Heidegger

In a message dated 9/28/2006 4:37:34 PM Eastern Daylight Time,
GEVANS613 at aol.com writes:
In a message dated 28/09/2006 Bernx at aol.com writes:

JUD [earlier]
Homocentric attribution of guilt does not make ontological sense when we
address insensate objects like a rusty nail.
BERNARD:
Then, Jud, how is it possible to say: “….deterministically causes THE
TRAUMA - [the nail or the cancer] and *that which deterministically UNDERGOES the
tissue change known as *trauma.* [the big toe or the liver tissue.].” I can
understand the deterministic possibility of cancer but of a nail??? That reminds
me of the onto-folkish days when a weapon was punished for inflicting a wound
rather than the wielder of the weapon.

Jud:
It might be best to allow one of your more famous countrymen to answer your
question for I believe that the original poem was written by
the great American Benjamin Franklin.

*”For the want of a nail, the shoe was lost;
for the want of a shoe the horse was lost;
and for the want of a horse the rider was lost,
being overtaken and slain by the enemy,
all for the want of care about a horseshoe nail.”
— Benjamin Franklin

The following version is the one most British kids learn at school [well
USED TO DO when I went to school.]

For the want of a nail, a shoe was lost.
For the want of a shoe, the horse was lost.
For the want of a horse, the rider was lost.
For the want of a rider, the battle was lost.
For the want of a battle, the kingdom was lost.

The story describes how all events are caused by a concatenational sequence
of prior happenstance.
A seemingly inconsequential detail [such as a nail carelessly dropped onto
the floor ) can lead to an *accident* such as a penetration of a big toe, which
might mean a day off work, and a subsequent escape from death, if one (for
example) worked in one of the twin Towers.

BTW The ontofolk hung a pig in a British village once for causing an accident
which led to a person’s life - such are the ontofolk.

regards,

Jud Evans.
Personal Website: http://evans-experientialism.freewebspac…
Jud: Rather than that absconding nail, Franklin made out much better with his
metal key at the end of his kite string: that is, when he was not at French
court fopping and philandering about and negotiating with the French to outfit
John Paul Jones with a fleet to pillage English seaside villages. John Paul
was in effect a French paid Yankee pirate whose inside man was Ben and who for
want of his (and your) deterministic nail spent more time stumphing royal
French ladies and having the English seaside put to terror.
Sincerely,
Bernard (more dandy than Yankee doodle)

Posted on Friday, September 29th, 2006 at 6:50 pm
comment | rss 2.0 | trackback