These files are maintained strictly for historical reference, research, and recordkeeping purposes,
and the content has not been altered or updated since archiving.
Content on this site may not meet current digital accessibility standards.
If you require an alternative, accessible format of any information found on this site,
please contact Bruce Jones, bjones@ucsd.edu to request an accommodation.
These files are maintained strictly for historical reference, research, and recordkeeping purposes,
and the content has not been altered or updated since archiving.
Content on this site may not meet current digital accessibility standards.
If you require an alternative, accessible format of any information found on this site,
please contact Bruce Jones, bjones@ucsd.edu to request an accommodation.
Michael,
I will confess that I struggle to grasp Levinas. This is a request for
clarification: what you've said [below] sounds very similar to Heidegger's
notion that the being of an entity is always constituted on the basis of a
background of cultural practices, which he called (rather confusingly) 'the
meaning of being,' or (better in my view) 'the upon-which of being.' The
'difference that makes a difference,' then, is the difference between a
being (an entity: that it is) and the being of that entity (what it is:
constituted culturally/historically).
Martin
On 6/28/07 10:59 AM, "Wolff-Michael Roth" <mroth@uvic.ca> wrote:
> think Being as being grounded, historically, in
> something that is "Otherwise than Being."
_______________________________________________
xmca mailing list
xmca@weber.ucsd.edu
http://dss.ucsd.edu/mailman/listinfo/xmca
Received on Thu Jun 28 09:26 PDT 2007
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.8 : Sun Jul 01 2007 - 00:30:04 PDT