Again, Mary loved John. John loved Marry. They both loved me and I loved them in turn.
Then Mary got pregnant. Within a few months that loves was basically in tatters.
How then would one go about yanking the manner in which I construe the meaning of dasein above up out of this.
More to the point: When you are intertwined in a particular conflict revolving around conflicting goods, how, for all practical purposes, do you yank yourself up out of the hole?
Describe examples of this.
It would seem to me there are three options.
1] one of you is stronger then the other and can impose his own agenda
2] you both come to agree that there is an optimal moral solution
3] you both agree to moderate your own point of view, and begin negotiations in order to compromise your behaviors
And that’s not even counting the rather pervasive agendas [in the world today] of the narcissists and sociopaths who only see a hole when they can’t get what they deem to be in their own self-interest.
In the interim though, I’m still waiting for the manner in which you subsume dasein, conflicting goods and political economy in a description of your interactions with others that come to clash as a result of opposing value judgments.
Again, Phyllo merely subsumes the right thing to do in regards to things like Communism in a reflection of his own political prejudices.
How about you? What “for all practical purposes” works for you?
All I can do here is to note that which I pointed out to Phyllo above:
Here, of course, you have no idea what particular options are available to me. There’s that ever widening gap between what I’d like to do and what I am actually able to. Besides, there are literally hundreds upon hundreds of folks out there all clamoring to insist that you should do what they do.
Indeed, I have accumulated any number of distractions that serve me quite well: music, film, PBS, the Science Channel, my “signature” threads here at ILP, my virtual exchanges with folks online. I sure as shit don’t wallow in that hole! It’s just always there when I bump into conflicting goods.
Okay, if you don’t believe in objective morals [and presumably God] how then do you make that crucial distinction between your value judgments as the embodiment of dasein and the extent to which the tools of philosophy enable you to be more rather than less convinced that one rather than another behavior is the right thing to do? As a “social mammal”. Walk us through a particular reaction “in your head” when you bump into another with conflicting value judgments. And note how that is then translated into a working solution given a particular context.
This is so far removed from my actual frame of mind, I can only attribute it to the complex variables embedded in dasein when two individuals try to communicate how they think and feel about these things.