[lbo-talk] Grappling with Heidegger

[Chris Doss]

That makes more sense, thanks. I meant consciousness
as the idea that there are things "outside" humen
experience that impinge upon it and then become
translated into a field of "awareness." For Heidegger
that is not the case. Human experience is already
always "outside," for Heidegger -- there is no
dividing line between human experience and the beings
it experiences. They are pretty much the same thing.

--- Ted Winslow <egwinslow at rogers.com> wrote:
> 
> This looks to be a confusion of the idea of 
> "consciousness" as a  
> derivative notion from Descartes idea of mind as a
> "substance" in the  
> senses I specified with "consciousness" as conceived
> within an  
> ontology of internal relations (a conception
> groundable, according to  
> Marx, Husserl and Whitehead, in "phenomenology" in
> Husserl's sense).   
> The latter conception constitutes all "beings" as
> "inside" and human  
> "consciousness" as direct awareness of this.  As I
> pointed out,  
> Marx's ideas of "self" and "world" sublate Aristotle
> (called by Marx  
> "the greatest thinker of antiquity").  This
> sublation, however,  
> involves rejection of the idea of entities that bear
> qualities  
> without being themselves qualities.  It's a
> rejection of both this  
> and the Cartesian idea of a "substance" i.e.
> conceived in this way  
> "being-in is not an attribute, it is not a
> accidental property of  
> extension".
> 
> Ted
> ___________________________________
>
http://mailman.lbo-talk.org/mailman/listinfo/lbo-talk
> 

Nu, zayats, pogodi!

__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Tired of spam?  Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around 
http://mail.yahoo.com