Self-Identity Over Time - Is It True At All?**
May 4th, 2008, search relatedRelated posts :: Words Have Changing Referents :: Self-Identity Over Time - Is It True At All? :: Self-Identity Over Time - Is It True At All? :: - Is It True At All?
In a message dated 4/28/2008 6:34:22 AM Eastern Daylight Time,
artefact at t-online.de writes:
Hence, the simple observation and statement, “This is an e-mail”, already
contains the mystery of philosophy (of being), something which analytic
philosophy per se (and all thinking based on ‘logic’) can only understand
through
self-destruction.
It is entirely superficial to locate Dasein’s difference in its becoming, or,
conversely, to want to locate identity in a self-same constancy over time.
Something can only become (in a movement of one kind or another) what it is
not
because it always already is _its_ other.
Michael;
Proof (of identity) by negation (is_its_other) fails to observe that what is
other has no ousia (essence qua to be) in itself but simply bends the
substance of identity back on itself. That tells us (sic) nothing but what the
idendity is not. Hence both the identity and the other remain empty. Such nihilism is
avoided by Aristotle and pre-Socratic reasoning by postiting the Other as not
the negation of something else but Potentia, in the case of Aristotle and
apieron by Anaximander. Unfortunately, if your statement at all reflects a
Heideggerism, it is also the position of modern psychoanalysis in its concept of
the noun UN-conscious telling not what the unconscious is but what it not. The
climax to this dialectical relativism is, of course, reflected in the
post-modern zeitgeist where nothing is, is all.
Sincerely;
Bernard
**************Need a new ride? Check out the largest site for U.S. used car
listings at AOL Autos.
http://autos.aol.com/used?NCID=aolcmp003…)
