RE: What is truth?

More to the point: "Everything is relative." The assertion asserts an =
absolute. Reductio ad absurdum, Q.E.D.

The activity of the intellect (e.g. in assertions or in perception) =
presupposes first principles or originary sources. We shouldn't jettison =
traditional inquiry into the archai lightly, especially if all we have =
to replace it with are murmurs of "thinking and being".

(I know Heidegger wants to get at something primordial that makes =
assertions possible. Too often this is a wrong turn for him: into =
gnosticism. But his assaults on metaphysics are refreshing and a =
stimulus to think the matter itself for ourselves.)

----------
From: Iain Thomson[SMTP:ithomson@xxxxxxxx]
Sent: Monday, September 16, 1996 3:54 AM
To: heidegger@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: RE: What is truth?

>The classic case against relativism: It refutes itself.

--"It's all relative."
"But then your statement is relative as well!"
--"Ah, so you understand..."

Iain




--- from list heidegger@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx ---





--- from list heidegger@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx ---


Folow-ups
  • Heidegger and Gnosticism
    • From: Mont Allen
  • Partial thread listing: