I have been presuming that is what Iambiguous meant by Dasein. Since existential implies perspective towards future , a perspective which seems to be a property of the human, Dasein adds that each perspective towards future is a unique perspective.Sculptor wrote: ↑Sun Dec 18, 2022 9:02 pm1. Understanding Dasein or valuing Heidegger's theory is not to be found by trying to unpack his relationship with the Nazi regime. So I think we need to drop that. Hitler, the Holocaust and Naziism played no part in our discussions about Dasein. As I said already it was written in 1926, about the same time as Mein Kampf, written in prison. There is very little else to unite any of the ideas in the two books. The party was still only a handful of marginalised nationalistic nutters.iambiguous wrote: ↑Sun Dec 18, 2022 8:10 pmRight, whatever that means.Sculptor wrote: ↑Sun Dec 18, 2022 7:35 pm
I spend several session in University seminars led by a Heidegger expert, and my conclusion was that the phrase "the meaning of Dasein" is an optimistic idea, since every one seems to have their own view on this. And maybe that is the key to unpacking the idea. Since the apprehension of the concepts is by nature existential, then what it means has to be personal.
But my challenge remains. Think you understand the meaning of Dasein from Being and Time? Think that my own understanding of it from the threads above is bullshit?
Then, given a particular set of circumstances revolving around conflicting goods, let's dig a little deeper into our respective philosophies.
Admittedly, I don't have a vast knowledge of Heidegger the man back then. But if you Google "heidegger and the nazis" you get this:Again, there are conflicting assessments of the actual historical facts. But my own aim here is still the challenge I propose above.Sculptor wrote: ↑Sun Dec 18, 2022 12:06 pm What is telling is a sentence at the top
"on May 1, 1933, ten days after being elected Rector of the University of Freiburg. A year later, in April 1934, he resigned the Rectorship and stopped taking part in Nazi Party meetings,"
He sucked it and saw it for what it was Probably found it somewhat lacking in intellectual rigor. As time progressed leaving the party would be tantamount to suicide.
Here's one link that seems to suggest he was more enthusiastic about them than you yourself seem to suggest.
https://www.theparisreview.org/blog/201 ... own-words/
Though I'm sure there are links that distance him from them.Okay, but the meaning and the value of his ideas taken down out of the philosophical clouds and interpreted existentially out in the world of ceaseless moral and political conflagrations?Sculptor wrote: ↑Sun Dec 18, 2022 12:06 pm I'm not sure you can take that much from de-contexted snippets. I'm not here to defend Heidegger in this respect. Politically he was probably an arsehole and I doubt he and I would ever vote for the same person, but that would not detract from the meaning and value of his ideas.
Same with him. Given that my own interest in dasein revolves around this...
"How ought one to behave morally in a world awash in both conflicting goods and contingency, chance and change"?
Given a particular context. Any Jordan Peterson scholars here care to go there?
Right, like Heidegger was never once asked himself to connect the dots between Dasein and Hitler. And, sure, maybe no one ever did. But that's the first thing that I would have asked him.Sure, maybe. But that doesn't really tell us what Heidegger might have noted if he were asked to connect the dots between Dasein from Being and Time and Hitler and the Nazis and the Holocaust.Sculptor wrote: ↑Sun Dec 18, 2022 12:06 pm I think if Hitler knew Heidegger, or if Heidegger were interested in Hitler then the former would have recruited for the war effort and heidegger would have used his influence to greater effect during Hitler's time.
As it appears the Heidegger kept his head way below the parapets, we might conclude that he was reluctant to engage in all that political murder.
Any speculations about that from the Heidegger scholars?
2. I said; "And maybe that is the key to unpacking the idea. Since the apprehension of the concepts is by nature existential, then what it means has to be personal." you responded "whatever that means". It does not auger well for a discussion about Dasein or Heidegger, if you find yourself puzzled by this statement. DO you want me to re-state it? Because if you don't get that then we might have very little to say.
