File spoon-archives/heidegger.archive/heidegger_1998/heidegger.9805, message 242


From: "Christopher Honey" <CH1745-AT-pluto.aum.edu>
Date:          Sun, 31 May 1998 20:39:18 +600
Subject:       Re: Self-evidently so ...


> Date sent:      Fri, 29 May 1998 16:54:38 -0700
> From:           Mike Staples <mstaples-AT-argusqa.com>
> To:             heidegger-AT-lists.village.virginia.edu
> Subject:        Re: Self-evidently so ...
> Send reply to:  heidegger-AT-lists.village.Virginia.EDU

> Laurence Paul Hemming wrote:
> 
> > part of the complication here is that I am not at all sure Heidegger
> > thought
> > "God is a being" - in fact I'm convinced he didn't.
> 
> Me too.
> 
> >  Certainly God does not
> > "exist" (cf. for instance, GA40: "Trees are, but do not exist, God is,
> > but
> > does not exist ..." there are statements of this kind in a number of
> > places) - only Dasein as such exists (existence meaning being that
> > being for
> > whom the being of being can be an issue).
> 
> I have heard many interpretations of the term existence before, but
> yours is very nicely put. I had not quite thought of existence in quite
> this way before. Do women exist?
> 
> It is so strange. This statement, paraphrased, is on page 14 of Dreyfus'
> Being-in-the-world. I have it all marked up and highlighted. And yet, it
> had not occured to me quite this way. But let me ask a basic question
> here again: If the tree does not exist, and its Being is in part tied to
> Dasein, then in the abscence of Dasein, what could we say bout the tree?
> We cannot say that it  exists in the abscence of Dasein...because it
> never existed in the first place. We cannot say that it is still
> "there", because without Dasein there is no "there" there. And we cannot
> say that it still "is" because the "is" is the "there" that isn't there.
> So, what can we say about the tree in the abscence of Dasein? Is there a
> simple aswer here?
> 
> Michael Staples
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
>      --- from list heidegger-AT-lists.village.virginia.edu ---
> 

We can say they exist only in relation to things which do exhibit 
Dasein.  Sort of like Berkeley's empiricism.

Christopher Honey
AUM
Dept of History


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

   

Driftline Main Page

 

Display software: ArchTracker © Malgosia Askanas, 2000-2005