Saturday, February 13, 2021
I have 18 non-political topics I want to discuss intently (i.e., not casually) soon—over the next month or so—but I need a few more days before beginning here. Those 18 will form a constellational set that is to be the first and longest part of nine (seven shorter ones and another long one). I hope to begin putting new items online next week. | March 3: The first of the 18 is available, “personhood…,” and the other 17 are consolidated for detailing and sharing; but I’m unsure when I’ll give time to those (and the other eight) because I want to wander back into more-creative writing.
Feb. 3 | A genuine sense of nationalism derives from the living notion of nationality, which is the basis for a concept of nation.
Feb. 1 | The challenge of humanistic union on the confederated planet is like translating bipartisanship into exemplary local fairness and out to transnational collaborative leadership: “elusive union, confederated planet”
Jan. 23 | I’m gathering a lot of political themes into focus relative to a long view of the Biden administration and current events. | March 3: That’s introduced by “Biden’s and my democratic society,” but the now-consolidated set of topics are shelved for later detailing and sharing after a set of ostensibly non-political topics are presented.
Jan. 9 | A bunch of discussions that emerged during the U.S. presidential campaign were organized into the “democratic America” project, which will develop further during this year.
Jan. 8 | Philosophy of law isn’t an academic pastime, which is my initial motive for “a vote for notes of fairness.” Is the emancipatory interest in free speech now antedated by the virtue of fair speech relative to malicious extremism online? Can we institute practical constraints? If justice is basically about ensuring fairness (and preventing malicious unfairness), then standards of fair speech should be clarifiable, codifiable, and transposable into law.
Yesterday, I discovered that a large project from mid-2018 never got listed in its site Area. Now listed: "astute reasoning and ‘fake news’,” which is also the main point of the fairness discussion. Noting that discussion at the Facebook/Habermas Page caused a couple of comments by someone, which caused me to enjoy an extended reply.
Jan. 6 | A new page, “Hermes was a savvy dude,” implicitly counters an unmentioned scholar’s view that Heidegger is self-invalidating. Though I’ve read his chapter carefully, commented at length to him (which he—an acquaintance, a friend—invited!), and welcomed discussion with him (no reply), I go no further with his discourse in my page here than his use of a passage from Heidegger which premises his chapter (a passage he misunderstands) and which he applies to his interest in Moses, though I have in mind all along the scholar’s elaborated desire, in terms of his “Heidegger,” to show an originary validity of sacred text.
December 30, 2020 | The “Heidegger studies” project has been re-organized—after carefully reading Heidegger’s entire Contributions to Philosophy: from enowning in exactly one week (doing nothing much else).