Date: Wed, 30 Sep 1998 23:15:59 +0200 Subject: Re: Meaning From: artefact-AT-t-online.de (Michael Eldred) Cologne, 30 September 1998 GBORGERSON-AT-delphi.com wrote: > Dear Micheal E., > > Your explaination clarifies a great deal for me and helps me understand > in a much more concrete way the difference between the ontic and the > ontological. So if I'm folowing you correctly, as psychologists we spend most > of our time encountering our clients in the realm of ontic meaning and > assisting them in the process of interpretation allowing their understanding > to bring the experience into the shared, ontological realm. > > Have I got that right? Dear Greg, Yes, it's worth reading Sections 29, 31, 32, 34 of SuZ again and again. A small correction, or possible misunderstanding: It is not as if experience is brought "into the shared, ontological realm" from somewhere outside, where it was not yet ontological (but merely ontic). The personal or singular meaning is ontic, but as an understanding it is also already ontological, e.g. to understand a flower _as_ a flower is already an ontological 'achievement', no matter what it may be (ontically) idiosyncratically associated with. Furthermore, the mood of grief is also already an opening of the world in its being, i.e. as the how of Dasein's being-in-the-world. Both moodedness and understanding are ways in which the world opens up. Heidegger calls them modes of Erschlossenheit, which is normally translated as 'disclosure', but I prefer the more concrete 'opening-up'. For example, in vernacular German, new territory is "erschlossen", i.e. opened up. The opening up of the West in the US was the Erschliessung of the West. What psychotherapists do with their "talking cure" is to help their clients gather the resonances and quaverings of what buffets them into an explicit understanding, i.e. an interpretation. The quiverings make way to language. Psychotherapists can only do this because they already share a world with their clients, both in understanding within the same clearing of truth and also in resonating with the same attunements to being. Such sharing (ontologically) be no means precludes singular or even idiosyncratic 'personal' meanings. Michael _-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_- artefact text and translation _-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_- _-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_- made by art _-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_- http://www.webcom.com/artefact/ _-_-_-_-_-_-_-_ artefact-AT-t-online.de-_-_ _-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_ Dr Michael Eldred -_-_-_ _-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_- --- from list heidegger-AT-lists.village.virginia.edu ---
Display software: ArchTracker © Malgosia Askanas, 2000-2005