>Steven E. Callihan wrote:
>>
>> I tend to agree that one should read Heidegger on Nietzsche primarily to
>> uncover Heidegger, every philosophy being an autobiography, and so on.
>
> I like totally agree. I mean perspective is everything, y'know.
>Like, being is contingent, etc., etc., etc. And it follows that mind
>is a construction, blah, blah, blah. You know the arguments.
Yes, perhaps on some level, redundantly circular, but then, of course, on a
certain level, everything is redundantly circular. If being is contingent,
for instance, then it is contingent on itself, in that it can't be
contingent on some incontingency that is external to it, etc., for such an
incontingency could itself then only be being. C. S. Peirce rides again, in
other words. Synechism rules! Nietzsche at least wears pragmaticism (note,
_not_ pragmatism, which is something else entirely) as one of his masks.
Heidegger _knows_ this about being, but rather chooses to lie about it, at
least up to the Turn (_Kehre_) in his thinking, after which "being" in his
writing is more often than not crossed out.
Steve C.
--- from list nietzsche@lists.village.virginia.edu ---