Dasein/dasein
Re: Dasein/dasein
- iambiguous
- Posts: 7464
- Joined: Mon Nov 22, 2010 10:23 pm
Re: Dasein/dasein
No, I don't think that we should. After all, my point -- my challenge -- revolves precisely around connecting the dots between Heidegger's theoretical Dasein in Being and Time and the manner in which I construe the existential dasein out in the world of actual human interactions...as encompassed in the threads above.Sculptor wrote: ↑Sun Dec 18, 2022 9:02 pm1. Understanding Dasein or valuing Heidegger's theory is not to be found by trying to unpack his relationship with the Nazi regime. So I think we need to drop that.iambiguous wrote: ↑Sun Dec 18, 2022 8:10 pmRight, whatever that means.Sculptor wrote: ↑Sun Dec 18, 2022 7:35 pm
I spend several session in University seminars led by a Heidegger expert, and my conclusion was that the phrase "the meaning of Dasein" is an optimistic idea, since every one seems to have their own view on this. And maybe that is the key to unpacking the idea. Since the apprehension of the concepts is by nature existential, then what it means has to be personal.
But my challenge remains. Think you understand the meaning of Dasein from Being and Time? Think that my own understanding of it from the threads above is bullshit?
Then, given a particular set of circumstances revolving around conflicting goods, let's dig a little deeper into our respective philosophies.
Admittedly, I don't have a vast knowledge of Heidegger the man back then. But if you Google "heidegger and the nazis" you get this:Again, there are conflicting assessments of the actual historical facts. But my own aim here is still the challenge I propose above.Sculptor wrote: ↑Sun Dec 18, 2022 12:06 pm What is telling is a sentence at the top
"on May 1, 1933, ten days after being elected Rector of the University of Freiburg. A year later, in April 1934, he resigned the Rectorship and stopped taking part in Nazi Party meetings,"
He sucked it and saw it for what it was Probably found it somewhat lacking in intellectual rigor. As time progressed leaving the party would be tantamount to suicide.
Here's one link that seems to suggest he was more enthusiastic about them than you yourself seem to suggest.
https://www.theparisreview.org/blog/201 ... own-words/
Though I'm sure there are links that distance him from them.Okay, but the meaning and the value of his ideas taken down out of the philosophical clouds and interpreted existentially out in the world of ceaseless moral and political conflagrations?Sculptor wrote: ↑Sun Dec 18, 2022 12:06 pm I'm not sure you can take that much from de-contexted snippets. I'm not here to defend Heidegger in this respect. Politically he was probably an arsehole and I doubt he and I would ever vote for the same person, but that would not detract from the meaning and value of his ideas.
Same with him. Given that my own interest in dasein revolves around this...
"How ought one to behave morally in a world awash in both conflicting goods and contingency, chance and change"?
Given a particular context. Any Jordan Peterson scholars here care to go there?
Right, like Heidegger was never once asked himself to connect the dots between Dasein and Hitler. And, sure, maybe no one ever did. But that's the first thing that I would have asked him.Sure, maybe. But that doesn't really tell us what Heidegger might have noted if he were asked to connect the dots between Dasein from Being and Time and Hitler and the Nazis and the Holocaust.Sculptor wrote: ↑Sun Dec 18, 2022 12:06 pm I think if Hitler knew Heidegger, or if Heidegger were interested in Hitler then the former would have recruited for the war effort and heidegger would have used his influence to greater effect during Hitler's time.
As it appears the Heidegger kept his head way below the parapets, we might conclude that he was reluctant to engage in all that political murder.
Any speculations about that from the Heidegger scholars?
Given a particular conext: fascism, abortion, gun control, feminsim, human sexuality, whatever.
You and others will either go there or you won't.
Yeah, and above I noted my reaction to that as well.Sculptor wrote: ↑Sun Dec 18, 2022 9:02 pmHitler, the Holocaust and Naziism played no part in our discussions about Dasein. As I said already it was written in 1926, about the same time as Mein Kampf, written in prison. There is very little else to unite any of the ideas in the two books. The party was still only a handful of marginalised nationalistic nutters.
Again, let's explore what you mean by that given a set of circumstances revolving around conflicting value judgments. We can discuss "maybe that is the key to unpacking the idea" pertaining to a particular idea proposed relating to the conflict. Also, "since the apprehension of the concepts is by nature existential, then what it means has to be personal" as that pertains to Heidegger's Dasein and my dasein.Sculptor wrote: ↑Sun Dec 18, 2022 9:02 pm2. I said; "And maybe that is the key to unpacking the idea. Since the apprehension of the concepts is by nature existential, then what it means has to be personal." you responded "whatever that means". It does not auger well for a discussion about Dasein or Heidegger, if you find yourself puzzled by this statement. DO you want me to re-state it? Because if you don't get that then we might have very little to say.
You choose the issue, you choose the context.
Or any others here following this exchange. Just bring this all down out of the scholastic clouds.
