From: "Anthony Crifasi" <crifasi-AT-hotmail.com> Subject: Re: doing a chomsky? Date: Sun, 13 Apr 2003 01:21:14 +0000 John Foster wrote: >anthony, > > Good, then we can get down to discussing this, hopefully by addressing >each > > other's objections from now on. Now, for Heidegger, what could this > > ontological ground for morality possibly be, since for him, every >morality > > implies an im-morality, which is also a way of being-in-the-world? > >This immorality implied. Where is the reference to this. This is like >saying >that there are no axiological truths what so ever, and that all morality is >subjective and subject to interpretation. Huh? John there no clearer evidence of your ontic reading of the ontological than this. To say that being-in-the-world encompasses any and every "side" does not mean that both sides are true, because being-false is also a way of being-in-the-world! The truth of a "side" is ONTIC truth, not ontological truth. So you are (yet again) interpreting ontological truth as ONTIC truth, because you think that if fundamental ontology does not exclude either side, then there can be no axiological truths or moral truths because all sides are true! That is a blatant conflation of ontic truth with ontological truth. Anthony Crifasi _________________________________________________________________ Help STOP SPAM with the new MSN 8 and get 2 months FREE* http://join.msn.com/?page=features/junkmail --- from list heidegger-AT-lists.village.virginia.edu ---
Display software: ArchTracker © Malgosia Askanas, 2000-2005