Subject: Re: Heidegger's Philosophy of Time
Date: Fri, 31 Aug 2001 20:59:52 -0400


Dear Mr. Schenk,

It is quite impossible to respond to your question about Heidegger's 
philosophy of time, since to my knowledge Heidegger had no philosphy of 
time.  Who does have a philosophy of time?  Lemme know if you find anyone.  
Heidegger has several assertions about the nature of time which are 
inscribed within a network of relations.  The subject is in some sense a 
fulcrum upon which these assertions about time are made.  As Heidegger 
himself argues, time is, phenomenolically speaking, the ecstases of the 
subject.  Hence time itself is not a thing or medium. What is it chez 
Heidegger?  Lemme know if you find out.


cd











om: djschenk <djschenk-AT-blue.weeg.uiowa.edu>
>Reply-To: heidegger-AT-lists.village.virginia.edu
>To: heidegger <heidegger-AT-lists.village.virginia.edu>
>Subject: Heidegger's Philosophy of Time
>Date: Fri, 31 Aug 2001 16:52:35 -0500
>
>Hi.
>
>I'm still having all sorts of trouble with my re-subscription to
>the Heidegger list (not sure what's going on), but I'll try
>sending this note and see what happens.
>
>I am currently writing on the nature of time, with special
>emphasis on several competing theories within analytic philosophy.
>In connection with this, I make the claim that a fully
>satisfactory account of the metaphysical structure of time must
>include a proper phenomenological account of time- consciousness
>a la Husserl and Heidegger, with my own sympathies inclining very
>strongly toward a roughly Heideggerian account, minus his temporal
>idealism.
>
>I have a *quite* rough rough draft of a chapter on Heidegger's
>theory for which I am dying to get some serious feedback.  I don't
>know if any of the experts on Heidegger's philosophy of time are
>still on this list, but if so I would love to have them critique it.
>At one time both William Blattner and Reginald Lilly were extremely
>helpful in getting me to understand the man's more, ermm.. *opaque*
>comments about the nature of time.
>
>Gentlemen, are either of you still on this list?  If so, would you
>be willing to dissect and deride my work?  If so, I would be more
>than a little grateful.
>
>Is anyone else on the list working on Heidegger's theory of time?
>Like I said, I am aching for all sorts of informed feedback and
>criticism.  Comments from classical Husserlians would be
>especially welcome.
>
>One of the claims I make is that one need not be any kind of
>Heideggerian to profit from and even endorse his account of
>temporality and its role in the business of phenomenologically
>digging one's way behind the phenomenon of intentionality.
>Tentatively, I favor his strategy of explaining the occurrence of
>the latter in terms of the former.  I especially want to explore
>the question of whether or not this chunk of his work *can* be
>divorced from his metaphilosophical method of hermeneutic
>phenomenology, because if it cannot then my chapter collapses
>into a hopeless bunch of hooey and I'll have to stake my claim to
>a phenomenological defense of the B-theory elsewhere.
>
>Well, I look forward to whatever responses I have in store.
>
>
>Thanks much,
>
>David Schenk
>University of Iowa
>
>
>
>      --- from list heidegger-AT-lists.village.virginia.edu ---


_________________________________________________________________
Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com/intl.asp



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