From: PhilSin-AT-aol.com Date: Wed, 5 Aug 1998 13:21:54 EDT Subject: Re: Henry Michael, In a message dated 98-08-05 11:01:54 EDT, you write: > > >> >Zimmerman (Eclipse of the Self) says the following: > >> > > >> >For Heidegger, for something "to be" means for it to be revealed, > >> >uncovered, made manifest. Being refers not to a thing but to the > >> event > >> >of being manifest." > > Hello, I'm back. I don't know if this will be good or bad news to you. I'd like to comment on the metaphysics of presence. My understanding is that this is the way of seeing the world that forms the basics for western metaphysics since the time of Plato. This is precisely the "tradition" the Heidegger proposed to deconstruct in the unwritten portion of B&T. My understanding of the term is that it refers to the operation of "stopping" time , stopping the happening of life and "fixing" the present time and then trying to reduce the object through further and further refinements of its being to arrive at last at the essence of the thing, the thing in itself. Contrast this with the "presencing" of the object, how it comes into a particular historical being, how aspectsof the thing are unconcealed but always at the expense of other aspects being concealed. The epochs of being play a role in the what of unconcealment as does the interests, projects and intentions of the seer. This analysis forms the basis for the critique of science as truth as it shows that both the epoch (the technological epoch) and the intentions of the "investigator" (the forestructure of the scientist), pre-determine the outcome even if the "scientist" believes he or she is merely observing and recording "objective" data. Later on Heidegger analysed the thing from the perspective of the fourfold, a rich and poetic understanding of the things themselves. Yours, Phil Sinaikin --- from list heidegger-AT-lists.village.virginia.edu ---
Display software: ArchTracker © Malgosia Askanas, 2000-2005