Reading through SZ is like being a kid in a candy shop. I am filled with
questions. Here are two I am struggling with. Perhaps someone has an answer.
First, Heidegger talks about discovering that which we know, that which we
understand (verstehen) as something which exists a priori. Meaning here is
not derived from words. Rather, words describe the meaning of something we
already have. What then is the difference between this and the a priori
"forms" (existentials?) of Platonic idealism??
Second, though Heidegger is careful not to morlize about his
authentic/inauthentic ways of Being... still, there seems to be an
implication that authentic being is something to cherished (am I wrong about
this?). If this is the case, I cannot find any explanation as to why. Why
should an authentic way of Being be any better or worse than falling into
the inauthentic "they"? Or is this strictly my own reading into Heidegger
something which is not Heidegger's intention?
Any help here would be appreciated. This stuff ain't exactely
self-explanatory, you know.
Michael
--- from list heidegger@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx ---