Heidegger

[118118]

I'm not sure I get how his ontology works.

Am I right in thinking that (I think I must be, its not my idea) being is differentiated from entities primordially, by Dasein. So what were they before? Is this the basic stuff? Does the universe predate our existence? not sure I could agree if he says it doesn't.

Is what is real objects ready-to-hand (and as such invisible)? How did they get to be ready-to-hand?

Would like it if I could get a discussion about this - it would help with study.

So, cheers.

 

[118118]

Yeah, he thinks that nature predates us, which is good eek: ). Er, yeah, what he has to say seems more relevent the more about what he has to say I read.

 

[muser]

I can't help in any way but can you tell me what your studying? Sounds like philosophy.

 

[118118]

Philosophy of science (and psychology). Haven't learnt a thing.

 

[Larry O'Hara]

Philosophy of science (and psychology). Haven't learnt a thing.

In which case read him & get back to us: there is no substitute for actual study. Or as Heidegger would say, using language to reach beyond language..

 

[118118]

In which case read him & get back to us: there is no substitute for actual study. Or as Heidegger would say, using language to reach beyond language..

Is this another person suggesting that I'm not bright enough to post here what am I doing wrong?

 

[Larry O'Hara]

Is this another person suggesting that I'm not bright enough to post here what am I doing wrong?

I do hope you read Heidegger with more care than you read my post! Seriously! I was merely suggesting that you actually read what he has to say first, rather than take a short-cut by expecting others to explain him to you before you have done the reading. Though if you really are intent on bluffing, then dig out the Fontana modern masters book on Heidegger (not to hand, like 90% of my books)

 

[lizzieloo]

If it makes you feel any better I didn't understand a word of your OP and I'm dead clever

 

[Jonti]

Everything I know about Heidegger

The Philosophers Song

Immanuel Kant was a real pissant
Who was very rarely stable.
Heidegger, Heidegger was a boozy beggar
Who could think you under the table.
David Hume could out-consume
Schopenhauer and Hegel,
And Wittgenstein was a beery swine
Who was just as schloshed as Schlegel.
There's nothing Nietzsche couldn't teach ya
'Bout the raising of the wrist.

John Stuart Mill, of his own free will,
On half a pint of shandy was particularly ill.
Plato, they say, could stick it away
Half a crate of whiskey every day.
Aristotle, Aristotle was a bugger for the bottle,
Hobbes was fond of his dram,
And Rene Descartes was a drunken fart:
"I drink, therefore I am"
Yes, Socrates, himself, is particularly missed;
A lovely little thinker but a bugger when he's pissed!

The serious student will appreciate this annotated copy of these verses.

 

[Jonti]

Here's the first bit of something from angelfire ...

Martin Heidegger’s Being and Time (1927) is an exploration of the meaning of being as defined by temporality, and is an analysis of time as a horizon for the understanding of being. Heidegger presents his view of philosophy as phenomenological ontology, beginning with ... Da-sein (there-being). Da-sein is a term used by Heidegger to refer to being which understands its own being. Da-sein is conscious being, and is the kind of consciousness which belongs to human beings.

Heidegger argues that Da-sein has both an ontic (existential) and ontological priority over other kinds of being. Da-sein is a kind of being which can understand the existence of beings other than itself. Thus, the ontic and ontological structure of Da-sein is the foundation for every other kind of being.

The being of Da-sein is different from the being of objective presence, in that Da-sein can project its own possibility. The factuality of Da-sein, which includes projected possibility, is different from the factuality of what is objectively present.

Da-sein may be authentic or inauthentic, depending on whether its projected possibility belongs, or does not belong, to itself. Authenticity and inauthenticity are thus modes or conditions of possibility. Da-sein reveals itself by authenticity, and conceals itself by inauthenticity. Authenticity and inauthentity are fundamental existential possibilities or determinations of Da-sein.

Well, OK, except he should say that "the ontic and ontological structure of Da-sein is the foundation of our understanding of every other kind of being."

Our human consciousnesses, understanding the world and projecting its possibilities, is the totality of our sensory and imaginative senses. So it seems to me that Da-sein is just the sensorium, in the widest sense.

 

[118118]

I've read that Dasein is more of a happening, or a life story. Not sure if this has anything to do with Heidegger bracketing consciousness.

 

[max_freakout]

'Dasein is the being for whom being is an issue'

Im trying to get to grips with Being and Time now in preparation for a phenomenology course

 

[Jonti]

'Dasein is the being for whom being is an issue'

I get the impression the Heidegger may have been tremendously clever, but not very good at expressing himself clearly.

He could've said, it's all a bit of a puzzle, innit, this existence lark. But no, he's got to make it sound complicated.

 

[max_freakout]

I get the impression the Heidegger may have been tremendously clever, but not very good at expressing himself clearly.

He could've said, it's all a bit of a puzzle, innit, this existence lark. But no, he's got to make it sound complicated.

Blame the translators, im sure it's dead simple to read in German...


I heard Heidegger was something of a nazi/nazi sympathizer

I love the way the phenomenologists totally turned the concept of analytic philosophy on its head though, very clever people

 

[CharlieAddict]

i've many difficulties getting my head around heidegger's thinking. is he taught in this country? i tend to read nietzsche, foucault and sometimes derrida for the genealogist's stance. am i missing something? can someone recommend me a good heidegger book with clear translations?

 

[118118]

I'm fairly sure he was not educated here, he was at one time a student of Husserls at Freiburg. His philosophy is definetly described much more as hermeneutical than genealogical. I think that means interpreting or understanding the topic rather than looking at its genesis.

 

[Jonti]

... I love the way the phenomenologists totally turned the concept of analytic philosophy on its head though, very clever people

Yes, turned it on its head, or perhaps inside out.

But one is not going to be able to systematically relate scientific ontology and phenomenology, not until one has a plausible link between the phenomenological and the actual. The pineal gland never seemed much of a goer -- but centuries later, philosophy's still groping for the answer. My hunch is that elemental sentience is associated with the creation of information in the organism, and that this essential "I-ness" is elaborated into the organism's sensorium by other mental (ie brain) processes.

Philosophically, one can argue that choice (or, if you prefer, freewill) logically demands awareness. And scientifically, one can argue that for a being ("organism") to have choice, to act, and not just automatically react, it must have new information about its situation*.

118118 is studying philosophy of science (and psychology). I'm pretty sure the teaching will involve just giving the poor bloody students a handful of pieces and clues, and telling them to get on with it. No one really knows (yet) how to put things together. The best one can hope for is a clear account of the problem, and some hand-waving in the general direction of possible solutions.

* eta: and phenomenologically speaking, that there's new meaning in the sensorium