reply to Pound, Sholar and Riddoch:
I was intending to oppose Dasein's ontology to the
Aristotelian or Cartesian scientia. The former's is
a "reason of the heart", an intuitive apprehension or
anamnesis, done, like Wordsworth, under the spell of strong
emotion (supremely, the "memento mori"), as opposed to the
cool analytic/synthetic theory of pure cartesian cerebration.
I sure am loathe to part with this postulate,...could you
instance for me how H is cartesian?
H claims that the moods, or intentional or affective states,
are primordial dynamei. They dispose or project Dasein,
i.e. consciousness, the transcendantal ego, soul, etc.
beyond or beneath the secondary truth of facticity,
cause/effect/ratio/..., instrumental reason,
into an unmediated grasping, or knowing, of being.
Aren't we in agreement here?
And what is uncovered or disclosed is (1) self-awareness
(2)of one's own existence, (3)the stunning uncanniness of it
(i.e. one's existence rather than non-existence), one's
being circumstanced in Nothing (i.e. no God/supreme being/
unmoved mover), and (4)the engrossing (structuring) of this
intuitive or visionary state with an affective
energy variably colored as concern, care, anxiety, dread,
guilt, conscience...but, univocally, all stirrings from the
one stark awareness or anticipation of approaching extinction.
Sooooooooooooooooo, if H can dispose of cartesian thinking
as derivative, why, especially post-Freud, isn't H under a
like cloud, that would have the effect of bringing on H's
"ontological thinking" a Kant-like judgement of subjective
circularity?
...a movement from a necrophobia to _philia,
within moribund culture in a war ravaged country. i.e. the
ontical is sufficient to it; there is no need here to
"multiply being" with a claim of "primordiality".
--- from list heidegger@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx ---
I was intending to oppose Dasein's ontology to the
Aristotelian or Cartesian scientia. The former's is
a "reason of the heart", an intuitive apprehension or
anamnesis, done, like Wordsworth, under the spell of strong
emotion (supremely, the "memento mori"), as opposed to the
cool analytic/synthetic theory of pure cartesian cerebration.
I sure am loathe to part with this postulate,...could you
instance for me how H is cartesian?
H claims that the moods, or intentional or affective states,
are primordial dynamei. They dispose or project Dasein,
i.e. consciousness, the transcendantal ego, soul, etc.
beyond or beneath the secondary truth of facticity,
cause/effect/ratio/..., instrumental reason,
into an unmediated grasping, or knowing, of being.
Aren't we in agreement here?
And what is uncovered or disclosed is (1) self-awareness
(2)of one's own existence, (3)the stunning uncanniness of it
(i.e. one's existence rather than non-existence), one's
being circumstanced in Nothing (i.e. no God/supreme being/
unmoved mover), and (4)the engrossing (structuring) of this
intuitive or visionary state with an affective
energy variably colored as concern, care, anxiety, dread,
guilt, conscience...but, univocally, all stirrings from the
one stark awareness or anticipation of approaching extinction.
Sooooooooooooooooo, if H can dispose of cartesian thinking
as derivative, why, especially post-Freud, isn't H under a
like cloud, that would have the effect of bringing on H's
"ontological thinking" a Kant-like judgement of subjective
circularity?
...a movement from a necrophobia to _philia,
within moribund culture in a war ravaged country. i.e. the
ontical is sufficient to it; there is no need here to
"multiply being" with a claim of "primordiality".
--- from list heidegger@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx ---