("Tell me what those words mean to you, so I know you're not unwittingly a fashion victim...") — 0af
It may be completely true what he says about death, but I already have a concept of that, and I don't need to learn what Heidegger means by hinges, by division one, by division two, and by dasein. All these are noise, complicated amplified noise, without which existence was simple and acceptable, and the new concepts overcomplicate things to the extent that their own mother would not recognize them. — szardosszemagad
I think in really simple terms, For Heidegger, death relates closely to authenticity/mineness. What turns out to be authentic (or owned) are ways of existing (possibilities) that disclose the mineness aspect that is basically characteristic of every dasein. Whereas what turns out to be inauthentic (or unowned) are ways of living that disclose the conformism aspect that is equally basic of every dasein. So for example, any of your possibilities that involve making the world intelligible in a unique and original way are authentic. Whereas, all of your ways of making the world intelligible by falling back upon the everyday meanings circulating within everyday public life, are by default inauthentic. — bloodninja
Get involved in philosophical discussions about knowledge, truth, language, consciousness, science, politics, religion, logic and mathematics, art, history, and lots more. No ads, no clutter, and very little agreement — just fascinating conversations.