No pinheads please.
Re: Dasein/dasein
Why do you think reducing it to "value judgements" is relevant to understanding Dasein?iambiguous wrote: ↑Mon Dec 19, 2022 7:30 pmNo, I don't think that we should. After all, my point -- my challenge -- revolves precisely around connecting the dots between Heidegger's theoretical Dasein in Being and Time and the manner in which I construe the existential dasein out in the world of actual human interactions...as encompassed in the threads above.Sculptor wrote: ↑Sun Dec 18, 2022 9:02 pm1. Understanding Dasein or valuing Heidegger's theory is not to be found by trying to unpack his relationship with the Nazi regime. So I think we need to drop that.iambiguous wrote: ↑Sun Dec 18, 2022 8:10 pm
Right, whatever that means.
But my challenge remains. Think you understand the meaning of Dasein from Being and Time? Think that my own understanding of it from the threads above is bullshit?
Then, given a particular set of circumstances revolving around conflicting goods, let's dig a little deeper into our respective philosophies.
Again, there are conflicting assessments of the actual historical facts. But my own aim here is still the challenge I propose above.
Okay, but the meaning and the value of his ideas taken down out of the philosophical clouds and interpreted existentially out in the world of ceaseless moral and political conflagrations?
Same with him. Given that my own interest in dasein revolves around this...
"How ought one to behave morally in a world awash in both conflicting goods and contingency, chance and change"?
Given a particular context. Any Jordan Peterson scholars here care to go there?
Sure, maybe. But that doesn't really tell us what Heidegger might have noted if he were asked to connect the dots between Dasein from Being and Time and Hitler and the Nazis and the Holocaust.
Any speculations about that from the Heidegger scholars?
Given a particular conext: fascism, abortion, gun control, feminsim, human sexuality, whatever.
You and others will either go there or you won't.
Yeah, and above I noted my reaction to that as well.Sculptor wrote: ↑Sun Dec 18, 2022 9:02 pmHitler, the Holocaust and Naziism played no part in our discussions about Dasein. As I said already it was written in 1926, about the same time as Mein Kampf, written in prison. There is very little else to unite any of the ideas in the two books. The party was still only a handful of marginalised nationalistic nutters.
Again, let's explore what you mean by that given a set of circumstances revolving around conflicting value judgments. We can discuss "maybe that is the key to unpacking the idea" pertaining to a particular idea proposed relating to the conflict. Also, "since the apprehension of the concepts is by nature existential, then what it means has to be personal" as that pertains to Heidegger's Dasein and my dasein.Sculptor wrote: ↑Sun Dec 18, 2022 9:02 pm2. I said; "And maybe that is the key to unpacking the idea. Since the apprehension of the concepts is by nature existential, then what it means has to be personal." you responded "whatever that means". It does not auger well for a discussion about Dasein or Heidegger, if you find yourself puzzled by this statement. DO you want me to re-state it? Because if you don't get that then we might have very little to say.
You choose the issue, you choose the context.
Or any others here following this exchange. Just bring this all down out of the scholastic clouds.
No pinheads please.
Re: Dasein/dasein
And yet he seems to think it has something to do with value judgements???Belinda wrote: ↑Mon Dec 19, 2022 6:05 pmI have been presuming that is what Iambiguous meant by Dasein. Since existential implies perspective towards future , a perspective which seems to be a property of the human, Dasein adds that each perspective towards future is a unique perspective.Sculptor wrote: ↑Sun Dec 18, 2022 9:02 pm1. Understanding Dasein or valuing Heidegger's theory is not to be found by trying to unpack his relationship with the Nazi regime. So I think we need to drop that. Hitler, the Holocaust and Naziism played no part in our discussions about Dasein. As I said already it was written in 1926, about the same time as Mein Kampf, written in prison. There is very little else to unite any of the ideas in the two books. The party was still only a handful of marginalised nationalistic nutters.iambiguous wrote: ↑Sun Dec 18, 2022 8:10 pm
Right, whatever that means.
But my challenge remains. Think you understand the meaning of Dasein from Being and Time? Think that my own understanding of it from the threads above is bullshit?
Then, given a particular set of circumstances revolving around conflicting goods, let's dig a little deeper into our respective philosophies.
Again, there are conflicting assessments of the actual historical facts. But my own aim here is still the challenge I propose above.
Okay, but the meaning and the value of his ideas taken down out of the philosophical clouds and interpreted existentially out in the world of ceaseless moral and political conflagrations?
Same with him. Given that my own interest in dasein revolves around this...
"How ought one to behave morally in a world awash in both conflicting goods and contingency, chance and change"?
Given a particular context. Any Jordan Peterson scholars here care to go there?
Sure, maybe. But that doesn't really tell us what Heidegger might have noted if he were asked to connect the dots between Dasein from Being and Time and Hitler and the Nazis and the Holocaust.
Any speculations about that from the Heidegger scholars?
2. I said; "And maybe that is the key to unpacking the idea. Since the apprehension of the concepts is by nature existential, then what it means has to be personal." you responded "whatever that means". It does not auger well for a discussion about Dasein or Heidegger, if you find yourself puzzled by this statement. DO you want me to re-state it? Because if you don't get that then we might have very little to say.
Re: Dasein/dasein
I don't know if Iambi said it however Dasein, if if it IS existentialist (and I agree it is) then Dasein must also be subjective and unique values ( and hence authentic). The problem posed by Dasein then is that morality is a communal endeavour. So the communal endeavour and the subjective endeavour will be at odds.Sculptor wrote: ↑Mon Dec 19, 2022 9:58 pmAnd yet he seems to think it has something to do with value judgements???Belinda wrote: ↑Mon Dec 19, 2022 6:05 pmI have been presuming that is what Iambiguous meant by Dasein. Since existential implies perspective towards future , a perspective which seems to be a property of the human, Dasein adds that each perspective towards future is a unique perspective.Sculptor wrote: ↑Sun Dec 18, 2022 9:02 pm
1. Understanding Dasein or valuing Heidegger's theory is not to be found by trying to unpack his relationship with the Nazi regime. So I think we need to drop that. Hitler, the Holocaust and Naziism played no part in our discussions about Dasein. As I said already it was written in 1926, about the same time as Mein Kampf, written in prison. There is very little else to unite any of the ideas in the two books. The party was still only a handful of marginalised nationalistic nutters.
2. I said; "And maybe that is the key to unpacking the idea. Since the apprehension of the concepts is by nature existential, then what it means has to be personal." you responded "whatever that means". It does not auger well for a discussion about Dasein or Heidegger, if you find yourself puzzled by this statement. DO you want me to re-state it? Because if you don't get that then we might have very little to say.
Sometimes it's not enough to compromise between the two so we resort to violence.
- iambiguous
- Posts: 7464
- Joined: Mon Nov 22, 2010 10:23 pm
Re: Dasein/dasein
To Dasein?Sculptor wrote: ↑Mon Dec 19, 2022 9:57 pmWhy do you think reducing it to "value judgements" is relevant to understanding Dasein?iambiguous wrote: ↑Mon Dec 19, 2022 7:30 pmNo, I don't think that we should. After all, my point -- my challenge -- revolves precisely around connecting the dots between Heidegger's theoretical Dasein in Being and Time and the manner in which I construe the existential dasein out in the world of actual human interactions...as encompassed in the threads above.
Given a particular conext: fascism, abortion, gun control, feminsim, human sexuality, whatever.
You and others will either go there or you won't.
Yeah, and above I noted my reaction to that as well.Sculptor wrote: ↑Sun Dec 18, 2022 9:02 pmHitler, the Holocaust and Naziism played no part in our discussions about Dasein. As I said already it was written in 1926, about the same time as Mein Kampf, written in prison. There is very little else to unite any of the ideas in the two books. The party was still only a handful of marginalised nationalistic nutters.
Again, let's explore what you mean by that given a set of circumstances revolving around conflicting value judgments. We can discuss "maybe that is the key to unpacking the idea" pertaining to a particular idea proposed relating to the conflict. Also, "since the apprehension of the concepts is by nature existential, then what it means has to be personal" as that pertains to Heidegger's Dasein and my dasein.Sculptor wrote: ↑Sun Dec 18, 2022 9:02 pm2. I said; "And maybe that is the key to unpacking the idea. Since the apprehension of the concepts is by nature existential, then what it means has to be personal." you responded "whatever that means". It does not auger well for a discussion about Dasein or Heidegger, if you find yourself puzzled by this statement. DO you want me to re-state it? Because if you don't get that then we might have very little to say.
You choose the issue, you choose the context.
Or any others here following this exchange. Just bring this all down out of the scholastic clouds.
No pinheads please.
