Meno_ wrote:"Now, what if Others were encapsulated in Things, in a way that Being towards Things were not ontologically severable, in Heidegger's terms, from Being towards Others? What if the mode of Dasein of Others were to dwell in Things, and so forth? In the same light, then, what if the Thing were a Dublette of the Self, and not what is called the Other? Or more radically still, what if the Self were in some fundamental way becoming a Xerox copy, a duplicate, of the Thing in its assumedessence?"
notes on Heidegger
Meno_ wrote:"Hiding my half existence behind the opaque walls of my skull, concealing it like a shameful disease, I did not consider the simple fact that the same thing could be occurring under other skullcaps, in other locked rooms."
Heidegger
Great Again wrote:Meno_ wrote:"Now, what if Others were encapsulated in Things, in a way that Being towards Things were not ontologically severable, in Heidegger's terms, from Being towards Others? What if the mode of Dasein of Others were to dwell in Things, and so forth? In the same light, then, what if the Thing were a Dublette of the Self, and not what is called the Other? Or more radically still, what if the Self were in some fundamental way becoming a Xerox copy, a duplicate, of the Thing in its assumedessence?"
notes on HeideggerMeno_ wrote:"Hiding my half existence behind the opaque walls of my skull, concealing it like a shameful disease, I did not consider the simple fact that the same thing could be occurring under other skullcaps, in other locked rooms."
Heidegger
Greetings, Meno.
I have read some thirty to forty Heidegger books and I cannot imagine that he would have said what you quote him as saying.
Sorry.
Meno_ wrote:Die Baume stehn der Frucht entladen,
Und gelbes Laub verweht ins Tal ...
Johann Heinrich Voss
Meno_ wrote:Great Again wrote:Meno_ wrote:"Now, what if Others were encapsulated in Things, in a way that Being towards Things were not ontologically severable, in Heidegger's terms, from Being towards Others? What if the mode of Dasein of Others were to dwell in Things, and so forth? In the same light, then, what if the Thing were a Dublette of the Self, and not what is called the Other? Or more radically still, what if the Self were in some fundamental way becoming a Xerox copy, a duplicate, of the Thing in its assumedessence?"
notes on HeideggerMeno_ wrote:"Hiding my half existence behind the opaque walls of my skull, concealing it like a shameful disease, I did not consider the simple fact that the same thing could be occurring under other skullcaps, in other locked rooms."
Heidegger
Greetings, Meno.
I have read some thirty to forty Heidegger books and I cannot imagine that he would have said what you quote him as saying.
Sorry.
Great Again
No problem, the sources are correct, the
I think the first is direct from him the other may have been cimmentary/analysis by a credible source. I will dig it up and post it, as soon as I can.
Meno_ wrote:Found it:
"Hiding my half existence behind the opaque walls of my skull, concealing it like a shameful disease, I did not consider the simple fact that the same thing could be occurring under other skullcaps, in other locked rooms.
Sigizmund Krzhizhanovsky, Autobiography of a Corpse'
Sorry You are right it was not Heidegger
Users browsing this forum: No registered users