Date: Sun, 03 May 1998 21:21:00 -0700
Subject: Re: Aehrewurm


>> >>Is the thinker in fact separate from the thought? Perhaps not.
>> >
>> >Perhaps you can suggest a way of thinking about it.  I assert that
>> >"thinking" is distinct from being thought up by the currents of
>> throwness.
>
>I'm sorry Bob, perhaps I missed some previous discussion that lead up to
>your statement about "being thought up by the currents of throwness."
>I'm not following you hear. Could you elaborate on this distinction? I
>don't understand what you mean by "being thought up by the currents of
>throwness."

I'm way running late.  my 2 year old is screaming so i'll just write. (ramble)

First off.  I'm not a philosopher.  As is obvious.  I will speak plainly of
my experience and relate it to what is discussed here with an impoverished
grasp the this whole vocabulary (H's).  The way I see it, the hermeneutical
circle and the ontological difference and most of what I see in SuZ is what
i refer to as the default human being.  The thrown way of being human.

What I find of interest is what H may have had in "mind" for the 3rd
division of part one of SuZ?  .. what he explores in _The End of Philosophy
and the Task of Thinking_.  That is the kind of being that isn't "delivered
over."  It is a new kind of human being.  A new mode of being distinct from
the thrown way of being for human being.  The words escape me.  the "truth"
is I rarely read this list.  And mostly just what Dr Eldred writes.  And
extraordinary symobolization of the actual (the antechamber eh?). The way
it is for me now (my practices) can be summed up by "I used to be
different, but now I am the same."  (H-ism with
interpretation/understanding escapes me at the moment)

How this "works" for me is ...

... first off.  H deconstructs the traditionals.  yes?  he articulates the
end of metaphysics beginning from decarte to nietzche's metaphysics of
subjectivity. the cogito to the will-to-power. the essence of metaphysical
man.  the possibilities are now exhausted is his claim.  Now what?  How
that is for me is that I "have" what I call a "psychology" (I know,
enframing).  That is a metaphysically why-based structure and not something
concerned with what-based being.  Not really.  Now what?  indeed.  If i let
my psychology be, it lets me be.  That is that when I can disentangle
my-self from conceptualization.  (this entire explication is in fact
bullshit because i'm attempting to "report" on what essentially lies beyond
"reporting" activities)  It is very zen like.  So what about the
horizonless desert of the subject-object split?  What I'm saying is that
once i experience you (for instance) in a way that isn't mediated by my own
position.  by my entanglement with metaphyically based structures (ie
made-up bull-shit)  i am able to sense you more intensely. when h says that
nihilism is countered only by repeatedly questioning "the nothing." this is
how it is for me.  My "experience" of you is more intense and alive.  What
h is talking about is, for me, an unencumbered ontology.  a disclosing of
relatedness.  the most intimate and nurturing gathering i'm aware off.
what does H say.  Metaphysics is interpretation of beings (ontic) and
forgetfulness of the essense of the nilih (poor paraphrase. i know).

Our networks of self-deception of so insidious Michael.  By the way, i
looked insidious up in my OED:

insidious (_________), a. Also 8=AD9 erron. insiduous.
[ad. L. insidios-us cunning, deceitful, f. insidi=E6 ambush: see -ous. Cf. Finsidieux (1420 in Hatz.-Darm.).]

Full of wiles or plots; lying in wait or seeking to entrap or ensnare;
proceeding or operating secretly or subtly so as not to excite suspicion;
sly, treacherous, deceitful, underhand, artful, cunning, crafty, wily. (Of
persons and things.)
--------------------
that is exactly what "mind worms" are like.  I mean exactly.  Don't get me
wrong.  as an engineer i value my "mind."  it's just that i've
distinguished it for what it is.  i use it.  it doesn't use me.

i'm on the run.  educate me.  i'm merely checking my experience with your
reports, explanations and descriptions of professor Heidegger's insight.
also, since many noticed my "background."  I just want you to know that I'm
standing for a global conversation beyond any corporate bound.

My very best regards,



Robert T. Guevara   | guevara-AT-rain.org
Electrical Engineer | guevarb-AT-mugu.navy.mil
Camarillo CA, USA   | http://www.rain.org/~guevara


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