[lit-ideas] Re: *Eichmann in Jerusalem*
- From: wokshevs@xxxxxx
- To: lit-ideas@xxxxxxxxxxxxx, Judith Evans <judithevans1@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Wed, 23 Aug 2006 17:56:36 -0230
Quoting Judith Evans <judithevans1@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>:
> > Interesting. Perhaps the answer lies in why it took you this
> long to ask.
>
> No.
W: Well, I guess that settles the matter.
> And
> > why nobody else on the List did?
>
> Perhaps they thought they knew the answer.
>
W: Perhaps you should simply ask for the sake of being in an epistemically more
favourable position to make your public conjectures. Then you could speak with
greater certainty about what you think other people think they know.
Your friendly neighborhood white middle-class atheist straight male, but not yet
dead, and still believing in Enlightenment values but clearly having too much
free time on his holidaying hands at present,
WCO
Cafe Platon
Rue des Feuillantines
Paris, France
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: <wokshevs@xxxxxx>
> To: <lit-ideas@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>; "Judith Evans"
> <judithevans1@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> Sent: Wednesday, August 23, 2006 8:00 PM
> Subject: Re: [lit-ideas] Re: *Eichmann in Jerusalem*
>
>
> > 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
> > >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > --
> > No virus found in this incoming message.
> > Checked by AVG Free Edition.
> > Version: 7.1.405 / Virus Database: 268.11.4/424 - Release Date:
> 21/08/2006
> >
> >
> ------------------------------------------------------------------
> 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:
