Date: Wed, 05 Aug 1998 10:48:00 -0700
From: Mike Staples <mstaples-AT-argusqa.com>
Subject: Re: encryption?


henry sholar wrote:

> what do you mean by encryption, Michael?

Yes, this cuts right to it. I was thinking encryption as in hidden or
not interpreted. As we know (how many times do I have to tell you this?)
Dasein is interpretation all-the-way-down. My "assumption" is that
encryption is that mode of being that is not interpreted (could
certainly have this wrong). And where this comes into my consideration
here might be framed by a couple more questions: 1) If Being does not
have to be a metaphysics of presence, then that which is not present
must be that which is not interpreted but is still part of Being. 2)
What is the relationship between Being and Nothing? A metaphysics of
presence would, it seems to me, oppose Being to Nothingness. As I
understand Heidegger, Nothingness is still a part of Being. So, if
something is not interpreted (i.e., not decrypted) it might indeed be
nothing -- but still part of Being.

What do you think? Am I way off track, just need tweeking into line, or
right on?

Michael S.



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