Heidegger

In a message dated 8/31/2006 12:56:56 AM Eastern Daylight Time,
phil at thalasson.com writes:
In article , GEVANS613 at aol.com writes
quoting Faye supposedly quoting Heidegger
>*identifying the hidden enemies within the nation - “in order to annihilate
>them totally:”
Philippe Arjakovsky points out that Faye is not quoting from an
unpublished lecture but from one that was published several […]

Kevin writes:
Jud,
Heidegger’s understanding of truth rests on a simple fact: that beings must
appear before we can say anything about them. In other words, there is
something that we may call a truth (because it is more originary and the basis of
‘propositional’ truth) that is inherently necessary for the traditional notion.
In fact, the very […]

any excuse will do.
 http://www.memritv.org/Transcript.asp?P1…

In a message dated 31/08/2006 16:27:42 GMT Standard Time,
michael at sandwich-de-sign.co.uk writes:
Jud:
In a sense such notions of *Being, Time, Nothing, Presence* etc could be
said to conceptually *stand out* or be instantiated representationally, as being
the ideational, template-based activity of the human brain, which
neurologically and synapsally configures itself to symbolise such ideational activity
Jud, […]

Jud:
In a sense such notions of *Being, Time, Nothing, Presence* etc could be
said to conceptually *stand out* or be instantiated representationally, as
being the ideational, template-based activity of the human brain, which
neurologically and synapsally configures itself to symbolise such ideational
activity
Jud, is “synapsally” one of your words/phrases (like “ideational,
template-based activity”)? If so, what do you mean […]

In a message dated Cologne 31-Aug-2006 _artefact at t-online.de_
(mailto:artefact@t-online.de) writes:
_GEVANS613 at aol.com_ (mailto:GEVANS613@aol.com) schrieb Wed, 30 Aug 2006
Dr Michael Eldred: Yes, “*Being* does not *name* anything - for there is
nothing to be named.” Strangely, we agree that being is nothing, you in the form
of denial, I in the form of affirmation. […]

Jud,
Heidegger’s understanding of truth rests on a simple fact: that beings must
appear before we can say anything about them. In other words, there is
something that we may call a truth (because it is more originary and the
basis of ‘propositional’ truth) that is inherently necessary for the
traditional notion. In fact, the very possibility of ‘correspondence’ […]

Tympan Segment cum Tympan Plato cum whatever your name wrote this to
Bernard:
> Please excuse me for taking such liberty
> with you. But it looks like Lucio and his two trolls Jud and Micheal
> Pennannacor or whatever his name is detonated a list flood.
Tympan or whatever your name is, please desist in this ludicrous
identification […]

Cologne 31-Aug-2006
GEVANS613 at aol.com schrieb Wed, 30 Aug 2006 09:33:05 EDT:
> Dr Michael Eldred: Yes, “*Being* does not *name* anything - for there
> is nothing to be named.” Strangely, we agree that being is nothing,
> you in the form of denial, I in the form of affirmation. Children, and
> most other people, do […]

In a message dated 8/29/2006 10:50:09 PM Eastern Daylight Time,
daxsein at hotmail.com writes:
Tympan: Jung’s discussion of Hermas sublimation of Rhoda is another way of
thinking about introversion. It defines spiritualization. The libido in this
case is flowing into the spiritualized expression as much as sinking into
the unconscious where it provides the energy for images to rise […]