Date: Sat, 4 Jul 1998 11:31:20 -0400 (EDT)
Subject: Re: Mind & Body, One More Time


On Sat, 4 Jul 1998, Prof. Dr. Rafael Capurro wrote:

> Dear Tom,
> 
> there is nothing special with languages, just the same as trying to
> undertstand (modern) physics without mathematics, you can do it, but only up
> to a certain point, and the you have to relay on the people who understand
> mathematics. Languages belong just to the basic tools of philosophy and
> there are, of course, limits where we have to relay on translations.
> One possible way of deepening the question of power/violence that concerns
> you so much is probably to deepen yourself in H. reading of Nietzsche (Will
> to power, will to will etc.), this is, according to H. (in the
> Spiegel-interview) his response to national-socialism.

I'm aware of that. Nevertheless, I hold that my point about, for example,
Gandhi, is potentially very good, and that, while I assure you, I can
probably make a better case than most people in *favor* of an
"anti-Nazism" in Heidegger that is of profound proportions (perhaps I will
do a little of this for you some time, just to give you an idea),
nevertheless, there is also this critical stance that emerges which I have
to hold is pretty undeniable. 

> A propos, when I sometimes read some American propositions and put instead
> of _american_ and _the American people_, German and _das deutsche Volk_ I am
> a little bit threatened (please remember that I am not German...). What I
> mean is, that there is a kind of American nationalism (trying to _sell_
> American values, way of life etc. ) that is probably not very different from
> other kinds of European (and non-European) nationalisms in this century (and
> in other centuries). But this is another matter...
> kind regards
> rafael
> 

Of course. There is, however, very little that is "American" in my views
here! Now, the American tendency *not* to learn foreign languages is of
not so good. Please do not attribute this to my xenophobia or whatever
senf-centered ignorance or "ugly Americanism" you might (understandably) 
imagine. I don't learn foriegn languages for one reason only: I don't have
the energy for it. I am *poor*, in a more essential definition of poverty
which perhaps the likes of Heidegger can help to illuminate. In point of
fact, one project I have had in mind for a long time is a kind of
phenomenological exploration of language learning that would be on par
with David Sudnow's phenomenological exploration of learning jazz piano,
with a view, perhaps, towards designing better literacy programs in, say,
"third world" contries and inner city settings. Along with this could be a
project that has to do with programmed learning that integrates such
knowledge in certain ways in order to enable language learning. Illiteracy
is probably the single greatest problem in countries and places where
there is much starvation and violence. Again, lack of "energy" hold me
back from this, just one project of many... 

Alas, the language of nonviolence, on the other hand, also should be
studied, and that is part of what I'm talking about. It is, of course, not
necessarily situated geo-politically or linguistically in the "ordinary"
sense. It is founded on a certain kind of essential questioning, the
deconstruction of the *gap* between our questioning and the origins of
those questions, and the denial of so many violences, and a remembrance so
simple it is almost invisible. 

Regards,

Tom B.



     --- from list heidegger-AT-lists.village.virginia.edu ---