Like to rate videos and let people know what you think?
Automatically share your ratings, favorites, and more on Facebook, Twitter, and Google Reader with YouTube Autoshare.
Autoshare makes certain YouTube activities public on the services you choose. Select only the services you are comfortable with - like Facebook, Twitter, or Google Reader - to let your friends know what you like on YouTube. You can turn Autoshare off at any time.
Like to share videos with friends?
Automatically share your ratings, favorites, and more on Facebook, Twitter, and Google Reader with YouTube Autoshare.
Autoshare makes certain YouTube activities public on the services you choose. Select only the services you are comfortable with - like Facebook, Twitter, or Google Reader - to let your friends know what you like on YouTube. You can turn Autoshare off at any time.
This video has been removed from your Favorites. (Undo)
Like to Favorite videos and let people know what you think?
Automatically share your ratings, favorites, and more on Facebook, Twitter, and Google Reader with YouTube Autoshare.
Autoshare makes certain YouTube activities public on the services you choose. Select only the services you are comfortable with - like Facebook, Twitter, or Google Reader - to let your friends know what you like on YouTube. You can turn Autoshare off at any time.
derritrane, I'm sure you could word your ideas / questions / general points in less academic / esoteric terms.
As regards science vs. philosophy, the contrast is simple :
Science deals with beings - and nothing more. Philosophy (as meta-physics) goes beyond beings in order to try to understand them AS SUCH (i.e. AS "beings"). Philosophy therefore deals with that which is never a being : Nothing. Only Nothing is metaphysical.
Akademeia, the garden, outside Athens, where Plato taught. Academy, Plato's school of philosophy. Do not be too sure about science's neglect of "nothingness", there's always quantum physics, virtual quantum fluctuations in the void, etc., all the usual gingerbread that's been bandied around for decades- 80 years
Genuine philosophy is actually very simple. There are these days too many "clever" interpretations of what it is. My suggestion to anyone who really wants to know what philosophy is would be to first of all read Plato. Heidegger, too, often opens his enquiries into the essence of this or that in a Platonic manner. Nothing has changed : if several things "are" then we need to know what we mean by "being" (i.e. to be), and so on. This method is sound.
It may be as well to remember that the PreSocratics had never read Plato or Heidegger, and that Heidegger wanted to "return" to them, there to start afresh. "It is not what you think, but THAT you think that is the source of all things" Zen saying
as one "thing" dialectically counterpo(I-i)sed to another thing Called World. This gives rise to the entire calculus of possibilities between Subject and Object, being- there and the theatres of spatiotemporalty, ontic-ontological possibility, etc..
"Questioning and Answering" is merely one mode of "Being" zarakhast, "life", "being", was never a question that required an answer. Questioning/Answering is a mode of being, not the only one. It is the alienating objectification of our own "essential constitution" [a constitution that is always allready (sic) "dependently originated", "given", IF!, one does anything less than wholly identify with the "totality", and yet this"totality" is a construction, too],
According to Heidegger, questioning is "the piety of thought".
"Being" (or "life", if you like) DOES require an answer. Moreover, it is not "man" who asks the question : it is Being itself. The question "of" Being is not merely the question, asked by man, concerning Being, but the question posed THROUGH man, by Being, to itself.
Whenever the question of Being arises, i.e. whenever philosophy IS, it is Being that asks - not "man".
Equally though, if we follow Heidegger's train of thought, "man" qua man IS only when he is appropriated by Being in the Event. In other words, man only comes to himself and is himself when Being "uses" him to question itself.
The question of Being is, always was and always will be, the greatest question not only for philosophy or for man ; it is always the true "endgame" of Being itself.
And the answer ? It is the question ! But along the way lies tragic wisdom ...
"Tragic wisdom" may well be the experience of a thwarted Eurocentric-Hell(enic) power drive, but it is not necessarily the experience of the yogi. After disconnecting from "Being" in order to violently plunder it, the power-drive returns, self-mutilated, sulkily declaring platitudes about tragedy, the tragic character of this or that, anything but the tragic character of it's own avoidable stupidity. "Rather than not will, it wills nothing (destruction) at all" Heidegger
The "of" here is to be understood in a double sense : "concerning" (i.e. about) and "belonging to". The question "of" Being is a self-questioning. Man is not some third-party bystander in all of this. He belongs to Being, as does everything else.
Autoshare makes certain YouTube activities public on the services you choose. Select only the services you are comfortable with - like Facebook, Twitter, or Google Reader - to let your friends know what you like on YouTube. You can turn Autoshare off at any time.
As regards science vs. philosophy, the contrast is simple :
Science deals with beings - and nothing more. Philosophy (as meta-physics) goes beyond beings in order to try to understand them AS SUCH (i.e. AS "beings"). Philosophy therefore deals with that which is never a being : Nothing. Only Nothing is metaphysical.
Academy, Plato's school of philosophy.
Do not be too sure about science's neglect of "nothingness", there's always quantum physics, virtual quantum fluctuations in the void, etc., all the usual gingerbread that's been bandied around for decades- 80 years
"It is not what you think, but THAT you think that is the source of all things" Zen saying
gives rise to the entire calculus of possibilities between Subject and Object, being-
there and the theatres of spatiotemporalty, ontic-ontological possibility, etc..
"Depth" is a matter of perspective.
Questioning/Answering is a mode of being, not the only one. It is the alienating
objectification of our own "essential constitution"
[a constitution that is always allready (sic) "dependently originated", "given", IF!,
one does anything less than wholly identify with the "totality", and yet this"totality"
is a construction, too],
"Being" (or "life", if you like) DOES require an answer. Moreover, it is not "man" who asks the question : it is Being itself. The question "of" Being is not merely the question, asked by man, concerning Being, but the question posed THROUGH man, by Being, to itself.
Whenever the question of Being arises, i.e. whenever philosophy IS, it is Being that asks - not "man".
The question of Being is, always was and always will be, the greatest question not only for philosophy or for man ; it is always the true "endgame" of Being itself.
And the answer ? It is the question ! But along the way lies tragic wisdom ...
After disconnecting from "Being" in order to violently plunder it, the power-drive returns, self-mutilated, sulkily declaring platitudes about tragedy, the tragic character of this or that, anything but the tragic character of it's own avoidable stupidity.
"Rather than not will, it wills nothing (destruction) at all" Heidegger