Re: Cast impressions

On Wed, 25 Sep Steven E. Callihan writes:

>It seems to me that the distinction you are pointing toward is that
>between the relative character of things as being autonomous or
alienated. >A chair, for instance, is not self-definitive, but is defined
by the use we
>would make of it. A tree, however, is. But if the chair be a high work
of >art...
>
Steve I thin you are right here. I am struggling with H's notion of
thing and trying to re-think it. However, I don't think I am doing that
well. it would appear that the character of things as, relative or
autonomous woud be the difference between the difference between thing
and phenomena. Let me ask a question though, are concerned only with
things we have visiual, tactil, olfactory contact with, or would this
cover planets (other than ours), and countries we have never been to, or
seen pictures of? I enjoy H, but I am trying to break down some of the
terms he uses. Maybe this is not possible, but I think it is worth the
try. What do you think the difference is, or is there any?

I'll respond to the rest later, I have to go teach class now.:)

P.S. thanks for helping me clarify my own thinking.

Jason

"The significant problems we are
facing can *not* be solved at the
same level of thinking we were
at when we created them."
-Albert Einstein




--- from list heidegger@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx ---


Replies
Re: Cast impressions, Steven E. Callihan
Partial thread listing: