Heidegger

Joseph Polanik wrote:
> >So you are asking why Heidegger prioritizes being-alongside over
> >being-inside.
>
> not exactly. Heidegger, like anyone else, can choose where to put his
> attention; but, choosing one viewpoint to the exclusion of the other
> doesn’t seem like a well-balanced approach to me.
I never said he excluded the other. I said […]

Anthony Crifasi wrote:
>Joseph Polanik wrote:
>>Heidegger writes:
>>”In the assertions ‘God is’ and ‘the world is’, we assert Being. This
>>word ‘is’, however, cannot be meant to apply to these entities in the
>>same sense, when between them there is an infinite difference of
>>Being; if the signification of ‘is’ were univocal, then […]

Joseph Polanik wrote:
> Heidegger writes:
>
> “The entity to which Being-in in this signification belongs is one which
> we have characterized as that entity which in each case I myself am
> [bin]. This expression ‘bin’ is connected with ‘bei’, and so ‘ich bin’
> [’I am’] means in its turn ‘I reside’ or ‘dwell alongside’ the […]

Anthony Crifasi wrote:
>Joseph Polanik wrote:
>>jimstuart51 wrote:
>>>jPolanik wrote:
>>>>so, how do I determine that I am a dasein instead of a mind, or
>>>>spirit or soul or a group of neurons or a quantum phenomenon?
>>>Heidegger gives reasons for thinking that I am a Dasein in B&T. He
>>>also gives reasons for […]

We seem to have this same debate once every few years, each time
advancing (I think) a little more. So let’s spit and shake that the next
time this comes up, I’ll be fluent in Greek, and you’ll be well versed
in the ancient Greek commentaries. That way, by the time one of us dies,
the dispute should […]

Cologne 26-Feb-2008
ME: This particular wrangle does not seem to be leading anywhere. You are defending a traditional
reading of Aristotle as postulating the existence of a god as the unmoving mover of all that moves,
and are claiming that this is the only possible reading. I am suggesting, by contrast, that there is
another way of reading […]

Joseph Polanik wrote:
> >jPolanik wrote:
>
> >>so, how do I determine that I am a dasein instead of a mind, or
> >>spirit or soul or a group of neurons or a quantum phenomenon?
>
> >Heidegger gives reasons for thinking that I am a Dasein in B&T. He
> >also gives reasons for […]

jimstuart51 wrote:
>jPolanik wrote:
>>so, how do I determine that I am a dasein instead of a mind, or
>>spirit or soul or a group of neurons or a quantum phenomenon?
>Heidegger gives reasons for thinking that I am a Dasein in B&T. He
>also gives reasons for thinking I am not an immaterial […]

In a message dated 2/25/2008 7:00:52 AM Eastern Standard Time,
michael at sandwich-de-sign.co.uk writes:
mP:
>> A quote from Howard Jacobson’s excellent novel (about Jewishness, about
>> Jewing):
>>
>> “They sang songs in Buchenwald. Figure that. … True, they were ironic
>> songs about _Schicksal_, but a song’s still a song.
>>
>> “_Schicksal_ — meaning fate or destiny.
>>
>> “Shikse — meaning […]

Michael Eldred wrote:
>>>>>>>> AC: What is your complete translation of 1064a29-37?
>>>>>>> ME: “Since there is a science of beings qua beings and standing for itself, it
>>>>>>> must be investigated whether this is to be posited as the same as physical
>>>>>>> science or rather as different. Physical science is about beings having a
>>>>>>> beginning/principle of […]