Date: Sat, 22 Jul 1995 16:40:02 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: Re: division two, chapter i




On Sat, 22 Jul 1995, David Schenk wrote:

> Not only am I imagining Dasein to have a fixed structure, I am quite 
> convinced that it does, at least on Heidegger's account.  So when I posed 
> my question, I was asking what _ontological_ element of Dasein makes it 
> possible for Dasein to ontically shift from authentic to inauthentic 
> existence.  Both authenticity and inauthenticity are grounded in fixed, 
> constant, ontological structures of Dasein, and so they in themselves 
> will never be enough to explain how it is that Dasein can have these 
> contingent shifts in its basic ways of being.  So there must be something 
> else in Dasein's fundamental structure whereby this becomes possible.
> 
> Does that make any more sense?

Yes.  I understand what you're saying, but I am surprised.  I hadn't had 
such an interpretation of B&T.  I don't consider myself an expert, 
though, and I intend to challenge you.  Still, I wonder if you would mind 
referringg me to a passage or so that leads you to this particular 
reading so I can see it the way you do.  What I'm missing is grounds for 
assuming that Heidegger is positing a metaphysical structure that shapes 
experience either as authenticity or inauthenticity.  Let me change 
that.  I don't want to see your 'grounds for assuming' it.  I just want 
to be able to see some piece of text that suggests that to you so I can 
understand your reading.

..Lois Shawver


     --- from list heidegger-AT-lists.village.virginia.edu ---

     ------------------