang.
Seien Sie stark! Setzen Sie das Lächeln fort! Setzen Sie das Malen fort! Setzen
Sie das Schreiben fort!

Regards,

Jud
Personal Website: http://evans-experientialism.freewebspac…

“In nuclear war all men are cremated equal.”
Dexter Gordon

Posted on Tuesday, September 4th, 2007 at 6:40 pm
comment | rss 2.0 | trackback