Heidegger and Nixon (was Re: What?)

[Paul Murphy]

Heikki writes:

thanks for the fine reply, Paul -- that perhaps the
>question is neither the ontological 'what' nor the epistemological 'how'
>but rather, if not the sole question mark itself, then the processual
>'what gives?' (Sorry, couldn't resist the temptation -- born a joker etc.)

And the cutely Heideggerian response, from _On Time and Being_ (1964?),
would be, "It gives" -- Es gibt Sein, und Es gibt Zeit -- "it gives (there
is) being and it gives (there is) time" (another untranslatable
Heideggerian pun). Leaving R.M.Nixon asking, "What?"

Cheers,
Paul

P.S. Probably the subject for another post, but what the hey -- if we're
being *really* micrological about this GR of GR, before we get to the
epigrams, we should talk about the dedication (standing alongside the
'mother and father' _Vineland_ dedication as a rarity for TRP) ... which
may or may not have something to say to von Braun ...