Suggestion

Howdy folks,

I have a suggestion. Someone a while back suggested that we switch to using
"essence" instead of Being and being. I would suggest (and I am seeing some
confusion over this point) that we stick with the standard (?) Macquarrie
and Robisnon habit of using "Being" and "being" (note the capital letter B)
for differentiating. In all the books I read about B&T the authors seemed
to stick with this (even to the point of using "[B]" and "[b]" at te start
of a new sentence.

Thus, Heidegger is, in B&T, searching for Being.
Dasein is a being (entity) for whom Being (existence) is a concern.
All animals "dwell in the...of Being".
All animals are beings.

I am seeing a lot of the "animal" discussion revolve around what I would say
is an overconnection of Being and Dasein. Animals are not, as has been
pointed out, Dasein. Dasien is defined as "this entity which each of us is
himself and which includes inquiring as one of the possibilities of its
Being" (B&T,p.27). Of course, Heidegger, by using the term "himself", does
not mean to disclude women and I think a strong argument could be made that
any being who concerns "itself" with Being would be characterized as Dasein
(aliens). Perhaps even "dolphins", who knows. But how are we to know?
That is a problem I hated vbecause it made me feel that Imust be missing
some point.
What is it about Heidegger's work that keeps him from being seen as
horribly egocentric? How do I, as Dasein, know that you are Dasein as well?
Are you all just "Being-with-others" to me? Is that enough?

Anyway, I hope the suggestion on the use of Being and being helps a bit.

-Nik



--- from list heidegger@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx ---

------------------

Partial thread listing: