Reply to Vallicella: Heidegger and Idealism

  • Smith Q
N/ACitations
Citations of this article
1Readers
Mendeley users who have this article in their library.

Abstract

Vallicella argued that Heidegger's idealism is incoherent but that absolute idealism is coherent. I argue the reverse. There is no contradiction in the supposition that Being is dependent upon Dasein, that entities are dependent upon Being, and therefore that all entities are dependent upon Dasein. This may be false, but it is consistent. The absolute idealism of Fichte and the like is incoherent, however, because it supposes that all human minds are but representations in the Absolute Mind, and it is impossible for a mind to be nothing but a representation in another Mind.

Cite

CITATION STYLE

APA

Smith, Q. (1991). Reply to Vallicella: Heidegger and Idealism. International Philosophical Quarterly, 231–235.

Register to see more suggestions

Mendeley helps you to discover research relevant for your work.

Already have an account?

Save time finding and organizing research with Mendeley

Sign up for free