File spoon-archives/heidegger.archive/heidegger_1999/heidegger.9901, message 50


Subject: re: Re: Re: Routledge Guidebook to Being and Time
Date: Wed, 20 Jan 1999 10:14:27 -0500


Stuart,

Thanks for couching it in the intro/interp distinction.
I take a stong stance on transl as/is interp., and so I
wouldn't see the intro/interp distinction as any more viable. 

Aren't you presupposing some "neutral" zone
in which can fall certain,
perhaps called conventional,
secondary sources. 

I've not looked at Mulhall; but, I have looked at Kisiel's _Genesis=C9 _
where we have a construction of B&T by way of the history of philos and
a tracing of Heidegger's work-life at the time of the writing.  With
Dreyfus, I believe, we have a commentary on the 1st division that
attempts to put Heid's scheme straightforwardly into a late-twebtieth
century English (American) interpretation. 

Dreyfus attempts to introduce the reader to (what he believes is)
Heidegger's way of thinking.  Kisiel tries to explain how Heidegger
thought.

Which is a riskier introduction?  And if both lie outside the
conventional (neutral) zone, what are the characteristics that would
apply for the introduction-without-or-with-little-risk?

Kindest regards,
henry



On Wed, 20 Jan 1999 14:10:13 -0000 Stuart Elden
<Stuart.Elden-AT-clara.co.uk> wrote:

> Henry
>
> (For information, the other time was on the Foucault list). Well, I think
> this has been aired on the list before. Dreyfus' interpretation of Heidegger
> is very important, interesting, etc. BUT, it is not the sort of introduction
> to Heidegger that (say) Mulhall provides. It is something that purports to
> be an introduction, but is far more an interpretation. I know that there are
> problems in distinguishing between introduction, interpretation, etc. (and
> Heidegger says any translation is necessarily an introduction), but Mulhall
> seems a good example of the former, Dreyfus the latter.
>
> So, my point is: if you want an introduction (a leading into, a summary
> guide to) use Mulhall, and approach Dreyfus with caution, as his is far more
> an interpretation.
>
> Hope this clarifies,
>
> Stuart
>



henry sholar
hwsholar-AT-uncg.edu



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

   

Driftline Main Page

 

Display software: ArchTracker © Malgosia Askanas, 2000-2005