Subject: Re: Numbers Game Question
Date: Mon, 24 Mar 2003 05:19:59 +0000


John Foster wrote:

>I cannot follow your argument very well.
>
>You seem to think that Deep Ecology is a means to 'mitigate
>anxiety' which you personally dissapprove of due to some
>thing you claim has to do with the 'ontic' versus the
>'ontological'.
>
>I am an ecologist, MSc level. Deep Ecologists experience
>anxiety for a variety of reasons. One of which may be due to
>the perception and critical evaluation of environmental
>quality in a region, or globally. Anxiety is an acute
>'concern' about something;

Geez John NO IT IS NOT! Did you even READ the text from SuZ that I gave you 
in my last reply? Here it is again, and READ it this time before (once 
again) just posting without have addressed the texts I give you!

"That is the face of which one has anxiety is not an entity 
within-the-world. Thus it is essentially INCAPABLE OF HAVING AN INVOLVEMENT. 
This threatening does NOT HAVE THE CHARACTER OF A DEFINITE DETRIMENTALITY 
which reaches what is threatened, and which reaches it with definite regard 
to a special factical potentiality-for-Being. THAT IN THE FACE OF WHICH ONE 
IS ANXIOUS IS COMPLETELY INDEFINITE. Not only does this indefiniteness leave 
factically undecided which entity within-the-world is threatening us, but it 
also tells us that entities within-the-world are not relevant at all. 
NOTHING WHICH IS READY-TO-HAND OR PRESENT-AT-HAND WITHIN THE WORLD FUNCTIONS 
AS THAT IN THE FACE OF WHICH ANXIETY IS ANXIOUS." (SuZ 186)

Anthony Crifasi


_________________________________________________________________
MSN 8 helps eliminate e-mail viruses. Get 2 months FREE*.  
http://join.msn.com/?page=features/virus



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