Shouldn't it really be called being /is/ time?

File: 18 KB, 280x400, bat.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]

Anonymous Sun Sep 19 09:15:25 2021 No.19079283 [Reply] [Original]

Shouldn't it really be called being /is/ time?

>>	Anonymous Sun Sep 19 09:48:36 2021 No.19079385 You guys, uh, you guys get it?

>>	Anonymous Sun Sep 19 09:53:06 2021 No.19079398 >>19079283 >>19079385 Infinitely high quality post OP. I had to sage, pardon me.

>>	Anonymous Sun Sep 19 09:53:51 2021 No.19079402 >>19079385 i get it. here's a pity (You).

>>	Anonymous Sun Sep 19 10:18:05 2021 No.19079501 >>19079385 Nah, I didn't (haven't read it). What's the joke, fellas?

Anonymous Sun Sep 19 10:18:23 2021 No.19079506

>>19079283

No because Heidegger doesn't say Being is Time. He only says the the sense of Being is Time. If Being was Time then that means they have the same identity. The very fact of talking about 2 different things (Being AND Time) presupposes an ontological distinction.

Advanced search
Text to find
Subject [?]Search by post subject. Leave empty for any.
Username [?]Search for user name. Leave empty for any user name.
Tripcode [?]Search for tripcode. Leave empty for any.
Email [?]Search by email. Leave empty for any.
Filename [?]Search by image filename. Leave empty for any.
From Date [?]Enter what date to start searching from. Format is YYYY-MM-DD
To Date [?]Enter what date to start searching until. Format is YYYY-MM-DD
Image hash
Search in	All Posts OPs Only
Deleted posts	Show all posts Show only deleted posts Only show non-deleted posts
Internal posts	Show all posts Show only internal posts Show only archived posts
Order	New posts first Old posts first
Capcode	All Posts Only by Users Only by Mods Only by Admins Only by Developers
Results	Posts Threads
Action	[ Simple ]

/lit/ - Literature