GR 156-170, colors, compounds

[Michael Bailey]

...not that there's any real point in harshing on old Heidegger.

I mean, the philosophic tradition is a long conversation and (from an
outsider view) pretty inbred.  So that he's replying to Kant and Hegel
(who was also replying to like Aristotle and Thomas Aquinas and such)
and maybe Marx and probably Sartre and a bunch of other wordy,
cerebral types, distinguishing his viewpoints from theirs, taking
stances that don't make all that much sense unless you're aware of the
issues and terms that led up to them.

And the people who work in that line spend a lot of time refuting the
last guy, so they probably aren't that worried about Heidegger's
theories being wrong because the way they get a reputation is refuting
them anyway...just as he got his reputation by saying basically "all
those older guys were wrong about even the most basic things, and
here's how it really is"  (sometimes I do that myself...but I get more
of a kick out of other activities, in general)

And certainly nobody is perfect.  I like to think that I'd resign from
the phone company if they started firing all the Germans or something,
but gee, I like working there and so forth.

and furthermore...old Jahn who did a lot for the sport of gymnastics
had some nasty bookburning antisemitic etc tendencies around the
edges, but people still use other contributions that he made

nonetheless, Heidegger wanted to redefine Being -- what is it about
his definition that makes it psilo-fabulous?