Dasein/dasein

For all things philosophical.

Moderators: AMod, iMod

User avatar
iambiguous
Posts: 7208
Joined: Mon Nov 22, 2010 10:23 pm

Re: Dasein/dasein

Post by iambiguous »

Mr. Wiggle wrote:
Er... no . I am totally not saying that is any sense what ever.
You never fail to disappont
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, Wiggle, Wiggle wrote:No, once again you are just wrong.
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.
Absolutely shameless. What, making this all about me not grasping Heidegger's "philosophical" Dasein, rather than in how Heidegger's "philosophical" Dasein can be made applicable to actual human interactions that come into conflict over value judgments?! Grow a pair and let's bring it down to Earth.
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.
Sculptor wrote: Wed Dec 21, 2022 6:08 pm Okay how do we understand the relevance of natural selection on human populations???
You go first!
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 survival 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?
Sculptor wrote: Wed Dec 21, 2022 6:08 pm And what has this got to do with your "Dasein"?
No, my dasein here: https://www.ilovephilosophy.com/viewtop ... 1&t=176529

And there, that pertains to "I" at the existential intersection of identity, value judgments, conflicting goods and political economy.

Given a particular context.

Which the Mr. Wiggles here avoid like the plague.
Belinda
Posts: 8034
Joined: Fri Aug 26, 2016 10:13 am

Re: Dasein/dasein

Post by Belinda »

In 2011 Please see Iambiguous's link from which I extract this key problem:
But then what does this really mean? That is the question that has always fascinated me the most. Once I become cognizant of how profoundly problematic my "self" is, what can "I" do about it? And what are the philosophical implications of acknolwedging that identity is, by and large, an existential contraption that is always subject to change without notice? What can we "anchor" our identity to so as to make this prefabricated...fabricated...refabricated world seem less vertiginous? And, thus, more certain.
What you can do to solve the problem is act as if you are free to accept or reject Dasein. The responsibility for the fabrication is yours, and the good that the fabrication does is yours.You yourself are therefore the hope and anchor and you yourself are the angel that leads the way into the future.
User avatar
iambiguous
Posts: 7208
Joined: Mon Nov 22, 2010 10:23 pm

Re: Dasein/dasein

Post by iambiguous »

Belinda wrote: Wed Dec 21, 2022 8:04 pm In 2011 Please see Iambiguous's link from which I extract this key problem:
But then what does this really mean? That is the question that has always fascinated me the most. Once I become cognizant of how profoundly problematic my "self" is, what can "I" do about it? And what are the philosophical implications of acknolwedging that identity is, by and large, an existential contraption that is always subject to change without notice? What can we "anchor" our identity to so as to make this prefabricated...fabricated...refabricated world seem less vertiginous? And, thus, more certain.
What you can do to solve the problem is act as if you are free to accept or reject Dasein. The responsibility for the fabrication is yours, and the good that the fabrication does is yours.You yourself are therefore the hope and anchor and you yourself are the angel that leads the way into the future.
:roll:

No, seriously.

Well, okay: :wink:
Belinda
Posts: 8034
Joined: Fri Aug 26, 2016 10:13 am

Re: Dasein/dasein

Post by Belinda »

iambiguous wrote: Wed Dec 21, 2022 8:09 pm
Belinda wrote: Wed Dec 21, 2022 8:04 pm In 2011 Please see Iambiguous's link from which I extract this key problem:
But then what does this really mean? That is the question that has always fascinated me the most. Once I become cognizant of how profoundly problematic my "self" is, what can "I" do about it? And what are the philosophical implications of acknolwedging that identity is, by and large, an existential contraption that is always subject to change without notice? What can we "anchor" our identity to so as to make this prefabricated...fabricated...refabricated world seem less vertiginous? And, thus, more certain.
What you can do to solve the problem is act as if you are free to accept or reject Dasein. The responsibility for the fabrication is yours, and the good that the fabrication does is yours.You yourself are therefore the hope and anchor and you yourself are the angel that leads the way into the future.
:roll:

No, seriously.

Well, okay: :wink:
What else? Some jumped up man in a uniform and high hat?
User avatar
Sculptor
Posts: 8529
Joined: Wed Jun 26, 2019 11:32 pm

Re: Dasein/dasein

Post by Sculptor »

iambiguous wrote: Wed Dec 21, 2022 7:56 pm
Mr. Wiggle wrote:
Er... no . I am totally not saying that is any sense what ever.
You never fail to disappont
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, Wiggle, Wiggle wrote:No, once again you are just wrong.
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.
Absolutely shameless. What, making this all about me not grasping Heidegger's "philosophical" Dasein, rather than in how Heidegger's "philosophical" Dasein can be made applicable to actual human interactions that come into conflict over value judgments?! Grow a pair and let's bring it down to Earth.
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.
Sculptor wrote: Wed Dec 21, 2022 6:08 pm Okay how do we understand the relevance of natural selection on human populations???
You go first!
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 survival 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?
Sculptor wrote: Wed Dec 21, 2022 6:08 pm And what has this got to do with your "Dasein"?
No, my dasein here: https://www.ilovephilosophy.com/viewtop ... 1&t=176529

And there, that pertains to "I" at the existential intersection of identity, value judgments, conflicting goods and political economy.

Given a particular context.

Which the Mr. Wiggles here avoid like the plague.

You said....

Not so with my dasein.

Again, think my own assessment of dasein in this thread -...
Okay, pick an issue, pick a context, and let's explore our respective takes on human identity out in the is/ought world then.


So I picked natural selection as a context to which you gave the usual sort of response. Yet you now reject this as supposed to have anything with Dasein.
On following your link I see the ramblings of a man confused about his personal identity and how it is supposed to relate to the rest of "mankind".

So are you saying that your dasein is about your personal angst concerning identity?
Is that it?
Identity?
Iwannaplato
Posts: 6656
Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 10:55 pm

Re: Dasein/dasein

Post by Iwannaplato »

Belinda wrote: Wed Dec 21, 2022 8:04 pm In 2011 Please see Iambiguous's link from which I extract this key problem:
But then what does this really mean? That is the question that has always fascinated me the most. Once I become cognizant of how profoundly problematic my "self" is, what can "I" do about it? And what are the philosophical implications of acknolwedging that identity is, by and large, an existential contraption that is always subject to change without notice? What can we "anchor" our identity to so as to make this prefabricated...fabricated...refabricated world seem less vertiginous? And, thus, more certain.
What you can do to solve the problem is act as if you are free to accept or reject Dasein. The responsibility for the fabrication is yours, and the good that the fabrication does is yours.You yourself are therefore the hope and anchor and you yourself are the angel that leads the way into the future.
Well, I sort of agree. I don't think there has to be an as if involved. Notice in his description that he is asking for some kind of general answer. Some meta-answer. What does he want to do? What does he want to avoid? Yes, act. But there is no need to pretend or to live with a fluff of distractions and meta-questions at all moments. If someone was near him who he loved and could reduce the suffering of that person by a simple act, he'd probably know what to do. Read: what he wants to do. So, yeah, that can be a fairly clear situation. But the process is the same. It doesn't matter for the next moments where my desire for pistascio ice cream or reading Tolstoy comes from in terms of what I want to do. And regadless of how one thinks of identity, sometimes the desires will be mixed or unclear. Even a naive simple view of the self, if it is one's model, doesn't protect one from ambivalence, mixed feelings, being torn between two desires, etc.

But viewing yourself as some kind of abstract problem to be solved...that's unlikely to lead to feeling less vertiginous. Quite the opposite.
User avatar
iambiguous
Posts: 7208
Joined: Mon Nov 22, 2010 10:23 pm

Re: Dasein/dasein

Post by iambiguous »

Sculptor wrote: Wed Dec 21, 2022 9:30 pm
iambiguous wrote: Wed Dec 21, 2022 7:56 pm
Mr. Wiggle wrote:
Er... no . I am totally not saying that is any sense what ever.
You never fail to disappont
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, Wiggle, Wiggle wrote:No, once again you are just wrong.
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.
Absolutely shameless. What, making this all about me not grasping Heidegger's "philosophical" Dasein, rather than in how Heidegger's "philosophical" Dasein can be made applicable to actual human interactions that come into conflict over value judgments?! Grow a pair and let's bring it down to Earth.
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.
Sculptor wrote: Wed Dec 21, 2022 6:08 pm Okay how do we understand the relevance of natural selection on human populations???
You go first!
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 survival 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?
Sculptor wrote: Wed Dec 21, 2022 6:08 pm And what has this got to do with your "Dasein"?
No, my dasein here: https://www.ilovephilosophy.com/viewtop ... 1&t=176529

And there, that pertains to "I" at the existential intersection of identity, value judgments, conflicting goods and political economy.

