Mr. Blancato,
Is it proper to speak of anything 'constituting' something evil
as evil? This sounds Husserlian but not particularly Heideggerian --
I imagine he would speak of the givenness of something as something,
thereby avoiding having to pick out a constituting subject or structure
as the source of meaning (I know, in a way this source is Dasein, but
Dasein doesn't seem to generate or constitute meanings so much as
inextricably find itself entangled in them, almost like a passive
conduit).
It sounds as if you want to say that (in the context of SZ anyway)
death, for instance, is only an evil when Dasein decides that it
is and is not an authentic self-giving of the entity in one of its
aspects (or is not an authentic self-giving of the Seinkoennen in
question in the case of death). You seem to take 'otherness' as a
primary, neutral phenomenon (or negative super-phenomenon) onto
which evil or some other characteristic is grafted artificially like
an accident in a substance. Which would seem like a perfect point
of entry for a Hegelian critique: x, the other, is taken as y, evil,
but the taking of x as an x implies the previous givenness of s
a super-x which was then taken as x, and so on ad infinitum...
Please correct me if this is a misreading,
Christopher Doss
--- from list heidegger@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx ---