[lbo-talk] Re: Derrida Was No Aristotle

Chris Doss lookoverhere1 at yahoo.com
Thu Oct 28 00:11:41 PDT 2004


A few examples: "All men by nature desire to
> know. This is evident in
> the delight men take in their senses." Humans are
> political animals; anyone who
> isn't is either a beast or a god. The specific
> difference subsumes all genetic
> differences. Being is "pros hen" equivocity toward
> form.

Come to think of it, all this means is:

People like to learn stuff. You can tell because they like to look at things.

People are social.

Differences between members of a group subume differences between different groups.

The word "to be" means different things.

I knew all this when I was 10.

BTW that Aristotle believed the equivocity of being toward to be based on form is a matter of great dispute. He never gives a final answer to the question of what the primary meaning of "to on" is.

===== Nu, zayats, pogodi!

__________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? Read only the mail you want - Yahoo! Mail SpamGuard. http://promotions.yahoo.com/new_mail



More information about the lbo-talk mailing list