What wonders could these contain

Look at the original of what most people believe today

Rigorous examination?

This is what they want to do more than know the truth

Only a “Grinch” would want to take that away.

False

Basically from 1920-1924 H was lecturing on Aristotle, and it’s AFTER that we get to the Sophist, which is probably why it’s so confusing to me. For some reason I always thought he would be boring about Aristotle. I’m a different person now. If you expect that to be boring you’re probably just a dumb kid. He also has a couple other courses on Aristotle in the 30s. There are more secondary texts on H&A than most other combos.

What can be discovered about these courses from an off-the-reservation perspective, that’s my burning question going in. Because as brilliant as many academics are they will steer clear of anything with the slightest hint of “there be dragons”. Maybe that is what makes them brilliant, I just can’t personally understand their “anxiety”. That aside, I’m just expecting my understanding of Aristotle to be shown to be wrong pretty soon here. Ahh I love to get fired so I can study this stuff right before I’m living in a cardboard box- “life in the fast-lane” as they call it. I miss the old days when I used to post a clown emoji with a gun emoji up to its head next to it. Oh THOSE dragons, my mistake. Is it too late for me to take it all back, Moshe?

cough cough

I wish there was an institution for the chaos of possible new horizons in our culture, oh well. That’s a Gordian Knot I’ve been slashing at, to no avail. It’s because you’d need such an institution to even propose such an institution- it’s a closed system. Alfarabi understood this better than anyone. Our civilization is approximately in Phase 2. Someone finally uploaded the best book ON Alfarabi to z-library by the way.

Back to the subject in question though

H takes philosophy as “first science” that any discipline can use. One can be the Aristotle of botany, one can be the Aristotle of the travel industry, one can be the Aristotle of sociology, one can be the Aristotle of journalism, etc.

The Aristotle of non-philosophy- that’s another game we can play.

What’s implicit is that H himself has to be the Aristotle of philosophy itself in order to help the other disciplines in this way.

This is making me want to get fluent in Greek

In growing into a language, I grow into an intelligibility of the world

“Why, so you can be even more hated here?” Pretty much.

What I do know is that a balance needs to be struck between the concern for status and the concern for wisdom, and that the former is lacking compared to the latter today. In other words, if you’re a child who has the opportunity to learn Greek and Hebrew, say, the chances are your parents are status-obsessed enough for you to find yourself in such a place. And if you’re TOO status-obsessed then you won’t even care to have a kid learn that because it’s not “fashionable”. What’s probably fashionable today is having a kid learn Swahili and gender deconstructionism, and I’m not sure how much wisdom is there, relatively speaking.

Just to zoom-out for a second I have to note that Nietzsche is a better example of “being the Aristotle of philosophy” than Heidegger in my opinion. I think there’s a reason H conspicuously skips Schopenhauer. He’s definitely on the Hegel-side of being an institutional thinker. That has its ups and downs, just take it how you want, I think Nietzsche is closer to Aristotle in terms of originality. Some natures are cozier in bureaucracy. I think part of them likes to be an object and to be constrained. Not like I’m accusing H of being in a collar on a leash. Maybe it’s about gnosticism. N hated the Germans a lot more than H did. H was firmly proud to be part of their tradition. Reminds me of people today who speak English about Jewish-French concepts- I can’t tolerate any of that “proud tradition”. The saving grace about both N and H though is that they wanted people to have these skeptical thoughts about them. So if you study them enough you will be standing on the shoulders of giants as the cliche goes. And that means not just dismissing them through english-jewish-french ignorance, mind you.

In other words I do think H in general in his texts achieves his goal I quoted above about imbuing others with the spirit of Aristotle. It’s not any doctrine of N or H, it’s their ability to create autonomous subjects. That’s what the establishment hates. Heebs and Frenchies, and Anglos aren’t so good at that. They all have their respective talents, this is the Germans’.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: