Karl: The sender of this has sent me several copies of this one
message. I am of the view that D Diane and Darlene are the principal
people sending this stuff.
> From: "Karl Carlile" <joseph@xxxxxxxxx>
> To: foucault@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> Date: Wed, 24 Jul 1996 18:05:35 +0000
> Subject: Re: Wittgenstein
> Reply-to: foucault@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> Karl: Explain, if you can, how you suspect Hegel's and Wittgenstein's
> definiton of identity are similar. This way we may be able to probe
> to establish what your views. What is written below is waffle.
>
>
> > Someone posted to this list this week that he was writing about or
> > wrestling with or had some relationship to or interest in W.
> > Unfortunately I neglected to save that message, so I'm just going
> > to send this enquiry to the group although its relationship to Foucault
> > is thin as in non-existent...
> > I'm intersted in knowing what W's "sceptical paradox" is.
> > I'm reading Zizek about Lacan, but he is discussing Hegel's deduction of
> > monarchy from his philosophy of right (as he describes it). He says
> >
> > "This coincidence of pure Culture (the empty signifier)
> > with the left over of Nature in the person of the king entails the paradox
> > of the king's relationship toward's law...In this sense, monarch functions
> > as a personification of Wittgenstein's 'sceptical paradox...'"
> >
> > Later Zizek talks about the "Wittgensteinian definition of identity,"
> > and I'd like to know more about that, also. I suspect that it is
> > quite similar to Hegel's just by the way Zizek writes about it.
> >
> > Like Tina Chanter writing on Irigaray, Zizek spends more time
> > discussing Hegel's ideas than he does the ostensible subject of the book...
> >
> > Thanks to the rest of you for your tolerance (Hegel says it is already
> > decided that you will grant even before I asked. Or was that God who
> > said that: I get confused.)
> >
> > Darlene Sybert
> > *****************************************************************************
> > ...feelings too
> > Of unremembered pleasure: such, perhaps
> > As have no slight or trivial influence
> > On that best portion of a good man's life,
> > His little, nameless, unremembered acts
> > Of kindness and of love... -Wm Wordsworth
> > "LINES Composed A Few Miles Above Tinturn Abbey,
> > On Revisiting the Banks of the Wye [River]
> > During a Tour, July 11, 1798"
> > ******************************************************************************
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
>
>
> Yours etc.,
> Karl
>
>
>
Yours etc.,
Karl
message. I am of the view that D Diane and Darlene are the principal
people sending this stuff.
> From: "Karl Carlile" <joseph@xxxxxxxxx>
> To: foucault@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> Date: Wed, 24 Jul 1996 18:05:35 +0000
> Subject: Re: Wittgenstein
> Reply-to: foucault@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> Karl: Explain, if you can, how you suspect Hegel's and Wittgenstein's
> definiton of identity are similar. This way we may be able to probe
> to establish what your views. What is written below is waffle.
>
>
> > Someone posted to this list this week that he was writing about or
> > wrestling with or had some relationship to or interest in W.
> > Unfortunately I neglected to save that message, so I'm just going
> > to send this enquiry to the group although its relationship to Foucault
> > is thin as in non-existent...
> > I'm intersted in knowing what W's "sceptical paradox" is.
> > I'm reading Zizek about Lacan, but he is discussing Hegel's deduction of
> > monarchy from his philosophy of right (as he describes it). He says
> >
> > "This coincidence of pure Culture (the empty signifier)
> > with the left over of Nature in the person of the king entails the paradox
> > of the king's relationship toward's law...In this sense, monarch functions
> > as a personification of Wittgenstein's 'sceptical paradox...'"
> >
> > Later Zizek talks about the "Wittgensteinian definition of identity,"
> > and I'd like to know more about that, also. I suspect that it is
> > quite similar to Hegel's just by the way Zizek writes about it.
> >
> > Like Tina Chanter writing on Irigaray, Zizek spends more time
> > discussing Hegel's ideas than he does the ostensible subject of the book...
> >
> > Thanks to the rest of you for your tolerance (Hegel says it is already
> > decided that you will grant even before I asked. Or was that God who
> > said that: I get confused.)
> >
> > Darlene Sybert
> > *****************************************************************************
> > ...feelings too
> > Of unremembered pleasure: such, perhaps
> > As have no slight or trivial influence
> > On that best portion of a good man's life,
> > His little, nameless, unremembered acts
> > Of kindness and of love... -Wm Wordsworth
> > "LINES Composed A Few Miles Above Tinturn Abbey,
> > On Revisiting the Banks of the Wye [River]
> > During a Tour, July 11, 1798"
> > ******************************************************************************
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
>
>
> Yours etc.,
> Karl
>
>
>
Yours etc.,
Karl