Date: Fri, 25 Sep 1998 18:37:21 +0200
From: Jérôme Audran <jaudran-AT-club-internet.fr>
Subject: Re: The term "Praxis"


Mattthew, 

 	There is a conference of J. Taminiaux - in Lecture de l'ontologie
fondamentale - Essai sur Heidegger - which develops a parallel between
praxis and poiesis in the first hand and authenticity and inauthenticity
in the second hand. For Taminiaux, the terms of authenticity and
inauthenticity are a "re-appropriation" of the aristotelician concepts
developped in the Nicomac's Ethic.
	But all the difficulty is to understand the nature of this
reappropriation. And Taminiaux does not really explain what he means by
this word.
	Actually, the problem is that Heidegger and Aristotle are not in the
same "level" of thinking. Heidegger develops an existentiale thinking.
The terms of authenticity and inauthenticity are existentiale terms,
they define the ontological structure of the Dasein. Aristotle
preoccupation is very different, it is an existentiell one. There is
something like an ontological difference between the two thinkings.
Aristotle's thinking takes place in the everydayness - for Heidegger.
	My interpretation is that the Heidegger's reappropriation must be
understood as a re-petition (Wider-holung). Authenticity and
inauthenticity are a repetition in an existentiale sens of the terms of
praxis and poiesis which are existentiell. This is a very common use
within Heidegger's method. He takes a concept in the metaphysic or in
the theology and he repeats it in an existential sens - as an example
anxiety which is a repetition a the Kierkegaard's concept, or the "call
of being" which is a repetition of the theological "call of the Father".
	I don't know if the book of J. Taminiaux has been translated in
english, but you have also an article on "Nonbelonging and authenticity"
by C. E. Scott in Reading Heidegger - Commemoration, (edited by J.
Sallis).
	Please excuse my very bad english.

	Regards.
				Jerome.


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