This is not Heidegger's concern at all.
--- Carrol Cox <cbcox at ilstu.edu> wrote:
> > sophisticated philosophy) requires complex
> statement. Society, trees,
> human relations really exist independently of the
> human mind -- but
> somehow (Buitler, Heidegger et all endlessly
> equivocate on this) we
> don't know how we know that things exist, so there
> is an endless
> struggle to show how things exist even though we
> don't know that they
> exist we somehow do know they exist.
>
> Those who sneer at Butler's prose are really being
> quite silly, aside
> from confusing the subject matter even more than she
> ever does. She is
> being quite clear om expounding a dense subject
> matter.
>
> The problem is that, like Milton and every other
> bourgeois thinker and
> poet, she begins with the isolated individual who
> knows that the world
> exists but cannot find a way to from his/her
> isolation to the world out
> there. She knows that society exists, but cannot
> find a way from the
> isolated individual to the socialized individual.
> (Notice that Charles
> has to resort to the mysticism of instinct to find
> the way from the
> individual to the social.) The history of bourbeois
> philosophy is the
> history of a noble struggle to achieve the
> impossible: a coherent path
> from individuals who begin in isolation and find
> their way to sociao
> existence. It can't be done, and of course the prose
> it produces is
> dense, as is the poetry.
>
> Carrol
>
> ___________________________________
>
http://mailman.lbo-talk.org/mailman/listinfo/lbo-talk
>
Mataiotes mataioteton, eipen ho Ekklasiastes, mataiotes mataioteton, ta panta mataiotes.