-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1
Wow the idea that my posting "provides hope" sounds rather nice. I
totally agree with you on the subject of intellectual warfare. As I
re-read Nietzsche, I am astonished at how BEAUTIFUL his work is. Thus
Spake Zarathustra is absolutely wonderful. Of course, Nietzsche shot
a lot of arrows at a lot of other philosophers, but his work is so
affirming--so beautiful. His ideas bring me hope (something which
many don't understand, but I imagine you will).
Our conversations on Nussbaum and Cheney are so telling. Now it's a
matter of, "You're a relativist." "You're a modernist!" "You're a
Marxist!" Stephen Feldman wrote an article in the Michigan Law Review
that was highly critical of the Deconstructionist Jack Balkin,
accusing him of adhering to modernist notions of subjectivty. He then
proceeded to make a vague reference to the virtues of postmodern
interpretivism (without even describing the "post-modern" view of
subjectivity).
Feldman's tactics exemplify the tactics Virilio studies. Feldman is
highly critical. He is unwilling to reveal the affirmative substance
of postmodern interpretivism. He attacks, and then the article is
over. His article boils down to, "Balkin's a modernist and Gadamer is
afraid," and then he flees into silence. It's like Virilio's
aesthetic of disappearance.
I wish people with ideas would truly write about them...not merely
attack anything that does not adhere to them. That's one thing that
really distinguishes Foucault, Irigay, Butler, Kristeva, Deleuze,
Guattari, Virilio, and Nietzsche. They write. Who's writing now?
Nathan
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: PGPfreeware 6.5.8 for non-commercial use <http://www.pgp.com>
iQA/AwUBOdGGJWPiNpsHufNqEQJMhwCgyLbGtXa/Lv+DHNjp6ddxAatTpjIAn31l
g8GX2S3el/+hDfNXcojAwp2a
=I6uG
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
Hash: SHA1
Wow the idea that my posting "provides hope" sounds rather nice. I
totally agree with you on the subject of intellectual warfare. As I
re-read Nietzsche, I am astonished at how BEAUTIFUL his work is. Thus
Spake Zarathustra is absolutely wonderful. Of course, Nietzsche shot
a lot of arrows at a lot of other philosophers, but his work is so
affirming--so beautiful. His ideas bring me hope (something which
many don't understand, but I imagine you will).
Our conversations on Nussbaum and Cheney are so telling. Now it's a
matter of, "You're a relativist." "You're a modernist!" "You're a
Marxist!" Stephen Feldman wrote an article in the Michigan Law Review
that was highly critical of the Deconstructionist Jack Balkin,
accusing him of adhering to modernist notions of subjectivty. He then
proceeded to make a vague reference to the virtues of postmodern
interpretivism (without even describing the "post-modern" view of
subjectivity).
Feldman's tactics exemplify the tactics Virilio studies. Feldman is
highly critical. He is unwilling to reveal the affirmative substance
of postmodern interpretivism. He attacks, and then the article is
over. His article boils down to, "Balkin's a modernist and Gadamer is
afraid," and then he flees into silence. It's like Virilio's
aesthetic of disappearance.
I wish people with ideas would truly write about them...not merely
attack anything that does not adhere to them. That's one thing that
really distinguishes Foucault, Irigay, Butler, Kristeva, Deleuze,
Guattari, Virilio, and Nietzsche. They write. Who's writing now?
Nathan
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: PGPfreeware 6.5.8 for non-commercial use <http://www.pgp.com>
iQA/AwUBOdGGJWPiNpsHufNqEQJMhwCgyLbGtXa/Lv+DHNjp6ddxAatTpjIAn31l
g8GX2S3el/+hDfNXcojAwp2a
=I6uG
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----