THE “KARL JASPERS FORUM” UPDATE 34 (August, 11, 2007) APPLYING A JASPERS’ RESPONSE TO HERBERT MULLER’S USE OF JASPERS |
||
|
1. Herbert Müller’s reference to Jaspers—One would suppose that a relatively extensive reference to Jaspers’ works should be accompanied by a sigh of relief—or a moan amidst Gregorian “amen” chanting. His references to Jaspers can come across as a response to cover possible hints at unethical net-etiquette. Whether a form of confession and restitution, it does present one with something Jaspers-relevant to hitch unto, but there’s another hitch. 2. Assigned dates of a net-etiquette defense--Herbert assigns a date of July 20, 2007 to his “August 11” postings actually posted August 10. The July date one must guess is the date he received it from himself but for undisclosed reasons it was not made available till later. What the assigned date of his quotes from Jaspers’ Von der Wahrheit can suggest is that references to Jaspers is not belated, but mostly it is to circumvent any post-July criticism that he avoids Jaspers. I think it is a typical manifestation of a “Contructivist’s” aversion to admitting a mistake. To admit a mistake involves some sort of allegiance to an objective ethical standard especially anything of historical substance. 3. It just doesn’t make sense--It would have been better to assign an intent-date of it to coincide with his first TA article which would in effect say this: “The name of Karl Jaspers is being used in the title of this Forum because I disagree with him for the following reasons…” There would have been no question then of the manner of exploitation. He then could have verbally made clear that he was going to show where Jaspers was “wrong”, in so far as his “emerging” (tongue in cheek) epistemology can be used to show how Herbert’s more developed “zero-derivation” is “right” and justifies the delimiting of a precursor. 4. Making sense—Giving the role of counselee to Herbert, and taking his TA93, R 16 as revelations made during a counseling session, more is revealed in the final seconds. It is found in [25]: “…subjective experience is a cornerstone of constructivism, which I see as a further phase in epistemology evolution” and Jaspers “…did not see the constructivist principle as such”. 5. Making Jaspers’ Von der Wahrheit available to all—Jaspers’ philosophical and psychological and epistemological position is made clear enough in the final section of the book. The constancy and consistency of Jaspers’ views had not changed from the earliest to the latest works for he was representing historical comprehensiveness. Herbert is quick to inform the reader that the book contains 1100 pages. The last reference he makes is page 579. Fortunately we have an English translation of the book’s final section in Truth and Symbol from Von der Wahrheit by Karl Jaspers, College and University Press, New Haven, Connecticut 1959, including the quote below. 6. Jaspers against the utilitarianism (e.g. Herbert’s pop “e” word) of Herbert’s zero derivation and constructivism—A short quote which cannot be enlarged upon within the space and time of today August 11, 2007: In the first instance I follow realism and materialism, positivism and idealism, which all agree in this one thing, that I see myself as something which, as the culmination of everything, has developed out of something earlier and lower, and which has grown out of something that was soulless, unfree, and, at first, indeed, even lifeless. This interpretation, however, founders on the fact that as it proceeds it provides no means for comprehending what man is capable of being, for comprehending his love, his thinking, or his knowing. This interpretation is ultimately reduced always to forms of naturalism, technicalism, or utilitarianism. In the second instance, I surge up and beyond myself with the urge to yield to an “other,” to reality itself.” (57)
|
||