Do You Claim the Power?
June 8th, 2008, search relatedRelated posts :: Do You Claim the Power? :: Do You Claim the Power? :: Do You Claim the Power? :: Do You Claim the Power?
michaelP wrote:
>To those that think in an overly linear fashion (e.g., one that is
>saturated with mathematical logic and other technics), Heidegger’s
>disdain for squaring the circle, dissolving paradoxes and viscous [sic]
>circles in the cheap acid of too hastily applied logical apparatuses,
>hammering home the non-literary non-merely-word-play ‘point’ of
>chiasmuses, etc, must appear as a display of error of logic or a
>dismissal of it:
some Heideggerians seem willing to follow Heidegger in his departure
from the way of the Logos; but, few are equally willing to admit having
done so.
In my post of 2008-01-13, I replied to you by saying:
“in a previous post I indicated that the road forked at the point where
predication is defined as ’saying something about something’.
“I accept this definition as meaning the same as ’saying something
about something that is not nothing’.
“you apparently accept this definition as meaning the same as ’saying
something about something — including something that is nothing’.
“I’ve given you my justifications for my reading of ’saying something
about something’. what are your justifications for your reading?”
it is one thing to complain that the way of the Logos is too confining;
but, if that is your compaint is, why are you unwilling to acknowledge
your own departure.
do you claim the power to attribute predicates to nothing(ness) or do
you not?
Joe
–
Philosophy is, after all, done ultimately in the first person for the
first person. — H-N Castaneda
@^@~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~@^@
http://what-am-i.net
@^@~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~@^@
