General Forum

General Forum

  1. Standard memberSeitse
    Doug Stanhope
    That's Why I Drink
    Joined
    01 Jan '06
    Moves
    33672
    26 Feb '17 13:23
    If you can grasp *from a first read* how present-at-hand can
    turn to readiness-to-hand without inference, I shall, hereby,
    crown you King of mit-Dasein.
  2. Account suspended
    Joined
    10 Dec '11
    Moves
    143494
    26 Feb '17 13:53
    Heidegger. Who translated it into English?
  3. Standard memberSeitse
    Doug Stanhope
    That's Why I Drink
    Joined
    01 Jan '06
    Moves
    33672
    26 Feb '17 14:55
    Originally posted by vandervelde
    Heidegger. Who translated it into English?
    Someone who was really, really high, because the translation is as convoluted
    as the confession of Carl Panzram
  4. Subscribermoonbus
    Uber-Nerd
    Joined
    31 May '12
    Moves
    2365
    26 Feb '17 21:06
    Heidegger was confused. It doesn't matter whether in German or in translation.

    So was Derrida. Don't bother.
  5. Standard memberSeitse
    Doug Stanhope
    That's Why I Drink
    Joined
    01 Jan '06
    Moves
    33672
    26 Feb '17 21:53
    Originally posted by moonbus
    Don't bother.
    Yeah, that's what Fox News and the Daily Mail want.

    I prefer to bother, thanks.
  6. SubscriberPonderable
    chemist
    Linkenheim
    Joined
    22 Apr '05
    Moves
    526026
    27 Feb '17 08:56
    Originally posted by Seitse
    If you can grasp *from a first read* how present-at-hand can
    turn to readiness-to-hand without inference, I shall, hereby,
    crown you King of mit-Dasein.
    Meinst Du jetzt das Da-sein als so-sein oder in der Seinsheit des Seins?

    Da musst Du in deinem in-der-Welt-sein das geworfen-sein in der seinsheit des Anderen als Expletierung des Impliziten mitdenken!

    (I won't translate that, but it certainly is Heideggerish)
  7. Standard memberSeitse
    Doug Stanhope
    That's Why I Drink
    Joined
    01 Jan '06
    Moves
    33672
    27 Feb '17 18:22
    Originally posted by Ponderable
    Meinst Du jetzt das Da-sein als so-sein oder in der Seinsheit des Seins?

    Da musst Du in deinem in-der-Welt-sein das geworfen-sein in der seinsheit des Anderen als Expletierung des Impliziten mitdenken!

    (I won't translate that, but it certainly is Heideggerish)
    Would that get me a curry wurst in Berlin?
  8. SubscriberPonderable
    chemist
    Linkenheim
    Joined
    22 Apr '05
    Moves
    526026
    27 Feb '17 19:06
    Originally posted by Seitse
    Would that get me a curry wurst in Berlin?
    Indeed if you talked to the right person 😉
  9. Subscribermoonbus
    Uber-Nerd
    Joined
    31 May '12
    Moves
    2365
    28 Feb '17 11:26
    Originally posted by Seitse
    Yeah, that's what Fox News and the Daily Mail want.

    I prefer to bother, thanks.
    Bother about things worth bothering about. Heidegger isn't one of them. Neither is the Daily Mail.
  10. Account suspended
    Joined
    26 Aug '07
    Moves
    38239
    28 Feb '17 13:512 edits
    Wow is this a Eurotrash only thread? 😛

    YouTube : PHILOSOPHY - Heidegger
  11. Standard memberSeitse
    Doug Stanhope
    That's Why I Drink
    Joined
    01 Jan '06
    Moves
    33672
    28 Feb '17 19:56
    Originally posted by moonbus
    things worth bothering about
    Please provide a list.
  12. Subscribermoonbus
    Uber-Nerd
    Joined
    31 May '12
    Moves
    2365
    28 Feb '17 20:49
    Originally posted by Seitse
    Please provide a list.
    Top of the list: homeless children.
  13. Standard memberSeitse
    Doug Stanhope
    That's Why I Drink
    Joined
    01 Jan '06
    Moves
    33672
    28 Feb '17 23:05
    Originally posted by moonbus
    Top of the list: homeless children.
    Sorry, argumentum ad passiones is a logical fallacy.

    Try again.
  14. Account suspended
    Joined
    26 Aug '07
    Moves
    38239
    28 Feb '17 23:361 edit
    I don't understand what this means,

    present-at-hand can turn to readiness-to-hand without inference

    Is there no way to explain it in terms that are easy to grasp?
  15. Joined
    01 Apr '05
    Moves
    57586
    01 Mar '17 01:57
    Originally posted by robbie carrobie
    I don't understand what this means,

    present-at-hand can turn to readiness-to-hand without inference

    Is there no way to explain it in terms that are easy to grasp?
    Being an intellectual camel I don't understand what this thread means.
    Leicester did well against Liverpool, eh?
Back to Top