Subject: Re: Being and Time-section one
Date: Sun, 16 Mar 2003 19:45:50 +0100


Is Heidegger rejecting the Enlightenment in favour of a subjective, Utopian,
irrational, instinctual, pre-logical notion of being?  If so, then read the
chapter on Romantics in Craig's 'The Germans' which gives more info about
Romanticism in German culture, and seems to fit in with the v strong
anti-Liberal strand running through German history.  Remember:  the Liberal
revolution of 1848 was defeated in Germany, in the 20th Century Germany had
2 different Totalitarian regimes, both with unique and common facets.
Living in Northern Ireland, I'm v familiar with anti-Liberal projects, and
have come to strongly despise, hate and suspect them.  Any project based
strongly on a genetic theory of race, religion, ethnicity and so on, is apt
to be built on ideas of instinct, 'nature', the subjective, irrational,
over-determination of 'genius' and other instinctual theories of
intellection or creativity.  What is unnatural: v simply, what is cultural -
intellect, art, decorum, politeness, law, poetry, opera, music, literature,
painting (apart from the painting of kerbstones with their appropriate
flags), theatre, film, photography, free speech, openness, democracy,
rights.  What is natural in my society: beer, fegs, marches, drums, flutes,
violence, heterosexual monogamy of the most simple-minded kind, flags,
taboos, shibboleths, (not hatich but aitch, the retained haitch means you
are a Fenian), dogshit, dog ends of dogdays, one dimensional fascists with
green white and gold or red white and blue and dogshit in their minds.
Wilkommen zu frei fascist OstBelfast!
----- Original Message -----
From: "Malcolm Riddoch" <riddoch-AT-central.murdoch.edu.au>
To: <heidegger-AT-lists.village.virginia.edu>
Sent: Sunday, March 16, 2003 7:17 PM
Subject: Re: Being and Time-section one


>
> On Monday, March 17, 2003, at 12:36  AM, Paul Murphy wrote:
>
> > In thought we attain being - cogito ergo sum.  What is
> > Heidegger's addition to Cartesian wisdom?
>
> The entirety of Being and Time is in a sense a critique of this
> Cartesian proposition. The equation of thought with being is just
> another gloss in the history of philosophy, and  for Heidegger
> Descartes' notion of human being as a rational animal exemplifies a
> traditional metaphysics of subjectivity.
>
> I'd say we're definitely looking for something else here, and I think
> if you've the mind to you can find it in a big mac as much as in the
> self-reflexive assertion of your own cognitive existence. We could go
> on indefinitely here, being is 'consciousness', being is 'thought',
> being is... a cheeseburger, coke and (freedom!) fries.
>
> Heidegger's question is explicitly about being qua being. Before he
> asks it he'll have to set up just how we might even begin to approach a
> definition of being in terms of 'being', rather than something else.
> That's the job of the introduction to BT but we're only 4 pages in, and
> already it's getting interesting  :)
>
> Cheers,
>
> Malcolm
>
>
>
>      --- from list heidegger-AT-lists.village.virginia.edu ---



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