Given a particular context.

Which the Mr. Wiggles here avoid like the plague.

You said....

Not so with my dasein.

Again, think my own assessment of dasein in this thread -...
Okay, pick an issue, pick a context, and let's explore our respective takes on human identity out in the is/ought world then.


So I picked natural selection as a context to which you gave the usual sort of response. Yet you now reject this as supposed to have anything with Dasein.
On following your link I see the ramblings of a man confused about his personal identity and how it is supposed to relate to the rest of "mankind".

So are you saying that your dasein is about your personal angst concerning identity?
Is that it?
Identity?
There's almost nothing you won't do to avoid connecting the dots between Heidegger's Dasein in Being and Time, my own assessment of dasein in my threads above and an actual existential context revolving around conflicting goods...pertaining to a moral or political issue most here will be familiar with.

I addressed in detail my own take on natural selection and I noted the manner in which I understand it intertwined in my assessment of dasein -- given human interactions in the is/ought world in my threads above. Making a distinction between genes and memes.

In my view, as with IC "demonstrating" his Christian God, you really are absolutely shameless here. Another Magnus Anderson from my frame of mind.
User avatar
iambiguous
Posts: 7208
Joined: Mon Nov 22, 2010 10:23 pm

Re: Dasein/dasein

Post by iambiguous »

Iwannaplato wrote: Thu Dec 22, 2022 12:25 am
Belinda wrote: Wed Dec 21, 2022 8:04 pm In 2011 Please see Iambiguous's link from which I extract this key problem:
a man amidst mankind...

That is the paradox, right? I am an individual....a man; yet, in turn, I am but one of 6,500,000,000 additional men and women that constitutes what is commonly called "mankind". So, in what sense can I, as an individual, grasp my identity as separate and distinct from mankind? How do I make intelligent distinctions between my personal, psychological "self" [the me "I" know intimately from day to day], my persona [the me "I" project -- often as a chameleon -- in conflicting interactions with others], and my historical and ethnological self as a white male who happened adventitiously to be born and raised to view reality from the perspective of a 20th century United States citizen?

How does all of this coalesce into who I think I am? And how does this description contrast with how others grasp who they think I am? Is there a way to derive an objective rendering of my true self? Can I know objectively who I am?

No, I don't think so.

Identity is ever constructed, deconstructed and reconstructed over the years by hundreds and hundreds and hundreds of variables---some of which we had/have no choice/control regarding. We really are "thrown" into a fortuitous smorgasbord of demographic factors at birth and then molded and manipulated as children into whatever configuration of "reality" suits the cultural [and political] institutions of our time.

On the other hand:

In my view, one crucial difference between people is the extent to which they become more or less self-conscious of this. Why? Because, obviously, to the extent that they do, they can attempt to deconstruct the past and then reconstruct the future into one of their own more autonomous making.

But then what does this really mean? That is the question that has always fascinated me the most. Once I become cognizant of how profoundly problematic my "self" is, what can "I" do about it? And what are the philosophical implications of acknowledging that identity is, by and large, an existential contraption that is always subject to change without notice? What can we "anchor" our identity to so as to make this prefabricated...fabricated...refabricated world seem less vertiginous? And, thus, more certain.
What you can do to solve the problem is act as if you are free to accept or reject Dasein. The responsibility for the fabrication is yours, and the good that the fabrication does is yours.You yourself are therefore the hope and anchor and you yourself are the angel that leads the way into the future.
Well, I sort of agree. I don't think there has to be an as if involved. Notice in his description that he is asking for some kind of general answer. Some meta-answer. What does he want to do? What does he want to avoid? Yes, act. But there is no need to pretend or to live with a fluff of distractions and meta-questions at all moments. If someone was near him who he loved and could reduce the suffering of that person by a simple act, he'd probably know what to do. Read: what he wants to do. So, yeah, that can be a fairly clear situation. But the process is the same. It doesn't matter for the next moments where my desire for pistascio ice cream or reading Tolstoy comes from in terms of what I want to do. And regadless of how one thinks of identity, sometimes the desires will be mixed or unclear. Even a naive simple view of the self, if it is one's model, doesn't protect one from ambivalence, mixed feelings, being torn between two desires, etc.

