Date: Mon, 19 Aug 2002 14:30:07 +0100
Subject: Re: "metaphysical and not phenomenology"?


a tiny interruption in the extraordinary thicket that is the weave of 
MichaelandAnthonying recently:

Michael says:

"So you would admit that a builder is a being, but deny that being a builder
is a mode of being?"

I seek the odd eye of a needle in this weave and so I ask, following
Michael: can we take it that a 'mode of being' is the be-ing of the being
(it is a mode of being of...)? Or, in other words, the be-ing of a being is
not the being itself... it [is] the way the being is? Could this [utter]
difference be the stumbling block in much of the usage of the word "being"
as well as being [!] its defining and definitive moment?

eye-seeking-michael


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