Date: Thu, 16 Aug 2001 16:30:59 +1000
Subject: Re: philosphy 101


For fear of pushing Bob's query to the side, it seems dangerous to view
Heidegger in the way prescribed by Gulio. Gulio seems to me to be suggesting
that Heidegger is different things to different people. Furthermore, that
this was intended in Heidegger's philosophical writings. Yet, Heidegger's
philosophy, even as early as Being and Time, is a direct challenge to the
possibility of having one's _own_ take on anything. The analysis of
Eigentlichkeit and Uneigentlichkeit (poorly translated into English as,
respectively, authenticity and inauthenticity) shows that it is precisely in
death that one's ownmost being comes to fruition. In other words, only at the
end of experience can one arrive at a full presence of oneself.

With regard to Bob's question, I don't think that one can direct Michael's
criticism against Dreyfus. Heidegger's work is not primarily concerned with
poetry, but the manner in which one becomes attuned to Be-ing via poetry. As
Heidegger writes throughout his work, there are several ways of becoming
attuned (or owned over) to Be-ing, philosophy being one, poetry another
(presumably there are more, although I have yet to come across any others
stated by Heideger).

Dreyfus, like a steadily increasing number of people, is finding ways of
approaching phenomenology from a cognitive scientific point of view. This
approach, it seems to me, implies a certain positivistic approach to
Heidegger. This is not in itself a problem, except that Dreyfus does not
spend the time to construct a philosophically rigorous basis for doing so.

More and more on the continent, a certain pragmatic, or naturalistic approach
is being adopted. More recently, see the work of Natalie Depraz and Francisco
Varela, who employ Husserl to naturalistic ends. Compare also the writings of
the late Gilles Deleuze and Felix Guattari, especially the latter (see Gary
Genosko's introduction to the _Guattari Reader_ for starters). His writing
takes explicit cues from the Empiricist and Pragmatic approaches of William
James, in particular.

Regards,

Alex


Blank wrote:

> ----- Original Message -----
> From: Bob Guevara <guevara2-AT-gte.net>
> To: <heidegger-AT-lists.village.virginia.edu>
> Sent: Wednesday, August 15, 2001 8:25 PM
> Subject: philosphy 101
>
> > being an engineer with a common man's interest in philosophy, i'd
> appreciate
> > some insight into why continentals view american pragmatists with a
> slightly
> > up-turned nose. ...what --exactly-- is the objection to hubert dreyfus'
> > pragmatic approach to heidegger.
> >
> > thanks in advance,
> > bob
> >
> Hi,
>
> If you ask me, I don't know. What do *you* get out of Heidegger or
> philosophy?
>
> Gulio
>
> >
> >
> >      --- from list heidegger-AT-lists.village.virginia.edu ---
>
>      --- from list heidegger-AT-lists.village.virginia.edu ---



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