From: "Peder Wuth Pedersen" <wuth-AT-coco.ihi.ku.dk>
Subject: Re: truth, disclosedness, obscurity
Date: Mon, 24 Aug 1998 04:29:23 +0200


Michael

Thank you for replying ! Tugendhat would agree with you. There has to be a
dimension of openness for being to appear (Tugenhat calls this fact
trivial).  The problem is, according to Tugendhat, that Heidegger says more
than this. He says that openness, because it is the necessary condition for
the true statement, should be called the essence of truth ("Wenn aber nur
durch diese offenstaendigkeit des Verhaltens die richtigkeit (wahrheit) der
Aussage moeglich wird, dann muss das, was die Richtigkeit erst ermoeglicht,
mit urspruenglicherem Recht als das wesen der Wahrheit gelten." (Vom Wesen
der Wahrheit")). He does not say that openness is the necessary condition
for truth AND untruth (at least not that I know of). I will let Tugendhat do
the talking (no translation since he is basically saying what I have written
above):

"Wenn also Heidegger sagt: "Die Aussage hat ihre Richtigkeit zu lehen von
der Offenstaendigkeit des Verhaltens;denn nur durch diese kann ueberhaupt
Offenbares zum Richmass werden fuer die vorstellende angleichung" (WW11)
dann ist diese behauptung entweder trivial oder falsch: sie ist trivial wenn
die hier behauptete Fundirung der Richtigkeit in der Offenstaendigkeit nur
besagen soll, dass die Offenstaendigkeit fuer die Richtigkeit eine conditio
sine qua non ist, trivial deswegen, weil sie es ebenso fuer die
Unrichtigkeit ist; und sie ist falsch, wenn diese Fundirung nicht nur im
sinn einer notwendigen, sondern einer zureichenden Bedingung gemeint ist.
Damit faelt dann aber auch die Folgerung, die Heidegger aus dieser
behauptung zieht: "Wenn aber nur durch diese offenstaendigkeit des
Verhaltens die richtigkeit (wahrheit) der Aussage moeglich wird, dann muss
das, was die Richtigkeit erst ermoeglicht, mit urspruenglicherem Recht als
das wesen der Wahrheit gelten." (ww12). Es ist allerdings einleuchtend, dass
man das, woran sich die richtige Aussage anmisst, "mit uerspruenglicherem
Recht" als "Wahr" bezeichnen kann, aber dies ist dann nicht das Offenbare,
sondern das Seiende wie es selbst ist.

Again the problem seems to be that Heidegger identifies disclosure in
general and truth. He does not distinguish between true and false disclosure
(If he does please let me know where). At least there is a fundamental
ambiguity in his work. How can the gold be anything but true if it is
disclosed and Heidegger says that any disclosure is truth ?


Greetings

Peder



-----Original Message-----
From: Michael Eldred <artefact-AT-t-online.de>
To: heidegger-AT-lists.village.virginia.edu
<heidegger-AT-lists.village.virginia.edu>
Date: 23. august 1998 12:49
Subject: Re: truth, disclosedness, obscurity


Cologne, 23 August 1998

Peder Wuth Pedersen schrieb:
> So when Dasein is generalized into disclosedness, the
> specific phenomenon of truth disappears that requires not only
> disclosedness, but disclosedness that which is the object of true
> intentionality as it is in itself. But the "as it is in itself" disappears
> in BT and disclosedness alone is said to be truth. The specific phenomenon
> or concept of truth (the traditional) represents at least a critical
> instance ( or a regulative principle) towards any given disclosedness (the
> object as it is in itself). The traditional concept of truth gives the
> possibility of asking towards any given disclosedness to entities as :"is
> this disclosedness true or not". According to Heidegger it is not possible
> to ask this question since all disclosedness is true. So the question is
> this: can there be any untrue "disclosedness" (according to Heidegger) and
> what is to be the meassure the truthvalue. It seems to me that Tugenhats
> criticism goes very deep. Can anyone help me save Heidegger from knock out
?

Peder, a quick reply because time is short this weekend. When H. translates
_alaetheia_ as Unverborgenheit (disclosedness, unhiddenness,
unencryptedness)
instead of truth the problem of an ambiguity or at least confusion does
arise,
but, in my experience, H. is very clear in avoiding this possible confusion.

If _alaetheia_ is understood as the openness within which beings can show
themselves of themselves as they are, this does not at all preclude that
beings
can show themselves also as they are not. There is room in this dimension of
disclosedness for distortion, obscurity and even hiddenness.

H. employs the example of fake gold (Katzengold) at several points (e.g.
GA54:43). Fake gold shows itself as that which it is not, but for it to show
itself at all, there must be a dimension of openness of being (since even
fake
gold is a being and is understood as such).

At GA54:47 Parmenides, H. gives the example of a cupboard placed in front
of a
doorway in a room, thus obscuring the doorway entirely. The wall thus shows
itself as not having a door.

Der vor die Tuer gestellte Schrank stellt aber nicht nur sich vor als
dieses
Ding, er verstellt auch nicht nur die Tuer, indem er die an dieser Stelle
durchbrochene Wand zu-stellt, d.h. verbirgt, sondern der Schrank kann so
ver-stellen, dass er vorgibt, es sei keine Tuer in der Wand. Der Schrank
verstellt die Tuer und entstellt so, indem er sich davor stellt, den
wirklichen Sachverhalt der Wand. (GA54:47)

roughly:
The cupboard placed in front of the door however not only presents itself
as
this thing; it does not only obscure the door by closing off, i.e. hiding,
the
wall which has break in it at this point, but the cupboard can obscure in
such a
way that it pretends that there is no door in the wall. The cupboard
obscures
the door and distorts in such a way by placing itself before the real
state of
affairs concerning the wall.

I have not been able to get across the play with the stellen-words.

I dont know whether Tugendhat considers GA54, but the discussion of the
phenomena of hiding, falsity, obscurity, etc. goes very deep and may even
disperse Tugendhats objections to the wind.

Michael
_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-  artefact text and translation _-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-
_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_- made by art  _-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-
http://www.webcom.com/artefact/ _-_-_-_-_-_-_-_ artefact-AT-t-online.de-_-_
_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_ Dr Michael Eldred -_-_-_
_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-





     --- from list heidegger-AT-lists.village.virginia.edu ---




     --- from list heidegger-AT-lists.village.virginia.edu ---