But viewing yourself as some kind of abstract problem to be solved...that's unlikely to lead to feeling less vertiginous. Quite the opposite.
Again, what is lacking here? The sort of context I explored in the OP of this thread pertaining to abortion: https://www.ilovephilosophy.com/viewtop ... 1&t=194382

Over and again, I maintain that my own understanding of dasein revolves around "I" in the is/ought world...conflicting moral, political and/or spiritual value judgments. Not eating ice cream or reading Tolstoy.

Let's agree on a context and sustain a discussion of I/"I" at the existential juncture of identity, value judgments, conflicting goods and political economy.
User avatar
Sculptor
Posts: 8529
Joined: Wed Jun 26, 2019 11:32 pm

Re: Dasein/dasein

Post by Sculptor »

iambiguous wrote: Thu Dec 22, 2022 2:49 am
Sculptor wrote: Wed Dec 21, 2022 9:30 pm
iambiguous wrote: Wed Dec 21, 2022 7:56 pm





Absolutely shameless. What, making this all about me not grasping Heidegger's "philosophical" Dasein, rather than in how Heidegger's "philosophical" Dasein can be made applicable to actual human interactions that come into conflict over value judgments?! Grow a pair and let's bring it down to Earth.









No, my dasein here: https://www.ilovephilosophy.com/viewtop ... 1&t=176529

And there, that pertains to "I" at the existential intersection of identity, value judgments, conflicting goods and political economy.

Given a particular context.

Which the Mr. Wiggles here avoid like the plague.

You said....

Not so with my dasein.

Again, think my own assessment of dasein in this thread -...
Okay, pick an issue, pick a context, and let's explore our respective takes on human identity out in the is/ought world then.


So I picked natural selection as a context to which you gave the usual sort of response. Yet you now reject this as supposed to have anything with Dasein.
On following your link I see the ramblings of a man confused about his personal identity and how it is supposed to relate to the rest of "mankind".

So are you saying that your dasein is about your personal angst concerning identity?
Is that it?
Identity?
There's almost nothing you won't do to avoid connecting the dots between Heidegger's Dasein in Being and Time, my own assessment of dasein in my threads above and an actual existential context revolving around conflicting goods...pertaining to a moral or political issue most here will be familiar with.

I addressed in detail my own take on natural selection and I noted the manner in which I understand it intertwined in my assessment of dasein -- given human interactions in the is/ought world in my threads above. Making a distinction between genes and memes.

In my view, as with IC "demonstrating" his Christian God, you really are absolutely shameless here. Another Magnus Anderson from my frame of mind.
You are nothing but a time waster.
Belinda
Posts: 8034
Joined: Fri Aug 26, 2016 10:13 am

Re: Dasein/dasein

Post by Belinda »

Iwannaplato wrote: Thu Dec 22, 2022 12:25 am
Belinda wrote: Wed Dec 21, 2022 8:04 pm In 2011 Please see Iambiguous's link from which I extract this key problem:
But then what does this really mean? That is the question that has always fascinated me the most. Once I become cognizant of how profoundly problematic my "self" is, what can "I" do about it? And what are the philosophical implications of acknolwedging that identity is, by and large, an existential contraption that is always subject to change without notice? What can we "anchor" our identity to so as to make this prefabricated...fabricated...refabricated world seem less vertiginous? And, thus, more certain.
In support of 'as ifs'

What you can do to solve the problem is act as if you are free to accept or reject Dasein. The responsibility for the fabrication is yours, and the good that the fabrication does is yours.You yourself are therefore the hope and anchor and you yourself are the angel that leads the way into the future.
Well, I sort of agree. I don't think there has to be an as if involved. Notice in his description that he is asking for some kind of general answer. Some meta-answer. What does he want to do? What does he want to avoid? Yes, act. But there is no need to pretend or to live with a fluff of distractions and meta-questions at all moments. If someone was near him who he loved and could reduce the suffering of that person by a simple act, he'd probably know what to do. Read: what he wants to do. So, yeah, that can be a fairly clear situation. But the process is the same. It doesn't matter for the next moments where my desire for pistascio ice cream or reading Tolstoy comes from in terms of what I want to do. And regadless of how one thinks of identity, sometimes the desires will be mixed or unclear. Even a naive simple view of the self, if it is one's model, doesn't protect one from ambivalence, mixed feelings, being torn between two desires, etc.

