Jump to content

Talk:Being in itself

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Sources

[edit]

There should be a source for the claim that Heidegger's alleged anti-semitism was rooted in his belief that jews were not whole Daseins. There is much scholarship on the issue of Heidegger's links to the Nazi party and whether or not he was truly anti-semitic. The wording damages the NPOV of this page.--Sam 04:42, 1 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Being-for-itself

[edit]
  • Can't understand why the being-for-itself article was deleted. Can't make sense of that. Anyway I've added in some basics about Sartrean Being-in-itself. Without getting over the top with terminology. I'll grammaticalise it a bit tomorrow. Sludgehaichoi 22:38, 28 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • This article is completely wrong. Hegel (nineteenth century) develops the concept of "being-in-itself (Ansichsein)." Someone needs to rewrite this altogether, or the article needs to be discarded, and readers can go to philosophers' pages, where their subjects are already elaborated.
  • Agree that with no mention of Hegel the article as it stands is fatally inadequate. Also, the Heidegger section is inaccurate. Heidegger's Being is not the same thing as being-for-itself as that term was and is used in philosophy, and Heidegger does not claim that it is. JohnMason (talk) — Preceding undated comment added 16:21, 15 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]