From: "Jud Evans" <Jud-AT-sunrise74.freeserve.co.uk> Subject: Re: heidegger-AT-lists.village.The Contractile Copula. Date: Fri, 27 Apr 2001 10:50:06 +0100 Re: The Contractile Copula I cross-post this here from the AIT list because in response to another's posting, in the body of the text, almost without thinking as I typed my reply it occurred to me what the nature of phenomenology really is - it excommunicates the descriptiveness and implied predicational historicity of the indicant [the "is" word] together with its postulative chain and attempts to confront an entity in a mode-free state - ignoring the fact that a mode-free state is a mode in itself. Now I see what Heidegger did after losing his battle with an understanding of the indicant - he tried to conscript it to his own purpose - to crimp and twist the emphemerality of modal informancy into a parallel existence that he called 'Being.' I've been thinking recently that Husserl with his phenomenology tries to by-pass the indicant and go straight for the throat of the existential modality of entities, whilst later, Heidegger attempted to recruit the indicant, baptise it 'Dasein' and sent it out into the world as a kind of roving reporter. The copula is always there, even in apparently 'copula-less statements, [in verbs of the simple present for example] but has simply become absorbed into its verb-word shell, there it remains, still carrying out its role of indicating existential modality - it's just that it's not readily visible like the 'up front' "is" word in continuous tenses. Jud: --- from list heidegger-AT-lists.village.virginia.edu ---
Display software: ArchTracker © Malgosia Askanas, 2000-2005