Re: sloterdijk

At 23:24 9-5-00 -0400, Bob Scheetz wrote:
>Rene,
>     Yes.
>The relentless Genome Project, the last gestell.
>...surely it does fill us with dread, no?
>So, "fascist" is preposterous; but how otherwise
>view this sloterdijk strategy than collaborationist?
>In heid anyway there's implicit an ethic of resistence.

Bob,

Both resist to brutality, not to technique. 
Heidegger said on tv: I'm not against technique. 
"Ich bin nicht gegen die Technik." 
Resistance, but from within.

>And, are you actually saying habermas is corrupt?
>...no philosophical integrity?

He excludes those who prefer to utter their own thoughts
in their own tongue, from the dialogue, that, according to 
himself, constitutes society, even if, or maybe because, 
it's the most intelligent and humourful talk. 
So one should conform to Habermas' selective rationality? 
Maybe Kenneth is right, and it's only will to power.

Many thought it was the age of Habermas and Grass, while
there was Heidegger and Juenger. That rhymes as well.

Besides -but this is only a personal "vision"- he has the same looks as
Honegger.
And you know what *he* did to those who wanted over his wall.

It seems, further, that he denied, when accused by Sloterdijk
in an open letter, that he had instructed the journalists and former pupils 
Asshauer and Mohr, to start the hunt for the fascist. But then his letter to 
Asshauer, who also wants into the guild of philosophers, popped up, with
detailed instructions. 
Yes, division of labour.
Since then Habermas silents. And Sloterdijk is doing the dialogue all of
his own. 

And I understand him, analogue to Heidegger, saying that, at the bottom,
there 
is a need, hard to lay a finger upon, to come into a relation to the
"Wesen" (verb) of technique. 
 
But Sloterdijk is another kind of gnome, talking very relaxed, associatively. 
"The globalization of the genes".
He quotes Nietzsche, observing the people in their houses, that they 
grow tinier and tinier, and wish only one thing: not to be hurt.
The incredibly shrinking man. Juenger once wrote a suspicion down, that man
could very well 
get lost on a side-trail of evolution, and become a kind of insect, a
strong lifeforce.
That goes beyond the cloning as concrete skill, which seems of no
importance sofar.   
But Sloterdijk said also: Fatalism is treason. 


And, to end, Habermas belongs to that Europe, that, constantly repeating: 
"never again" kept their eyes closed vis-a-vis the "real-existing" selection
in their backyard and then acclaimed to American action. (re: mains sales)  
One gets macabre thoughts. Thatcher's colonial war comes to mind.

>...not, surely, a celebrity whore...like all the derrida spawn?
>...or,  worst of all, another holocaust industry tartuffe?

No, not that.

>and, rene, can't tell you how tonic is this for one's
>provincial inferiority having such a pipeline.

Same pleasure here, hope the nose has some epiderma.

rene 








     --- from list heidegger@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx ---