6 maart 2010


Some philosophical bits


Heidegger was undoubtedly a genius. You can tell he was a genius because his philosophy is so hard to grasp...
   -- quoted in Arts & Letters Daily

I still don't have much energy and this time I will restrict myself to some remarks about philosophical and related subjects - with this note to those who read my Studies in MEdical sadism, that may well include professors Wessely and Van der Meer (*): I certainly have not done yet with my subject (that is fit for a Ph.D. in either medicine, psychology, psychiatry, philosophy or psychology), but I do not want to write long consecutive series on the same subject in Nederlog.

So today I deal with a few philosophical subjects.... or so I believed and indeed did, but then again I had not reckoned with my computer, that first let me wait more and longer than it allowed me to type, and then blew the piece that was here and nearly finished to bit heaven.

Not having the health nor the patience to write it again, I only link in my sources to my list of subjects of today:

Heidegger: (from the Times Higher Education: "Heidegger: The Introduction of Nazism into Philosophy" - bookreview)

The pope: (from Science, Reason and Critical Thinking: "The TWAT in the HAT" - illustrated poem)

Communist brains: (from Neuroskeptic's Blog: "Is your brain a communist?")

Sokal: (from The Philosophers' Magazine: "My Philosophy: Alan Sokal" - interview)

Baader-Meinhof: (from The Nation: "Heroic Impatience" - expository article)

There also was a piece on postmodernism and the confusion of respect and politeness, and the postmodernistic totalitarian mindset, but today you must do without my writings for today, since they disappeared, and must make do with my sources.

The first three are, each in their own way, quite funny.

P.S. Two earlier Dutch pieces by me on Heidegger are here: Heidegger aan diggelen and Arendt en Heidegger, and of course my opening quotation is ironical.

And it is a pity that the pieces I wrote - as usual, the computer collapses when I was almost done: Murphy's Law - have disappeared, for they were clear, amusing and instructive. The links I do provide are also interesting in themselves.

(*) At least professor Wessely is supposedly known to check the internet himself for interesting bits about himself, and both he and Van der Meer seem quite vain to me. (But that is as may be: My problem with them is not that they are vain, but that they knowingly lie and deceive, and have caused much harm to and many suicides by genuinely ill people who on the strength of their lies and deceptions got no help while being ill.)

Maarten Maartensz

        home - index - top - mail