That's what you continue to "wiggle, wiggle, wiggle" out of: discussing Heidegger's take on Dasein in Being and Time as it relates to conflicting goods that revolve around moral and political value judgments situated out in particular worlds historically, culturally and personally. Given a particular context.
Whereas in regard to my take on dasein in my threads above, value judgments are crucial because they revolve around the distinction I make between the Self in the either/or world and the "self" in the is/ought world.
Let me know when you are ready to actually go there. You can pick the issue. You can pick the context.
Re: Dasein/dasein
Whether I choose to pick an issue and/or the context, or not, will depend on how clearly, or even if, you can define;iambiguous wrote: ↑Tue Dec 20, 2022 10:44 pm Whereas in regard to my take on dasein in my threads above, value judgments are crucial because they revolve around the distinction I make between the Self in the either/or world and the "self" in the is/ought world.
Let me know when you are ready to actually go there. You can pick the issue. You can pick the context.
Who and/or what is the 'Self', to you.
Who and/or what is the 'self', to you.
What is the 'either/or world', to you. And,
What is the 'is/ought world', to you.
And then make 'the distinction' that you make here, as clear as you can.
We know with your 'condition' that this might be very difficult for you, but just try to do the best you can here "iambiguous" okay?
Re: Dasein/dasein
UNderstanding what is Dasein is about embracing your personal and experiential self. It is a recognition that we do not have a communal experience except that which is conceived through the self. This does not make us "at odds" with a collective endeavour.Belinda wrote: ↑Tue Dec 20, 2022 3:49 pmI don't know if Iambi said it however Dasein, if if it IS existentialist (and I agree it is) then Dasein must also be subjective and unique values ( and hence authentic). The problem posed by Dasein then is that morality is a communal endeavour. So the communal endeavour and the subjective endeavour will be at odds.
Sometimes it's not enough to compromise between the two so we resort to violence.
Whether or not we find ourselves in accord or in conflict , these things are an epiphenomenon of Dasein.
Dasein is more like conscious will; its not "about" values; its not about "subjectivism", "reductionism", "objectivism" - it about ALL of those things.
But you cannot understand the vehicle by looking at the journey.
Violent of peaceful; Dasein is the essence of experience.
Re: Dasein/dasein
Dasein is beyond all these things. It does not mandate any of them.iambiguous wrote: ↑Tue Dec 20, 2022 10:44 pmTo Dasein?Sculptor wrote: ↑Mon Dec 19, 2022 9:57 pmWhy do you think reducing it to "value judgements" is relevant to understanding Dasein?iambiguous wrote: ↑Mon Dec 19, 2022 7:30 pm
No, I don't think that we should. After all, my point -- my challenge -- revolves precisely around connecting the dots between Heidegger's theoretical Dasein in Being and Time and the manner in which I construe the existential dasein out in the world of actual human interactions...as encompassed in the threads above.
Given a particular conext: fascism, abortion, gun control, feminsim, human sexuality, whatever.
You and others will either go there or you won't.
Yeah, and above I noted my reaction to that as well.
Again, let's explore what you mean by that given a set of circumstances revolving around conflicting value judgments. We can discuss "maybe that is the key to unpacking the idea" pertaining to a particular idea proposed relating to the conflict. Also, "since the apprehension of the concepts is by nature existential, then what it means has to be personal" as that pertains to Heidegger's Dasein and my dasein.
You choose the issue, you choose the context.
Or any others here following this exchange. Just bring this all down out of the scholastic clouds.
No pinheads please.
That's what you continue to "wiggle, wiggle, wiggle" out of: discussing Heidegger's take on Dasein in Being and Time as it relates to conflicting goods that revolve around moral and political value judgments situated out in particular worlds historically, culturally and personally. Given a particular context.
Whereas in regard to my take on dasein in my threads above, value judgments are crucial because they revolve around the distinction I make between the Self in the either/or world and the "self" in the is/ought world.
Let me know when you are ready to actually go there. You can pick the issue. You can pick the context.
Dasein does not have a context; it is all contexts.
Its more like consciousness; beingness. The ground of possibility that makes all these concepts possible.
- iambiguous
- Posts: 7464
- Joined: Mon Nov 22, 2010 10:23 pm
Re: Dasein/dasein
Age wrote: ↑Tue Dec 20, 2022 11:29 pmWhether I choose to pick an issue and/or the context, or not, will depend on how clearly, or even if, you can define;iambiguous wrote: ↑Tue Dec 20, 2022 10:44 pm Whereas in regard to my take on dasein in my threads above, value judgments are crucial because they revolve around the distinction I make between the Self in the either/or world and the "self" in the is/ought world.
