Date: Fri, 23 Aug 2002 17:32:34 EDT
Subject: Being and Christmas Snowmen



--part1_38.2cf53cd9.2a9803f2_boundary
Content-Language: en



 -
In a message dated 23/08/2002 20:01:26 GMT Daylight Time,
pennamacoor-AT-enterprise.net writes:

Subj: closer, but I wonder... Date: 23/08/2002 20:01:26 GMT Daylight Time
From: pennamacoor-AT-enterprise.net (michaelP) Sender:
owner-heidegger-AT-lists.village.virginia.edu Reply-to:
heidegger-AT-lists.village.virginia.edu To: heidegger-AT-lists.village.virginia.edu

Along the way Jud spake thus:

You cannot point to "being," but only something that exists being something.
You cannot point at "being" itself - which doesn't exist - but only at
something existing as something [being something]

Well, be-ing is always the be-ing of a being;

Be-ing is hidden by the being it is the be-ing of and precisely by that being;


I lost your message [together with a long reply to Anthony Crifasi - so I
have had to rename this piece.

Jud:
Hahahah! The neologisms are flying thick and fast in Heideggeria tonight!
Like one of those snowman Christmas balls, where [if one is ontological
embarrassed, one shakes the Daseinic obfuscator and the merry little chap is
surrounded in a trice by a swirling mass of bright baublous transcendental
neologs. Quick! Pick one! There! That hyphenated one will do, Look! See!
There before your eyes! "BE-ING" Brilliant! That'll show em! Hahahahah! So
be-ing is always the be-ing of a being is it? And pray what is the being
be-ing other than be ing a being? And NOW the big step - the award of THE
definite article to be-ing - no longer is it some intangible will of the wisp
that can't be grasped even by such well known graspers as Heidegger, no
longer is it as one list-member called it "a thing of the imagination" it has
now been elevated in its guise as an ontological snowflake THE BEING. Hurrah!

Michael:
Well, be-ing is always the be-ing of a being;

Jud:
If a human being wasn't being a human being it would no longer be being a
human being - it would be like the parrot in Monty Python - it would be a
dead, defunct corpse of a human being being a corpse of a human being.

Michael:

Be-ing does not exist: because it is the existence of what exists;

Jud:
I have told you a thousand times that existence doesn't exist - only that
which exists exists. Abstract nouns like existence and resistance and
persistence and ALL the rest of them do not exist, only that which exists
exists, only that which resists resists, and only that which persists
persists.

Michael:
A logos cannot point at be-ing, only beings: but pointing can evoke what
cannot be pointed to or at...

Jud:
Pointing cannot point, jointing cannot joint, anointing cannot anoint,
appointing cannot appoint.  Only a pointer can point, only a jointer can
joint, only an anointer can anoint, only an appointer can appoint.  Pointing
at a neolog snowflake cannot help you here Michael, and snowflakes are
notoriously ephemeral=E2=80=A6 like=E2=80=A6ultimately=E2=80=A6the crazed ideas of  the cult-fuhrer
Heidegger.

Michael'
On the way sunshine!

Jud:
I should tie a skein of wool around your ankle and pay it out behind you
Ariadne-like if I were you chum, to help you find your way out of the
ontological Daseinic maze and the Hall of Mirrors of your =E2=80=9CBeing=E2=80=9D and
=E2=80=9Cbe-ing=E2=80=9D that you are lost within.

Bon Voyage and watch out for the Minataur!

Jud Evans.


--part1_38.2cf53cd9.2a9803f2_boundary

HTML VERSION: