On Sat, 22 Jul 1995, Tom Blancato wrote:
> Now, it seems to me that one of the conditions of
> possibility of the shift, even simply the Being of the
> difference between authenticity and inauthenticity is the
> very "theme" of authenticity itself. In this respect, you
> may be perhaps recapitulating the wrong-headed (if
> intellectually well-intentioned) attempt to avoid
> "tautology" or circular reasoning. Heidegger *might* say,
> "authenticity is actual", just as Kant says that
> "metaphysics is actual". Or he might say: it is primordial,
> in which case the thing to do is not determine *its*
> conditions of possibility but rather let it be one of the
> conditions of possibility of other things, in showing and
> explaining *their* Being.
----------------------------------
Yes, I think your comments here are plausible. Heidegger did spend a lot
of energy talking about the necessary logical circularity of any proper
Daseinanalytik, so he might appeal to that to convince me that here
explanations must come to an end.
I wouldn't believe him if he gave me such an explanation, of course, but
that's a whole separate matter from which I should probably steer clear
for now.
Anyway, I think it's time for me to move on from this issue and post a
message on Chapter 3. I'll try to do that tomorrow.
Thanks for the reponse,
David Schenk.
--- from list heidegger@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx ---
------------------
> Now, it seems to me that one of the conditions of
> possibility of the shift, even simply the Being of the
> difference between authenticity and inauthenticity is the
> very "theme" of authenticity itself. In this respect, you
> may be perhaps recapitulating the wrong-headed (if
> intellectually well-intentioned) attempt to avoid
> "tautology" or circular reasoning. Heidegger *might* say,
> "authenticity is actual", just as Kant says that
> "metaphysics is actual". Or he might say: it is primordial,
> in which case the thing to do is not determine *its*
> conditions of possibility but rather let it be one of the
> conditions of possibility of other things, in showing and
> explaining *their* Being.
----------------------------------
Yes, I think your comments here are plausible. Heidegger did spend a lot
of energy talking about the necessary logical circularity of any proper
Daseinanalytik, so he might appeal to that to convince me that here
explanations must come to an end.
I wouldn't believe him if he gave me such an explanation, of course, but
that's a whole separate matter from which I should probably steer clear
for now.
Anyway, I think it's time for me to move on from this issue and post a
message on Chapter 3. I'll try to do that tomorrow.
Thanks for the reponse,
David Schenk.
--- from list heidegger@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx ---
------------------