But viewing yourself as some kind of abstract problem to be solved...that's unlikely to lead to feeling less vertiginous. Quite the opposite.
Reducing the suffering of someone you love, except for instinctive behaviour, involves you in assessing probability. They have broken their leg. What is probably the best way I can support the broken leg? You will act as if you can do something to help relieve the pain. Nothing is certain but Dasein is not a senseless thing that can't project itself into the future.
If, by 'dasein' you include motor cars, robots, and computers then these are different from Dasein whose ability to experience results in imagination and creativity.
Iwannaplato
Posts: 6656
Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 10:55 pm

Re: Dasein/dasein

Post by Iwannaplato »

Belinda wrote: Thu Dec 22, 2022 1:21 pm Reducing the suffering of someone you love, except for instinctive behaviour, involves you in assessing probability. They have broken their leg. What is probably the best way I can support the broken leg? You will act as if you can do something to help relieve the pain. Nothing is certain but Dasein is not a senseless thing that can't project itself into the future.
If, by 'dasein' you include motor cars, robots, and computers then these are different from Dasein whose ability to experience results in imagination and creativity.
I probably didn't explain myself well. At least, it seems like we are not writing past each other, though I'm not sure. I wasn't speaking about certainty of being effective. I just meant that in that situation (a small to larger crisis) most people would not start mulling over if their urge to help the other person - to bring them a pillow, to hold them, etc. - reflects part of their true identity or some learned behavior from TV and the culture. They would just help their loved one. Whatever the ultimate philosophized determination one makes about that gesture and selves and authenticity or permanent selves or if selves exist at all, one would not later think 'Oh, my God, I assessed selfhood incorrectly.' You might have, but really, who cares, in that moment and no reason to chastize oneself later. Desire, concern for the other, concern for yourself, interests...these all can make the next action choosable. Yes, perhaps the desire was created in part by watching too many Hollywood films. Perhaps it is the product of some other cultural process or parenting or....But if it is what you wanted to do even if we bracket [you], this is a lot closer to the feeling of being yourself than staying in some metaposition about selves and critically assessing every act one might choose.

To be clear: I am not saying the issue is now resolved. I understand the interest, which I share, in thinking about such things. I am not saying the issue is not important. I do think that immersion is more likely to reduce the stress around the issue, than having that philosophical issue always central to one's thinking. A bit like if you want to kick a ball well in soccer/football don't think about the motions of your legs or how you look doing it. Follow the feeling.

When you said act as if...I took a little exception. I think the desire is already there, just express it. You don't have to act 'as if' it is yours or a true expression of you or that you exist in some naive way. Just follow that desire.

And as I said, yes there are situations where you may have more than one desire and they don't match well, or you are numb or emotionally paralyzed. But this is true even if you never once consider folk theories of selves.

If however you make a habit of thinking of your acts as dependent on 'as if'. If you frame them this way regularly, I think it will cause more problems than help.

Just as there likely is a level of too much thinking about oneself in philosophical ways. I mean too much in the sense that it neither produces more insight nor makes one feel better. In fact, it makes one feel worse. Of course, that may fit someone's values. That's their choice.
Belinda
Posts: 8034
Joined: Fri Aug 26, 2016 10:13 am

Re: Dasein/dasein

Post by Belinda »

Iwannaplato wrote: Thu Dec 22, 2022 2:43 pm
Belinda wrote: Thu Dec 22, 2022 1:21 pm Reducing the suffering of someone you love, except for instinctive behaviour, involves you in assessing probability. They have broken their leg. What is probably the best way I can support the broken leg? You will act as if you can do something to help relieve the pain. Nothing is certain but Dasein is not a senseless thing that can't project itself into the future.
If, by 'dasein' you include motor cars, robots, and computers then these are different from Dasein whose ability to experience results in imagination and creativity.
I probably didn't explain myself well. At least, it seems like we are not writing past each other, though I'm not sure. I wasn't speaking about certainty of being effective. I just meant that in that situation (a small to larger crisis) most people would not start mulling over if their urge to help the other person - to bring them a pillow, to hold them, etc. - reflects part of their true identity or some learned behavior from TV and the culture. They would just help their loved one. Whatever the ultimate philosophized determination one makes about that gesture and selves and authenticity or permanent selves or if selves exist at all, one would not later think 'Oh, my God, I assessed selfhood incorrectly.' You might have, but really, who cares, in that moment and no reason to chastize oneself later. Desire, concern for the other, concern for yourself, interests...these all can make the next action choosable. Yes, perhaps the desire was created in part by watching too many Hollywood films. Perhaps it is the product of some other cultural process or parenting or....But if it is what you wanted to do even if we bracket [you], this is a lot closer to the feeling of being yourself than staying in some metaposition about selves and critically assessing every act one might choose.

