I'm wondering how to resolve a paradox that few scholars consider a
paradox. If Dasein is necessarily existentially composed of
understanding/existence, falling, and throwness, then it sems that falling
is part of his existential makeup. This is difficult only because
authenticity requires man to become indifferent to his falling. And if he
is indifferent to his existential makeup, how can we consider him authentic
Dasein, whose being is necessarily an issue for him. Dreyfus tries to
distinguish b/w falling and being fallen into das man, but this distinction
is Dreyfus' own superimposition. If the way we fall is the content of
authenticity, and the authentic way of falling is to overcome it, then I do
not see how falling can be a part of our existential makeup. If we are to
become resolute to our anxiety about falling, then to what extent must we
fall? Help please......
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
----------------------------------------
Ethan Leib (Yale '97).....ethan@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Man is timid and apologetic; he is no longer upright; he dares not say "I
think," "I am," but quotes some saint or sage.
-Emerson, "Self-Reliance"
--- from list heidegger@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx ---