>
> Heidegger's word can, however, like any other, be misused for spoiled
> purposes. Let there be no misunderstanding how Heidegger thought of
> killing and abuse.
>
> regards
> rene
rene,
i was thinking in terms of jn caputo's thesis in "de-mything heid",
which i found convincing, ...don't see how you can ever prescind from the
factical without losing everything. also, isn't tu quoque a specious
defense? ...as well for heid as anthony, each has to answer for his own
being.
bob
Bob,
The screwer and the screwed so close to each other?
Caputo is a screwer too. He convinces you?
All machination builds upon over- and underman. You want, like
Caputo and Anthony, be superior?
Or...do you really think 1968 is superior to 1933?
I cannot believe it.
hopeful,
rene
--- from list heidegger@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx ---
> Heidegger's word can, however, like any other, be misused for spoiled
> purposes. Let there be no misunderstanding how Heidegger thought of
> killing and abuse.
>
> regards
> rene
rene,
i was thinking in terms of jn caputo's thesis in "de-mything heid",
which i found convincing, ...don't see how you can ever prescind from the
factical without losing everything. also, isn't tu quoque a specious
defense? ...as well for heid as anthony, each has to answer for his own
being.
bob
Bob,
The screwer and the screwed so close to each other?
Caputo is a screwer too. He convinces you?
All machination builds upon over- and underman. You want, like
Caputo and Anthony, be superior?
Or...do you really think 1968 is superior to 1933?
I cannot believe it.
hopeful,
rene
--- from list heidegger@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx ---