Jump to content
Guardian_Angel

Heidegger

Recommended Posts

I look forward to true heideggerian scholars to perforating my ignorance with anger, but my understanding of Dasein was that it was the alternative or opposite of the gestell... if gestell is the "enframing" then Dasein is non-enframed - in a sense... its more that your open to being as heidegger discuss' it... it literally translates to "being here" - so to reach dasein would mean to arrive at the state of Being - again in a sense. You are open in desein... you are enframed in the gestell... but dasein is ephemeral (yet possibly reoccuring) - temporal... a light-bulb which cannot sustain the current that is being put into it and glows brightly then flashes out... its a concept that is primal, and defined via western thought so inherently doomed to being enframed so long as you are in the gestell... You might have a better understanding of what being is... im fuzzy there honestly - but Dasein is essentially seeing something sans the gestell - perhaps its true being...

 

OHHHHHHHH, scary stuff

 

let the perforations commence.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm not an expert but...

 

Dasein ("being-there") is more specific to a parameter of Being ie:

 

Man stands out from things (ex-sists, not merely ex-ists) never being completely absorbed by them but nevertheless being nothing (no-thing) apart from them. "Man" dwells in a world that he has been, and continues to be, “thrown into” until death.

 

In comparison, Being thrown into things = Dasein.

 

Edit: that probably doesn't help much.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Ha well i understand the basic ideas of being and Being but whats the difference between Being and Dasein

 

"Thanks for any info"

 

 

Dasein is the being that questions it's very Being; namely, human beings. But it's not particular humans, it's the concept of being human. At least, that is a lot closer to how Heidegger talks about it in Being and Time than what the other people said. I don't know what the debate Heidegger nonsense is.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Defining exactly what Dasein is proves immensely difficult, Heidegger devotes hundreds of pages of very dense text to the analytic of Dasein in Being and Time. He also comes back to the question repeatedly in his later work, partly due to the amount of misinterpretations that were floating around.

 

The direct translation 'there-being' is pretty misleading, Dasein is a very common word in German that simply means existance, or human existance. That is not say that Heidegger used it in a common way. There's still heated debate on how we are to understand it.

 

For the sake of explaining the difference between Dasein and Being, it's easy enough to say that Dasein is that special kind of thing that has access to both Being and beings.

 

A being is a thing, and Being is that which allows things to show up, or 'presence' (verbal).

 

Dasein, is the being which is essentially temporal and aware of its own mortality. Heidegger thus describes Dasein as 'Being-toward-death'. This means that Dasein, as the only kind of being that has a relationship to its own non-being (death) also has a privelaged access to, or understanding of, what is to exist, that is, to Being.

 

The analytic of Dasein and its temporality thus becomes the method Heidegger chooses to try to get to grips with what Being is, at least in Being and Time, as Dasein is the site at which the two realms of Being and beings collide.

 

Hope that helped, if you're interested in Heidegger take a look at either Stephen Mulhall's or Hubert Dreyfus' introductory texts. Although they pragmatise his thought somewhat, they make it a lot more accessible than simply diving into the primary work.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
didn't heidegger have a new theory of life every 3 months!!!!!!

 

Well no, actually. Heidegger stuck to his guns throughout his entire career regarding his project of the destruction of the history of ontology. And if by the vacuous term 'theory of life', you mean an ethics, then actually Heidegger's treatment of Dasein in Being and Time meant that questions of theory and practice could no longer be asked separately and the construction of an ethics or politics out of his project thus became an impossibility.

 

If by 'theory of life' you simply mean his philosophy, then again, no. Heidegger even went so far as to declare in Was Heisst Denken that "every great thinker thinks only one thought". He never deviated from the project set out in Being and Time.

 

Maybe you should try actually reading some Heidegger rather than looking for digestible chunks of argument on Google?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Well no, actually. Heidegger stuck to his guns throughout his entire career regarding his project of the destruction of the history of ontology. And if by the vacuous term 'theory of life', you mean an ethics, then actually Heidegger's treatment of Dasein in Being and Time meant that questions of theory and practice could no longer be asked separately and the construction of an ethics or politics out of his project thus became an impossibility.

 

If by 'theory of life' you simply mean his philosophy, then again, no. Heidegger even went so far as to declare in Was Heisst Denken that "every great thinker thinks only one thought". He never deviated from the project set out in Being and Time.

 

Maybe you should try actually reading some Heidegger rather than looking for digestible chunks of argument on Google?

 

i think you may be overstating your claim in a way that would mislead folks who perhaps haven't read as much heidegger as you. later heidegger (after the turn) has a markedly different focus than early heidegger. you may be right that his general project is the same, but there is at very least a shift from universal structures and experiences to something more historically contextualized. i also think his explanation of Dasein and Being changes significantly, though this may not be part of a change so much as a continued interrogation. Dreyfuss is a pretty good resource on comparative analyses of early and late heidegger, for those interested. i know there's lectures posted where he discusses early heidegger in great depth, and most of what gets deployed in debate rounds comes out of later heidegger so you can draw your own contrasts.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

da-sein is a result of Heidegger's distaste for personal pronouns (and other personal identifiers like 'one' or 'man').

 

As for being, heidegger puts it pretty well himself:

“Yet Being – what is Being? It is It itself. The thinking that is to come must learn to experience that and to say it. “Being” – that is not God and not cosmic ground. Being is farther than all beings and is yet nearer to man than every being, be it a rock, a beast, a work of art, a machine, be it angel or God. Being is the nearest. Yet the near remains farthest from man. Man at first clings always and only to beings. But when thinking represents being as beings it no doubt relates itself to Being. In truth, however, it always thinks only of beings as such; precisely not, and never, Being as such … This means that the truth of Being as the clearing itself remains concealed for metaphysics. However, this concealment is not a defect of metaphysics but a treasure withheld from it yet held before it, the treasure of its own proper wealth. But the clearing itself is Being.”

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The question of being is best answered by yourself. Even a library of thousand paged books will never answer the question, because the question is framed incorrectly by many. "Being-there" is a feeling, not a thought. Curious that someone would waste so much time translating it to words. That this is even a question shows the extreme degree of confusion in our world. Why don't we regain some basic sanity before constructing arguments and theories?

Edited by Met4physica

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...

×
×
  • Create New...