[lit-ideas] Re: *Eichmann in Jerusalem*
- From: wokshevs@xxxxxx
- To: lit-ideas@xxxxxxxxxxxxx, Judith Evans <judithevans1@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Wed, 23 Aug 2006 16:30:56 -0230
Interesting. Perhaps the answer lies in why it took you this long to ask. And
why nobody else on the List did?
WCO
Quoting Judith Evans <judithevans1@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>:
> I should have asked this before, I suppose. Why "Hannah" but
> "Kant"?
>
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: <wokshevs@xxxxxx>
> To: <lit-ideas@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>; "Ed Farrell" <ewf@xxxxxxxxxxx>
> Sent: Tuesday, August 22, 2006 8:21 PM
> Subject: [lit-ideas] Re: *Eichmann in Jerusalem*
>
>
> >
> > Many thanks to Ed for a very informative post. It gives me some
> meat to gnaw on
> > until the book makes it to my mailbox. But I'm hoping that Ed
> or anyone will
> > put his or their humility aside and take a stab at making some
> sense of
> > Hannah's idea that judgements of right and wrong regarding
> particular
> > historical events or individual subjects can be made without
> appeal to general
> > principles, rules or concepts, as per Kant's "reflective
> judgement" (Third
> > Critique). This seems impossible to me (and should have so
> seemed to Kant as
> > well); I don't know why Hannah ever saw the question as a
> sensible one. Any
> > examples of such judgements that anyone cares to offer will be
> appreciated (if
> > not accepted.)
> >
> ------------------------------------------------------------------
> To change your Lit-Ideas settings (subscribe/unsub, vacation on/off,
> digest on/off), visit www.andreas.com/faq-lit-ideas.html
>
------------------------------------------------------------------
To change your Lit-Ideas settings (subscribe/unsub, vacation on/off,
digest on/off), visit www.andreas.com/faq-lit-ideas.html
Other related posts:
