why it appeals to me to write in a mode that might appear frivolous or ignorant, for Pete
December 6th, 2006, search relatedRelated posts :: why it appeals to me to write in a mode thatmight appear frivolous or ignorant, for Pete :: Early Greek Thinking :: why it appeals to me to write in a mode thatmight appear frivo :: why it appeals to me to write in a modethatmightappear fr…
on 12/6/06 11:49 AM, That Pete at that_pete at yahoo.com wrote:
> — Philip Baker wrote:
>> — ME scribed
>>> A raft from a shipwreck is drifting without anchor and
>>> without direction on the high seas. To have sense is to
>>> take a direction.
>>
>> I’ve always thought that the raft of the Medusa is a great metaphor for
>> human life in general.
>
> The Medusa itself may be drifting, but the shipwrecked have spotted a
> ship on the horizon.
>
> “[A]s long as they only drift in the wind of a decision that comes
> from afar, thinking in the crossing dare not eschew the dearth of
> preparatory differentiations and elucidations. Only the chill of the
> boldness of thinking and the night of errancy of questioning lend
> glow and light to the fire of beyng.”
>
> CtP, S 259 {paraphrasing, the (not here) translated}
>
>
>
>
> ______________________________________________________________________________
> ______
> Do you Yahoo!?
> Everyone is raving about the all-new Yahoo! Mail beta.
> http://new.mail.yahoo.com
> _______________________________________________
> heidegger mailing list
> heidegger at soca.ecu.edu.au
> http://www.soca.ecu.edu.au/mailman/listi…
> http://heidegger.an-archos.com/
yes,yes,yes, pretty cool. To cool for school. In my original post the word
“drifter” juxtaposed against the superstructure of this Heidegger/
Phenomenology list (was meant to be) is an obvious ’signpost/representum’ -
an open invitation for writing a meta-discourse whose ‘meaning’ would be
like the wave topography for an endless sea. So the raft metaphor fits all
too nicely. All a I ask from anyone who reads my posts is that they don’t
dismiss them out of hand, simply because I’m using a literary device to
introduce what is basically an open invitation to comment. Believe me I’ve
got no wheel-barrow to push, no ordered agenda, so I’m just asking for a bit
of tolerance (re: moving away from the conventions of philosophical
writing). Basically, if at first glance one of my posts seems frivolous or
without fore-thought, then sometimes your missing out on the
meaning/understanding of what’s been said. Mediocrity is the locus of the
post-modern (I know this word has fallen into disrepute but I mean it just
in situating a certain philosophical epoch). That’s why it appeals to me to
write in a mode that might appear frivolous or ignorant. But sometimes my
posts are actually just ignorant or frivolous- that’s what makes it
interesting.
regards peter k
