I think this is a very good, albeit not too fleshed out, observation. I
share your view here.
Tom B.
On Tue, 10 Sep 1996, Christopher Stewart Morrissey wrote:
> > OK, please elaborate. Don't mean to be impolite or presumptious.
> > Instincts of a harried teaching assistant.
>
> Cool. I'll try and pick some stuff out of "On the Essence of Truth" that
> I have trouble with.
>
> > If it is a relativism, albeit a complex one (which I still think is
> > debatable), the question perhaps should be posed, "is it worth anything"
> > compared to, say, a dogmatic positivism or some other such ahistorical
> > foundationalism? What standard determines 'worth' here?
> > (Sorry for the brevity, my dial-in time is running out...)
>
> Heidegger beats every other philosophical option offered in this century.
> No question. He's the man to be dealt with. But I'm trying to take a
> millenial view. Maybe there's something Heidegger overlooked or
> misunderstood in his historical studies.
>
> Somehow I feel that Heidegger's radical historicism
> preempts dialogue with any other thinkers; they just get "interpreted"
> and his spin on them silences them. It's tough to argue with Heidegger
> because there's something about his philosophy that makes him immune to
> criticism.
>
>
> --- from list heidegger@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx ---
>
__________________________________________________________________________
'After witnessing the gruesome effect of sanctions on children and families
in Basrah, a city in southern Iraq, one delegation member, Brad Lyttle,
said, 'The sanctions are not spectacular, and operate slowly, but they
kill and maim as remorselessly as bullets and bombs, and are destroying a
generation of Iraqi children.' "
__________________________________________________________________________
--- from list heidegger@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx ---