Well Mike, you're very kind to try to make us reflect on the nuances in
Stephan Pickering's comments, but I think you're making an inversion
when you state that
>. . . what we cannot in good faith do at this point, though, is continue to argue the validity of the pickering position itself on philosophical grounds, since
>the heart of his claim is that there are areas where philosophy no longer
>has dominion
>
When you mean that the holocaust is an area where philosophy has no
longer dominion, I understand your point (although I do not fully
agree), but this is an other discussion, and it is not what Pickering
was claiming. Read again his words:
>Is Heidegger worth studying now, in the contexts of cinematic studies? No. In
>the context of 20th century philosophy? No. His ideas should be elucidated,
>and discussed within the context the man was a vituperative Jew hater (...)
>
There's no Chinese in this. He is claiming that no one has the right to
study or use Heidegger's philosophy than in the context of his being a
jew hater. Apparenty based on his 50 years of (bio & paleo) ontology and
his wanting to become a rabbi, he thinks to have a morally superior
authority to impose a censorship on the other list members when it comes
to studying Heidegger. I'm arguing the validity of this claim.
I'm not arguing that Pickering thinks Heidegger was an intellectual
fraud - he is entitled to have his personal opinion on that. But I am
arguing the validity of Pickering's claims on philosophical grounds -
more precisely, on ethical grounds. I'm claiming to have the freedom to
read, study and use Heidegger's philosophy the way I want to. I am not
defending Heidegger, I am defending my 'freedom of philosophy'.
If Pickering's claims are caused by a personal trauma (on which I don't
want to speculate), than this might be an explanation of all this, but
it does not justify nor validate his claims.
Furthermore, I think that Stephan Pickering could (and should) have the
decency to apologize to David Barison, who simply announced the
screening of the film The Ister, for accusing him of antisemitic slander
(from which it becomes clear that Pickering has not seen the film, nor
read information about it, since the film explicitly deals with the
context of which he thinks it is the only one in which Heidegger's
philosophy should be discussed).
But more or less on the topic Mike pointed at, it might be interesting
to read Paul Ricoeur's /La mémoire, l'histoire, l'oublie/. Ricoeur is
not only a holocaust survivor, he is also studying Heidegger (especially
in the context of hermeneutics).
And just for info (again), the film's website: http://www.theister.com/
Best regards,
Kees
*
*
*
*
***
Film-Philosophy Email Discussion Salon.
After hitting 'reply' please always delete the text of the message you are replying to.
To leave, send the message: leave film-philosopy to: [log in to unmask]
For help email: [log in to unmask], not the salon.
***
|