http://www.bib.uab.es/pub/enrahonar/0211402Xn34.htm
In this 2002 issue of Enrahonar, von Herrmann's earlier
mentioned article on Dasein, and one, as well readable,
by Parvis Emad. Both clarify the ontic-ontological
structure of Dasein. Emad is esp. critical of Dreyfus.
"Rueck- oder Vorbezogenheit", transl. as "retro- and
forward relatedness", does not indicate an opposition,
but 'Rueck oder Vor' points to being as 'always already
in the back', or 'always already in front of' any Daseinic
asking possibility, preceding it. (All Entwurf/project as
itself projected, thrown/geworfen)
rdb
--- from list heidegger@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx ---
In this 2002 issue of Enrahonar, von Herrmann's earlier
mentioned article on Dasein, and one, as well readable,
by Parvis Emad. Both clarify the ontic-ontological
structure of Dasein. Emad is esp. critical of Dreyfus.
"Rueck- oder Vorbezogenheit", transl. as "retro- and
forward relatedness", does not indicate an opposition,
but 'Rueck oder Vor' points to being as 'always already
in the back', or 'always already in front of' any Daseinic
asking possibility, preceding it. (All Entwurf/project as
itself projected, thrown/geworfen)
rdb
--- from list heidegger@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx ---