beyng & irony

Michael Staples:
>I must be missing your mark, Bob. I see a difference between being
>involved with my swinging a hammer, and my observing someone else --
>baby or otherwise -- sucking a treat (or anything else). The >experiences
>I have are mine. The experiences you have are not mine. There is no way
>I can know your experience as a baby. And there is no way I can know my
>experience as a baby. I can only presume.... 

Steven Callihan:
>The question, of course, would be whether there is a person, I, being,
>Dasein, etc., already resident in the infant psyche peering out upon >the
>world unprompted, or whether the person (Baby Dasein) comes into being
>betwixt what is a bundle of drives and reflexes, on the one hand, and >the
>conforming forces of family and society, on the other. Is Dasein rooted >in
>our genetics, in other words, or is it rooted in our socio-cultural >histories?


Steve and Michael, 
there's no question of biography or history, facticity. 
dasein's past is always the present of his past...
dasein's babyhood always the presence-ing of 
the ecstatic temporality of his babybeing-there.

h's pt (at least one of them) with hammerring
was how it instanced non-reflexive being-in...
agent-implement-world becoming herein undifferentiated...
thereby disclosing the primordial ontological structure of 
concernful absorbtion of dasein in the world; 
and corelatively, the secondary nature of 
subjectivity and mentation.
...tell me subbing a suckling babe doesn't 
improve and sharpen this analytic?

the hermeneutic of that ecstatic temporality
is richly-n-cogently manifest in the perrenial plethora 
of poetizing the prelapsarian trope...sorry
genesis to wordsworth, rousseau, barney...nso on.

i suppose baby-dasein may be just another 
"primordial form" ignis fatuus, 
but it has the advantage of
h's pre-socratics or philology, no?

bob


     --- from list heidegger@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx ---