Again, Folks! I pronounce MY ontologic mantra (integrating the
O/o Oh! so well, methinks! I've shared it twice before this list,
remember whom you heard it from first!):
*I laugh; therefore YOU are* (after
Merleau-Ponty/Levinas)
This, the first Theorem following the Axiology of
hermeneutics; its n-tupled Corollaries are found by substituting
any other apperceptive, mulitlogued activity you might come up
with: *think*, *read*, *write*, und so weider...
Those dualists, after deCartes, are So persuasive, yet always off
the mark entirely.
*I think; therefore I am* Indeed!
And in one proposition, one analytic utterance of first-order,
non-recursive logisitics and the whole Morals and Ontology are
collapsed into Epistemology and the *world-as-we-know-it* is
wiped out in one fell swoon, away w/*mitsein*, to Hell
w/Alteriety! Objectify The Other! Kill her.
.. ;-} rap.
michaelP wrote:
> Jud the meat:
>
>
> > Meat questions because it is a questioning meat,
> and not a non-questioning
> > meat.
>
>
> why? why questions if just meat? what purpose, meatwise, purely
> meatwise, does questioning serve for meat-qua-meat? If
> questioning serves meat to be and maintain and further meat in
> its meatiness (because that is all meat is) then why not
> question whether meat is really just meat? Can such a purpose
> then subvert itself? If so, how can it do so if meatiness is
> all there is: how can it not continue and strengthen its
> meatiness... furthermore why should it even try to further its
> genuine meatiness if meatiness is all there is? Why does meat
> need to 'communicate' at all, especially in the age-old fashion
> of philosophic meat? I 'mean' again, if meat is meat and
> nothing besides, why does it not just get on with its 'nature'
> as meat and thereby not even be capable (or needing or heeding)
> of questioning (like plants, like my cats, like pebbles on
> Sandwich Bay, like my yummy iMac)? In yet other words, what is
> missing in this pure meatiness that such an example of
> meat-just-meat needs to proximally and for the most part
> question (and, it does, incessantly) not just other meat and
> non-meat but itself-qua-meat? Questioning at all (which the
> plants, the cats, the pebbles, the iMac, just do not engage in
> -- they just be without question) strongly suggests the absence
> of pure meatiness (of which cats and dinosaurs and bacteria are
> surely good examples)? I.e., questioning in meat poses a
> serious question of its pure and total meatiness: pure meat has
> no reason to question, has no reason whatsoever... Questioning
> presupposes something other than stimulus-response,
> cause-effect and all the other meaty mechanisms pure meat
> engages for pure meat. Once again, if I (as an example of
> nothing but meat) am to discard all not-meaty mechanisms or
> non-meaty non-mechanisms, why should I-as-meat listen to
> anything that seeks to persuade or convince or reason me into
> taking on board the aforementioned meaty mechanisms as the
> mechanisms that I already encompass, already exemplify, already
> incorporate? Or, putting it yet another way, why should Judmeat
> (need to?) preach the way of pure meat, unless there is
> something about such meat that is less than pure: sounds like
> the age-old preaching of all religious and political zealots to
> this here meat that all meat needs to purify itself, needs to
> lose false-consciousness, needs to understand its
> inauthenticity, its bad faith, its sinful nature, etc... ?
>
> Or, again, in another mode, why does Jud's old-fashioned
> version of hard-man materialism need to be at all persuasive if
> the theory is correct? Matter (dirt) just materialises (does
> dirt things) and has no reason to be otherwise or not be
> otherwise. If it is not utterly persuasive in itself (and it's
> not, evidently!) then perhaps this spells its weakness, huh? I
> think, and just because I think, the meat theory has long since
> gone off (how can meat even begin to think this of itself if
> meat is all there is).
>
> BlackPudding wishes
>
> mP
--
"Dein Wachstum sei feste und lache vor Lust!
Deines Herzens Trefflichkeit
Hat dir selbst das Feld bereit',
Auf dem du bluehen musst." JS Bach: Bauern Kantata
Richard A. Parkany: SUNY@Albany
Prometheus Educational Services
http://www.borg.com/~rparkany/
Upper Hudson & Mohawk Valleys; New York State, USA
--- from list heidegger@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx ---
