Date: Wed, 04 Mar 1998 07:07:37 -0800
From: Maggie <mheenie-AT-earthlink.net>
Subject: Re: Archetypes






At 07:06 AM 3/4/98 EST, you wrote:
>
>>
>>MS: So, this is what I ment about the patterning of  "stuff" (e.g.,
>>behavioral patterns, atomic patterns, molecular patterns, geometric
>>patterns...) isn't the issue. The issue comes about when Plato decides
>>that the pattern is the "real" (onto-theo-logical ground of these
>>things), and the "thing" isn't. Do I got this right?
>
>
>as right as me; but aren't you looking for jungian/platonic
>archetypes?  Martin surely isn't, or wasn't ready to look for any
>of that.  
>
>it appears to me that you are looking for those major pillars 
>archoring us to that glorious universal unconscious (= big B?).
>
>i conjecture that the pillars are/aren't 
>by way of the ontological difference.
>
>
>>> but daseining, it appears to me, is the ceaseless weaving of the
>>> fabric
>>> of being and dis-covering where designs that i intended weave into
>>> disclosed designs that are given to me, that sometimes close up my
>>> intended designs.  the "to me" indicates the requirement of I/Thou
>>> for a reconcilliation of poetic archetype
>>
>>MS: That is a very pretty way of putting it, Henry.
>>
>
>that the thought is not punctuated after "archetype"
>is an (intentional? Mr. Freud, eh, Henk?) accident
>due to the thought drifting into that which Henk 
>points out about intentionality and Martin.
>
>henry


you guys are really good!!!  I am now able to follow this conversation and
feel accomplished. Bear with me - I am being here.


>
>
>     
>
        ~~~~~~~~ Maggie G Heenie ~~~~~~~
              http://www.maggie.net
             Deal with other’s faults
        as gently as if they were your own.



     --- from list heidegger-AT-lists.village.virginia.edu ---