To be clear: I am not saying the issue is now resolved. I understand the interest, which I share, in thinking about such things. I am not saying the issue is not important. I do think that immersion is more likely to reduce the stress around the issue, than having that philosophical issue always central to one's thinking. A bit like if you want to kick a ball well in soccer/football don't think about the motions of your legs or how you look doing it. Follow the feeling.

When you said act as if...I took a little exception. I think the desire is already there, just express it. You don't have to act 'as if' it is yours or a true expression of you or that you exist in some naive way. Just follow that desire.

And as I said, yes there are situations where you may have more than one desire and they don't match well, or you are numb or emotionally paralyzed. But this is true even if you never once consider folk theories of selves.

If however you make a habit of thinking of your acts as dependent on 'as if'. If you frame them this way regularly, I think it will cause more problems than help.

Just as there likely is a level of too much thinking about oneself in philosophical ways. I mean too much in the sense that it neither produces more insight nor makes one feel better. In fact, it makes one feel worse. Of course, that may fit someone's values. That's their choice.
I don't know of anyone who. when an occasion for action presents , does philosophy. Many people (who I believe to be the good people) don't hesitate to help including when the other is an enemy. Dasein is compete with overlearned beliefs and morals, and has or maybe has not learned empathy and sympathy, so Dasein comes to emergencies ready primed to act. Dasein is as Dasein does.
One thing that is common to all Daseins, and I think we agree here, is that Dasein throws himself into the future for better or worse.This is an existential ability that motorcars, tables, computers, robots, and lifeless stones don't possess.

I suppose each Dasein , when presented with incoherent alternatives, will have learned his own triage system. Bearing in mind that an honest decision may be to sleep on the problem or await more information, the Dasein who escapes from the responsibility of Daseins to make decisions is not much better than a stick or a stone.
User avatar
iambiguous
Posts: 7208
Joined: Mon Nov 22, 2010 10:23 pm

Re: Dasein/dasein

Post by iambiguous »

There's almost nothing you won't do to avoid connecting the dots between Heidegger's Dasein in Being and Time, my own assessment of dasein in my threads above and an actual existential context revolving around conflicting goods...pertaining to a moral or political issue most here will be familiar with.

I addressed in detail my own take on natural selection and I noted the manner in which I understand it intertwined in my assessment of dasein -- given human interactions in the is/ought world in my threads above. Making a distinction between genes and memes.

In my view, as with IC "demonstrating" his Christian God, you really are absolutely shameless here. Another Magnus Anderson from my frame of mind.
Mr. Wiggle wrote:You are nothing but a time waster.
Again, another absolutely shameless post from someone who refuses to come down out of the intellectual contraption clouds here in exploring the distinction between Heidegger's Dasein in Being and Time, and my dasein here: https://www.ilovephilosophy.com/viewtop ... 1&t=176529

Given a particular moral conflict and set of circumstances.
User avatar
iambiguous
Posts: 7208
Joined: Mon Nov 22, 2010 10:23 pm

Re: Dasein/dasein

Post by iambiguous »

Heidegger and Dasein
at The-Philosophy.com website
In Being and Time, Heidegger raises the fundamental question of being. He called Dasein, that is to say “being there” in that it is distinguished by its very being that makes it (in) as it is there (da) in the world.
How much more fundamentally obvious can this be? Like we need a philosopher to point out that each of us has a particular existence out in a particular world. And that, unlike with other animal species, the human species [given a free will world] is self-conscious of this existence such that over time we were even able to invent philosophy in order to explore existence itself in ways no other species comes even remotely close to.

Instead, what is far, far more crucial, from the cradle to the grave, is where "there" is. Why? Because when any particular one of our own "theres" is embedded in different historical and cultural and personal contexts that can have a profound impact on what we conclude is right or wrong in terms of the behaviors we choose. Many things in the either/or world are true objectively for all of us. But within the philosophical discipline, ethics was invented precisely because the self-conscious animals that we are can't seem to pin down which behaviors are in fact obligatory for all rational men and women.

Only "arrogant, autocratic, authoritarian" ethicists all up and down the moral and political spectrum are around these days to insist that, on the contrary, an actual "universal morality" applicable to all of us has been found. Hundreds and hundreds of objectivists across the globe providing us with "scripts" to follow. And for many of them, others follow them...or else.

Instead, Heidegger and his philosophical ilk keep it all up in the intellectual clouds...
Heidegger begins by describing the fundamental structures of Dasein. It is primarily a “being with” and that “with” is defined in relation to other human beings and “utensils”, the concrete objects of civilization, which constitute the Umwelt, “the world around” . Dasein appears to itself through its daily life and must assume its “being-thrown-in-the-world” (Geworfenheit) as a project history. Then, as “being-in” Dasein is constantly prey to the temptation to fall in the inauthentic and the diversity of the everyday.
Recognize yourself and the life you live in that?

How about this...
He then discovers that it is determined by the nothingness that is the foundation of his being, a discovery that coincides with that of temporality. The meaning of his Dasein is indeed the “being-toward-death.”
Only here there is indeed the very, very profound existential reality of death...oblivion, nothingness. No getting around that for either the moral nihilists or the moral objectivists. Ah, but the moral objectivists among us have either a God or a No God dogma to put even that in a more uplifting perspective. With the God folks you get immortality and salvation. And with the No God folks at least you get an ideological script on this side of the grave into which you can anchor your Self.

Or, again, "or else".

I quote history here, for example.

https://ilovephilosophy.com/viewtopic.php?f=1&t=176529
User avatar
iambiguous
Posts: 7208
Joined: Mon Nov 22, 2010 10:23 pm

Re: Dasein/dasein

Post by iambiguous »

Heidegger and Dasein
at The-Philosophy.com website
[The meaning of his Dasein is indeed the “being-toward-death.”] Understanding this finitude, which is the essence of temporality is for man to discover the historicity of their destiny, which he shares with all his generation. The scope of this work was considerable. It was said that based existentialism, what Heidegger has always refused. But Sartre will build on Being and Time to develop his philosophy, not without having made some misinterpretations.
There's no getting around death here. It and the fact that we are the only animals around capable of exploring it philosophically. Being and time. And then we run out of it. So, how "on earth" are we to understand our very existence itself given that we have to live with the knowledge of death...with what we think we know about it. And it's not for nothing that so many manage to convince themselves that death is just a passage on to a life after death.
So from that book, Heidegger turns to an interpretation of being as necessary to forget the metaphysical as it exists from Socrates.
Things that philosophers say? And then those "beings" like you and I who grapple with intertwining the existential reality of social, political and economic interactions...literally from day to day to day...with whatever we can manage to convince ourselves connects all that to the "metaphysical". Again, God for most. But, here, in a philosophy venue, it can be...other things? Like, for instance, the "intrinsic Self".

But then straight back up into the clouds...
Western metaphysics founded by Socrates and Plato obscures the meaning of the truth that the pre-Socratics had updated and was forgotten. Indeed, the myth of the Cave narrated by Plato in the Republic be broke in two by splitting being and appearance. Or Nietzsche has shown that there is no “back-world” (Hinterwelt) and so there is no conflict in being itself. For Nietzsche, the truth comes back to its foundation is the “un-veiling”...being is given to itself as will to power.
Here I merely point out the obvious...

That, given all of the vast and varied historical, cultural and interpersonal circumstances that any particular one of us might find ourselves born and then bred into, the caves themselves can be encompassed in countless configurations. So, of course, attempts will be made to insist either that only our own description of the cave counts or that only our own understanding of the "metaphysical" Reality outside the cave counts.
According to Heidegger, poets, thinkers such as, more than anyone else feel threatened by the omnipotence of technology that crushes man in bondage to the “object-ness” of the object and they fear that the instrumental purpose not submerge humanity in man. The distress of our times is precisely the lack of questioning, which makes the subject (though man-made) became the supreme certainty of daily life and the language has become information and communication: the only way out is brings the art.
And, by all means, existentially, make of this what you will. The omnipotence of technology still prevails of course but there are also still plenty of "Isms" around to anchor the Self to. The Nazis then, the Nazis now, for example.
Post Reply