Thank you Michael, as always--
As you may have noticed, I'm always looking to draw a connection between
Heidegger's philosophy and life as it is lived.
Can you find the time to comment on Iain Thomson's _Martin Heidegger: a
philosophical snapshot_ --specifically in terms of his "thin sketch" of
SuZ's 2nd Division.
http://orpheus.ucsd.edu/eands/heid.html
Bob
> -----Original Message-----
> From: owner-heidegger@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx [
mailto:owner-
> heidegger@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Michael Eldred
> Sent: Sunday, August 18, 2002 1:41 PM
> To: heidegger@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> Subject: Re: "metaphysical and not phenomenology"?
>
> Cologne 18-Aug-2002
>
> Bob Guevara schrieb Sun, 18 Aug 2002 11:17:58 -0700:
>
> >
> > > > Which--I say--indicates the difficulty of speaking and listening
> > via
> > > > mailing lists and perhaps in general.
> >
> > > >
> >
> > > > I greatly appreciate the contributions to this list for I'm not
a
> >
> > > > Heidegger scholar but it is clear to me that some participants
in
> >
> > > > the conversations here tend hold Heidegger's philosophy as
> > something
> >
> > > > to have [know about "correctly"] but Heidegger would say that he
> > has
> >
> > > > no philosophy _at all_ for philosophy isn't something that he
has
> >
> > > > but rather something that he does.
> >
> > > >
> >
> > > > Is the history of Heidegger's philosophy the long and short of
> > it?
> >
> > > > ...to merely point out this reference and that? ...or is such
> >
> > > > history only the first step to philosophizing?
> >
> > > >
> >
> > > > If we are indeed interpretation _all the way down_ and we
> >
> > > > authentically face up to our condition, then--I say--that not
> > only
> >
> > > > do we reflect on Heidegger's lectures and texts but draw a
> >
> > > > connection to our _very actions_ in life as we live it.
> >
> > > >
> >
> > > > Perhaps this particular conversation can be subordinated to
> >
> > > > Being-in-the-world [Being-with] and not simply being fastened to
> > the
> >
> > > > concept of it.
> >
> > > >
> >
> > > > Inquiry:
> >
> > > >
> >
> > > > If communication is speaking and listening such that the
> > phenomenon
> >
> > > > comes into view for all concerned then what will it take to
> >
> > > > "communicate" in this forum?
> >
> > > >
> >
> > > > Bob
> >
> > > >
> >
> > > >
> >
> > >
> >
> > > The problem is that, for the most part, human communication fails
> > to
> >
> > > bring the phenomenon into view as a shared experience, especially
> > when
> >
> > > the phenomenon is the one which hides itself most of all. Then
> > there
> >
> > > is not even agreement on whether there is a phenomenon hiding, let
> >
> > > alone what it is and
> >
> > > how it can be brought to light.
> >
> > Do you have anything to say about working the problem?
> >
> > Are there possibilities in Heidegger's speaking [perhaps yet to be
> > fulfilled] that move toward this work?
> >
> > When Allen quotes SuZ and poses the question:
> >
> > 'The verse I would like to ask about is SuZ #26 (p.123 in the
German):
> > "As Being-with, Dasein 'is' essentially for the sake of others." (M
&
> > R)'
> >
> > I see possibility.
> >
> > Not merely an opinion on Heidegger's part.
> >
> > Not merely words to study.
> >
> > Are we not always already in a mode of self-deception
[inauthenticity]
> > and is it possible to step out of this at times?
> >
> > Not like an opinion but like the fulfillment of a possibility?
...and
> > how would you characterize your conversation with Anthony in the
light
> > of Heidegger's saying?
> >
> > Respectfully,
> >
> > Bob
> >
> >
>
> I see possibility too. It's like an impossible possibility. The
dialogue
> with Anthony is an instance of it. Without the possibility of bringing
> something to light which can be shared as a shared insight in this or
> another forum, today or later, there would be no point in talking.
> Philosophical thinking is addressed to whom it may concern, but in the
> first place it is and must be one's own thinking, one's own endeavour
to
> bring an issue to light for oneself.
>
> In the twenties, for instance, Heidegger was talking in his seminars
and
> lectures, endeavouring to bring something to light in a critical
> engagement with the philosophical tradition. Eighty years later we can
> participate in this endeavour, critically, controversially or
otherwise.
> It's a possibility we have, and we invariably fail in exercising it.
> Nevertheless, there are perhaps glimpses here and there. It's a
> beautiful way to die.
>
> Michael
> _-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_- artefact text and translation
_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_
> _-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_- made by art
_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_
>
http://www.webcom.com/artefact/ _-_-_-_-_-_- artefact@xxxxxxxxxx
> _-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_ Dr Michael Eldred
-_-_-
>
_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_
>
>
>
>
>
>
> --- from list heidegger@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx ---
--- from list heidegger@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx ---
