Bryan:
You should not apologize for engaging others in thought. It is the best way
to learn. If people are having problems with their mail they can use filters
or go to the daily digest.
I was not accusing you of suppressing the issue of homosexuality. Far from
it.
By the way. Is being "moral" necessarily a good thing? That is Nietzsche?s
poignant question. Of course you need a standard to evaluate "morality"
(Nietzsche used "health"). The standard does not have to be transcendental,
and genealogy is a tool for backing away from the moral commitments you wish
to critique. You may arrive at a state of doubt about moralities without, of
course, being able to eliminate them.
For one attempt to develop a Foucaldian/Nietszschean approach to the moral
critique of moralities, I recommend William Connolly, "The Ethos of
Pluralization." For another critique of unified, totalizing moral
perspectives that is clearly normative see John Gray's little book on Isaiah
Berlin.
Bryan C wrote:
> i have been talking w/ nathan and i guess ive been flooding people's
> emails w/ useless crap. sorry. i was really trying to learn something
> but i guess i pissed alot of people off. i'll stop posting at least for
> a few months until i figure out what im talking about. i got a false
> impression of nathan on the pedaphile stuff so i owe him an apollogy.
> sorry to the people i pissed off, i wont do it when/if i come back.
> _________________________________________________________________
> Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com
You should not apologize for engaging others in thought. It is the best way
to learn. If people are having problems with their mail they can use filters
or go to the daily digest.
I was not accusing you of suppressing the issue of homosexuality. Far from
it.
By the way. Is being "moral" necessarily a good thing? That is Nietzsche?s
poignant question. Of course you need a standard to evaluate "morality"
(Nietzsche used "health"). The standard does not have to be transcendental,
and genealogy is a tool for backing away from the moral commitments you wish
to critique. You may arrive at a state of doubt about moralities without, of
course, being able to eliminate them.
For one attempt to develop a Foucaldian/Nietszschean approach to the moral
critique of moralities, I recommend William Connolly, "The Ethos of
Pluralization." For another critique of unified, totalizing moral
perspectives that is clearly normative see John Gray's little book on Isaiah
Berlin.
Bryan C wrote:
> i have been talking w/ nathan and i guess ive been flooding people's
> emails w/ useless crap. sorry. i was really trying to learn something
> but i guess i pissed alot of people off. i'll stop posting at least for
> a few months until i figure out what im talking about. i got a false
> impression of nathan on the pedaphile stuff so i owe him an apollogy.
> sorry to the people i pissed off, i wont do it when/if i come back.
> _________________________________________________________________
> Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com