Let me know when you are ready to actually go there. You can pick the issue. You can pick the context.
Who and/or what is the 'Self', to you.
Who and/or what is the 'self', to you.
What is the 'either/or world', to you. And,
What is the 'is/ought world', to you.
And then make 'the distinction' that you make here, as clear as you can.
We know with your 'condition' that this might be very difficult for you, but just try to do the best you can here "iambiguous" okay?
No, seriously.
Re: Dasein/dasein
So, you REALLY do have NO clue AT ALL here.iambiguous wrote: ↑Wed Dec 21, 2022 2:45 amAge wrote: ↑Tue Dec 20, 2022 11:29 pmWhether I choose to pick an issue and/or the context, or not, will depend on how clearly, or even if, you can define;iambiguous wrote: ↑Tue Dec 20, 2022 10:44 pm Whereas in regard to my take on dasein in my threads above, value judgments are crucial because they revolve around the distinction I make between the Self in the either/or world and the "self" in the is/ought world.
Let me know when you are ready to actually go there. You can pick the issue. You can pick the context.
Who and/or what is the 'Self', to you.
Who and/or what is the 'self', to you.
What is the 'either/or world', to you. And,
What is the 'is/ought world', to you.
And then make 'the distinction' that you make here, as clear as you can.
We know with your 'condition' that this might be very difficult for you, but just try to do the best you can here "iambiguous" okay?
No, seriously.
- iambiguous
- Posts: 7464
- Joined: Mon Nov 22, 2010 10:23 pm
Re: Dasein/dasein
To Dasein?
That's what you continue to "wiggle, wiggle, wiggle" out of: discussing Heidegger's take on Dasein in Being and Time as it relates to conflicting goods that revolve around moral and political value judgments situated out in particular worlds historically, culturally and personally. Given a particular context.
Whereas in regard to my take on dasein in my threads above, value judgments are crucial because they revolve around the distinction I make between the Self in the either/or world and the "self" in the is/ought world.
Let me know when you are ready to actually go there. You can pick the issue. You can pick the context.
Exactly!! Heidegger's Dasein is basically just a "general description intellectual/philosophical contraption" that never needs to be taken down out of the scholastic clouds.
Not so with my dasein.
Again, think my own assessment of dasein in this thread -- https://www.ilovephilosophy.com/viewtop ... 1&t=176529 -- is bullshit?
Okay, pick an issue, pick a context, and let's explore our respective takes on human identity out in the is/ought world then.
Re: Dasein/dasein
Er... no . I am totally not saying that is any sense what ever.iambiguous wrote: ↑Wed Dec 21, 2022 4:28 pmTo Dasein?
That's what you continue to "wiggle, wiggle, wiggle" out of: discussing Heidegger's take on Dasein in Being and Time as it relates to conflicting goods that revolve around moral and political value judgments situated out in particular worlds historically, culturally and personally. Given a particular context.
Whereas in regard to my take on dasein in my threads above, value judgments are crucial because they revolve around the distinction I make between the Self in the either/or world and the "self" in the is/ought world.
Let me know when you are ready to actually go there. You can pick the issue. You can pick the context.Exactly!! Heidegger's Dasein is basically just a "general description intellectual/philosophical contraption" that never needs to be taken down out of the scholastic clouds.
You never fail to disappont
Okay how do we understand the relevance of natural selection on human populations???Not so with my dasein.
Again, think my own assessment of dasein in this thread -- https://www.ilovephilosophy.com/viewtop ... 1&t=176529 -- is bullshit?
Okay, pick an issue, pick a context, and let's explore our respective takes on human identity out in the is/ought world then.
You go first!
- iambiguous
- Posts: 7464
- Joined: Mon Nov 22, 2010 10:23 pm
Re: Dasein/dasein
Right. As long as you avoid altogether bringing his Dasein down out of those intellectual clouds. And I am more than willing to let you pick the issue and the context.Mr. Wiggle wrote:Er... no . I am totally not saying that is any sense what ever.iambiguous wrote: ↑Wed Dec 21, 2022 4:28 pmMr. Wiggle wrote:
Why do you think reducing it to "value judgements" is relevant to understanding Dasein?To Dasein?
