File spoon-archives/heidegger.archive/heidegger_2001/heidegger.0102, message 4

Date: Fri, 02 Feb 2001 12:19:23 -0600
Subject: Re: what's in a name?

At 7:48 AM -0800 1/30/01, P. Johnston wrote:
>I agree with Heidegger that misnaming will
>significantly distort one's approach to a matter under
>investigation, because it creates a mis-invocation, a
>misguided invocation.

Invoke, rather than evoke! " More on target, more direct>" 
Invocations are not usually associated with philosophy, but of 
course, as Rick recently suggested, phenomenology speaks 
liturgically, or at least may speak liturgically.  When it does, it 
begins with an invocation of the name from which the phenomenology 
proceeds.  The invocation directs the communicant to attend to the 
name given as a call to think what the name names.

Heidegger's beginnings are particularly invocational .  And the 
effect on me of certain of those invocations, heard at certain times, 
has been just such a response to the invocation of the name as a call 
to think the thing named in a particular way.  It's not that that 
name is the only way to invoke a thinking relationship to the thing 
named, but it does do what it does.  To repeat my student's 
observation, "The only way to understand a sign is to follow it." 
That's the only way Socrates could understand the oracle.  One needs 
to be faithful to one's signs or one's understanding will be 

Thanks for the references.  I will of course look into them.


Professor Allen Scult					Dept. of Philosophy
HOMEPAGE: " Heidegger on Rhetoric and Hermeneutics":		Drake 
University		Des 
Moines, Iowa 50311
PHONE: 515 271 2869
FAX: 515 271 3826

     --- from list ---


Driftline Main Page


Display software: ArchTracker © Malgosia Askanas, 2000-2005