KARL JASPERS FORUM

TA60 (Grandpierre)

Commentary 19 (to TA60 C18)

( ON FUNDAMENTALS )
by Greg Nixon
31 January 2004, posted 7 February 2004

Glenn, I feel no need to respond to your statements, since most are not arguments but ad hominem dismissals of what you perceive as my character. I will at least point out that the highly complimentary things I said to Herb Müller you cite at the beginning of your philippic ("gregoric"?) were not originally written to the KJForum at all but were instead messages I sent to Dr. Müller as private emails since he had backed my position on JCS-Online & I wanted to show him my appreciation. He asked if he could post them on the KJF & I agreed.

If you did read further postings of mine - even though you now feel sure you have complete understanding of my sucky sycophantic thinking - you would find that I am in sharp disagreement with HM on a number of issues, including my certainty of the uniquity of human conscious experience. I agree with Müller that some form of creative dynamism is the only "foundation" reality has, but I feel the teleological potentials are not as absolutely unconditioned as he seems to indicate. There are ontological limits & perhaps unconscious or archetypal aims to "constructivism", some of which are better than others. I regard humanity as much within the sphere of the already created as amidst the divine-like creators. But since I see the inherent creativity of individual thought within the hermeneutic round to be so vital, you may comprehend why I feel "fundamentalism" (clinging to the fundament of any text or dogma or perspective) is a grievous error. As you noted, I pointed out that if HM thinks he can work with an "as-if" mind-independent reality, then his own conceptual ultimate, the "0-D", must be recognized as an as-if conceptual place holder for that which he intends to have no space (or time or conceptual content).

And I never suggested you should cease referencing Karl Jaspers. In fact, your expertise is highly valued. I just wished to point out that your interpretations may not render all other possible interpretations invalid.

Clearly, you are reading into & projecting your assumptions onto someone else's ideas & phrases, i.e., my own. It was neither my intention to be a loyal knight in the defence of Dr. Müller's castle of ideas nor to be knight errant jousting at the fortress of your own.

"A man hears what he wants to hear and disregards the rest." (Paul Simon, 'The Boxer')

----------------------------------------------

Greg Nixon