Hi, --- In [email protected], JONATHAN KELLY <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > by Jon > > I said of course what Wittgenstein said could not be spoken about was > exactly what Heidegger wanted to talk about. > > The reply was: I totally agree. But what for? What did he obtained? His philosophy is a model example of wishful thinking and solving pseudoproblems > like "what does it mean to be"? I can say "I understand existence > through existence itself" but what progress did I make by stating > this? > I answered; > The question of Being may be worth nothing to you but to me it is the most fundamental of all questions the question of most importance.
OK, but again: What did he obtain? Metaphysical speculations don't solve anything. We can speculate for entire life but we will not make a single step forward. What doesn't mean "beeing". This word is empty. It has no meaning. It is one of the notions created by human brain to simplify its perception of the Universe. Is there anything in the world that really "is"? Metaphysics failed in answering great questions. Speculative theories are the case of someone's taste. What we really need is stop to speculate and start to think what we are talking about. I am not trying to say studying Heidegger's philosophy is a waste of time. I say Heidegger's philosophy will not help us to understand reality. > I said; > Heidegger also said Zen was about exactly what he was trying to say. > The reply was; > So what? Did he experienced satori? Did he sit in zazen? I have never > heard about it. How did he know zen is compatible with his philosophy. > Because he read some books? What an ourageous arrogance... > I answered; Zen philosophers of the Kyoto school wanted Heideggerian philosophers to use Zen. Again, so what? I would recommend to use Zen methods to everyone. Would you call Heidegger a nazist because he was a member of NSDAP for many years? > > I said; As Heidegger is the only serious philosopher of the last century... > The reply I got was; > What can I say...? It's a very controversial opinion (and not > supported by any proofs).I replyed; To find prove you have to look for it may be try reading my web site? Well, I have to say I am stunned. There's a good Roman rule which states the prosecutor should show the evidence of the crime. So it is your duty to justify such contoversial sentence because statement "Heidegger is THE ONLY serious philosopher of the last century" is equivalent to "Wittgenstein, Popper, Feyerabend, Maritain, Einstein, all founders of modern theoretical physics and many, many other great thinkers WEREN'T SERIOUS PHILOSOPHERS". I visited your site and I found it interesting enough to study its contents when I'll have more free time. Despite that I am sure you haven't shown there that all those great thinkers weren't serious. I hope you didn't find my reply offencive. I just want to exchange arguments. Kind regards, Tomek ------------------------ Yahoo! Groups Sponsor --------------------~--> Join modern day disciples reach the disfigured and poor with hope and healing http://us.click.yahoo.com/lMct6A/Vp3LAA/i1hLAA/S27xlB/TM --------------------------------------------------------------------~-> Current Book Discussion: Appreciate Your Life by Taizan Maezumi Roshi Yahoo! Groups Links <*> To visit your group on the web, go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/ZenForum/ <*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] <*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to: http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
