Re: Mind & Body, One More Time

On Wed, 1 Jul 1998, TMB wrote:

> 
> I think this is *very good*, but also probably wrong. I see no reason to
> consider it a concession, though maybe you are right and could explain
> further. As much as interpretation and furtural projection can be reworked
> to handle the issue of the maleability and cognizeability of moods, it
> does not seem to work out that way in Heidegger at all. Perhaps it is
> becuase the whole characterization of Dasein *as projective* is, in fact,
> just one disclosure of Dasein in a particular *mood of Dasein*. In other
> words, Dasin is not, in fact, always projective. Could it be that *this*
> mood was the one that was most invisible to Heidegger? 

I don't see why you think Dasein isn't always projective.  For the most
part, I am doing something (sitting around, taking a nap, ignoring the
phone, etc.), and in doing things, I am taking a stand on who I am and
defining myself in some set of possibilities into the future (being a
bum, being lazy, etc.).  Heid's point is that such projectiveness is
always also situated:  it arises from a background of attunment (Stimmung)
which limits and defines its possibilities.

The vocabulary of mastery, will, knowledge, etc. is too traditional:
finite humans can never be "masters" in Descartes's sense, and will and
knowledge are too loaded down with traditional mentalistic assumptions.   
>

Charlie
> TMB > > > >      --- from list heidegger@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx ---
> 



     --- from list heidegger@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx ---