Has anyone here ever thought much about "thingness" ? This is something important for Heidegger -- but it still is just a mere pronoun for me (which is how I've just used it).
It seems as if M.H. wants us first to consider the "thingness" of a work of art, so that we can eventually "decide whether the work is at bottom something else and not a thing at all" (and how's that for a paradox!) Did anyone find M.H.'s discussion of this topic especially enlightening? ____________________________________________________________ Top Companies Bid For Your Business. Get The Best Car Insurance Rates http://thirdpartyoffers.netzero.net/TGL2231/fc/HiMzbGTUxYsGzTtxrTfoB4D0AJw0TO 2nqfgVSAXWUMQQF2QkeM/
