Arne

Seriously? You are going to use a dictionary to throw down the gauntlet on a philosophical forum? :-) The thread is entitled “Types of faith. What var...

yes it does

I think you have that backwards. Believing works vis faith. It seems simple enough that faith is generally what we rely upon when it comes to beliefs ...

I have faith in what I know.

Fascinating.

I agree.

How do you think when it comes to writing and re-writing?

My paper for my senior seminar almost 40 years ago was entitled Pylyshyn and the Mine/Body Problem. In a sense, the answer will always be no because h...

The above statements strike me as inconsistent. The first seems to include more than philosophy (perhaps science and/or technology?) while the second ...

Numbers start at zero. The counting starts at 1. If I am running a 100 yard race, I do not get to start at yard 1.

and as somewhat of an aside, I greatly appreciate your initial comment to the original question. I would like to discuss it with you. So at some point...

You are welcome. And I appreciate all your comments and efforts. As resistant as I sometimes seem to being pushed, pushing me is the most effective wa...

Logic, language, and the world can only make sense to beings for whom logic, language, and the world can make sense. Why are you and I one of those be...

Nietzsche did philosophy from the beginning to the end of his sanity. And he abandoned the ivory tower and did it his way. That was his talk. That was...

and doesn't there also have to be a logical structure underlying mind?

The nature of being (ontology) is inaccessible in the absence of being. A deeper understanding of the nature of being (ontology) can be facilitated wi...

Perhaps. Dasein is constitutively pre-ontological. Please see Being and Time. Also, consciousness is derivative of being-in-the-world. Ibid.

.

Not all ontologies are the same. Heidegger would say yes. Please see Being and Time.

What Heidegger does in Being and Time is consistent with Heidegger's intentions as set forth in the Introduction to Being and Time. Please see Being a...

The systematization (schematization?) is nothing new. Plato schematized as have many philosophers throughout history. Some wish to explain everything ...

It has more to do with the dynamics of conformity. Metaphysics is what One does.

Contemporary metaphysics represents the systematizing of philosophy.

.

Excellent point.

I do not know what that means. Ontology is not "extracted" from the rest of metaphysics. Metaphysics is an emphasis upon what is, epistemology is an e...

I do not understand what you mean by pure ontology. I have never referred to pure ontology. I am not familiar with the term. And you may rest assured ...

One could just as well say that the limits of my language and the limits of my world are the limits of me. And I for one am tired of being written out...

Well said. And more than a minor point.

but even grunts, growls, and purring excite our language based desire to interpret. is it not in our linguistic nature to interpret the as-structure o...

Be that as it may, that does not answer the question of whether logic and language are separable. All it does is raise the parallel question of whethe...

chicken or the egg. and with no language to express the axioms, silence. and speaking only for myself, silence is preferable to incoherence.

Are logic and language separable? First we divide the whole into parts to facilitate an understanding of the whole and then we proceed to destroy the ...

Fascinating question. It would be odd indeed if a being having a generous scope regarding the use of language for the questioning of being lacked the ...

Being and Time is his most noted work. I highly recommend.

No time, no whole.

By saying "perhaps the whole is limited by time" I mean perhaps the whole is limited by time. It is an idea that emerged shortly before I said it and ...

I am not saying Heidegger is correct. I am only clarifying how Heidegger distinguishes between fear and anxiety. Whether he is correct is a different ...

I have no doubt. I was joking.

I agree that the whole includes "all". I neither agree nor disagree that the whole is "limitless." I suspect "all" and "limitless" have different impl...

how newtonian of you. :-)

I state unequivocally that the whole cannot be limited by "thingness." How you interpret my statement is on you.

I agree. My immediate response was that these are "laws of nature" and not "laws for nature." Whether anything is classified as a "law of nature" depe...

Exactly. The flaw in the notion of a limited whole is our obsession with "thingness". By definition, a limit to the whole cannot be a "thing" or it wo...

Indeed. And that is the primary reason Walter Kauffman initially used "re-sentiment" rather than resentment. But dong so came with its own set of issu...

I remind myself from time to time that carving up philosophy into parts is intended to facilitate rather than impede an understanding of the whole Bey...

. My only intent is to clarify the basis for Heidegger's distinction, i.e.,whether the source of the phenomenon is within the world. And you are welco...

we are force-fed the realness of sense perceptions.

. Not quite. Whether the object of fear is known is irrelevant to Heidegger's distinction between fear and anxiety. Instead, the source of the phenome...

thank you. I shall Google.