"In the main they are wrong." You simply don't know what you're talking about. — Xtrix
I think this is exactly your case:
You're a good disciple of Heidegger: you've decided that words don't mean what they usually mean but what you want them to mean. That's why you don't care what the dictionaries and everyone who has studied Heidegger say. Of course, the criterion of authority is not an argument in itself, but there are times when it is useful. It's useful in the face of a question we don't know. When talking about nuclear physics, most human beings have no choice but to trust what the scientists say. When all the experts on Heidegger say one thing contrary to what you say you would do well to meditate a little on your position. Especially when you are not able to present a single text that supports your position and you say it because you want to.
And your whole excuse is that "free from something" is a "technical" term whose meaning only you know. Don't make me laugh. Where did you get your knowledge? If you don't back up your interpretation with commentators' texts or Heidegger's, where does your interpretation come from? Is it a metaphysical intuition?
I got tired of providing you with Heidegger's negative terms regarding the western metaphysical tradition, his interpretation of Haraclitus' and Parmenides' philosophy - which had correctly raised the question of Being ("the way the question of Being is formulated"). I think I must have put here a dozen examples taken from Heidegger's own books. I repeat some of them to refresh your memory, which seems to be somewhat weak.
Deteriorating, collapsing, falling down, inadequately formulated, forgotten, distortions, taken over dogmatically, concealments, baleful prejudice, failed to determine, falsified, misses its sense entirely, falsified from the bottom up, degeneration, blocked, forgotten, erroneous
Wow, there were more than a dozen of them. These are all terms Heidegger uses in his usual sense. They are not his own concepts that require an explanation (if they have one), as it would be the Dasein, to be thrown, clear of being and others. All of them constitute a "radical" criticism, that is to say, in its root, to the western metaphysics, which, according to Heidegger has undertaken a wrong way of which it is necessary to get rid of. Of course, according to your metaphysical intuition they do not mean "wrong". They're just for show.
But you just respond like a litany (mantra, if you like) that they don't mean what they obviously say. But you cannot present a single text in your favour. So this debate is not a real debate. It is pure stubbornness on your part.Probably because you presented yourself as someone who knew Heidegger's work well and this is not true. If you have read one or two texts that you did not understand or did not want to understand. There's not much to present you as an authority on the subject.
That Heidegger did not have a concrete answer to the question of Being, he recognizes that himself. He takes refuge in vague and metaphorical terms like "shepherd of Being", "clear of Being", "truth of Being". But in spite of not knowing what he is talking about, he dedicates himself to disqualifying all the previous metaphysics with the qualifiers that I have collected above. All of them imply that this metaphysical tradition was mistaken in the "question of Being". That this is inconsistent with being unable, after twenty years, as he says in Letter on Humanism
, to say anything really concrete about Being is one of the problems of Heidegger's reading, which sometimes has really comical effects.
You started this thread by saying:
I want to be clear that I consider Heidegger to be a great thinker and teacher, and that I've learned a great deal from his writings and interviews — Xtrix
You don't look like you've demonstrated that much knowledge of Heidegger to me. Actually, almost nothing. I think the two months I've been reviewing Heidegger has been more productive than your whole life as a Heideggerian. I've presented at least ten times more Heidegger's texts here than you have. A clear indication.