That's what you continue to "wiggle, wiggle, wiggle" out of: discussing Heidegger's take on Dasein in Being and Time as it relates to conflicting goods that revolve around moral and political value judgments situated out in particular worlds historically, culturally and personally. Given a particular context.
Whereas in regard to my take on dasein in my threads above, value judgments are crucial because they revolve around the distinction I make between the Self in the either/or world and the "self" in the is/ought world.
Let me know when you are ready to actually go there. You can pick the issue. You can pick the context.Exactly!! Heidegger's Dasein is basically just a "general description intellectual/philosophical contraption" that never needs to be taken down out of the scholastic clouds.Mr. Wiggle wrote:Dasein is beyond all these things. It does not mandate any of them.
Dasein does not have a context; it is all contexts.
Its more like consciousness; beingness. The ground of possibility that makes all these concepts possible.
You never fail to disappont
Not so with my dasein.
Again, think my own assessment of dasein in this thread -- https://www.ilovephilosophy.com/viewtop ... 1&t=176529 -- is bullshit?
Okay, pick an issue, pick a context, and let's explore our respective takes on human identity out in the is/ought world then.
Well, first, of course, there is the biological reality of natural selection itself. Sans 1] God or 2] a teleological component to nature itself, it all unfolds through random mutations. Genes are modified -- why? what's behind that? -- and species change and evolve. Then survial of the fittest. Adapt or die.
Only when it all evolved into the human species the conscious mind itself [given free will] becomes the self-conscious mind and nature itself becomes increasingly more embedded in nurture. Genes? Meet memes.
Historical, cultural and experiential memes/variables such that depending on when and where you are "thrown" adventitiously into a particular world at birth, you may be indoctrinated to believe in any number of different [and ofttimes conflicting] things about any number of different behaviors that are either prescribed or proscribed.
And then a few thousand years ago, re Marx, the means of production advanced to the point where "surplus labor" was increasingly available for other things.
Being philosophers for example. Or theologians. And some of those folks then "thought up" any number of God and No God objectivisms such that it was commanded that all rational and virtuous men and women were now deontologically obligated to think "wisely" about morality and ethics and political science.
Some going so far as to insist this was categorical and imperative.
Or, uh, be deemed a moron and a retard?
Re: Dasein/dasein
No, once again you are just wrong.iambiguous wrote: ↑Wed Dec 21, 2022 7:35 pmRight. As long as you avoid altogether bringing his Dasein down out of those intellectual clouds. And I am more than willing to let you pick the issue and the context.Mr. Wiggle wrote:Er... no . I am totally not saying that is any sense what ever.iambiguous wrote: ↑Wed Dec 21, 2022 4:28 pm
Exactly!! Heidegger's Dasein is basically just a "general description intellectual/philosophical contraption" that never needs to be taken down out of the scholastic clouds.
You never fail to disappont
You simply failed to understand what I described. We can talk about it or not. You can take off the shelf or not. but my guess is that you are pissed off because you cannot reach the shelf, because you don't have to chops.
Instead you just put up a smokescreen of sour grapes.
And what has this got to do with your "Dasein"?Not so with my dasein.
Again, think my own assessment of dasein in this thread -- https://www.ilovephilosophy.com/viewtop ... 1&t=176529 -- is bullshit?
Okay, pick an issue, pick a context, and let's explore our respective takes on human identity out in the is/ought world then.Well, first, of course, there is the biological reality of natural selection itself. Sans 1] God or 2] a teleological component to nature itself, it all unfolds through random mutations. Genes are modified -- why? what's behind that? -- and species change and evolve. Then survial of the fittest. Adapt or die.
Only when it all evolved into the human species the conscious mind itself [given free will] becomes the self-conscious mind and nature itself becomes increasingly more embedded in nurture. Genes? Meet memes.
Historical, cultural and experiential memes/variables such that depending on when and where you are "thrown" adventitiously into a particular world at birth, you may be indoctrinated to believe in any number of different [and ofttimes conflicting] things about any number of different behaviors that are either prescribed or proscribed.
And then a few thousand years ago, re Marx, the means of production advanced to the point where "surplus labor" was increasingly available for other things.
Being philosophers for example. Or theologians. And some of those folks then "thought up" any number of God and No God objectivisms such that it was commanded that all rational and virtuous men and women were now deontologically obligated to think "wisely" about morality and ethics and political science.
Some going so far as to insist this was categorical and imperative.
Or, uh, be deemed a moron and a retard?