Class Notes (834,043)
Canada (508,293)
Philosophy (1,521)
PHL217H1 (47)

Authentic Existence and the 'they'

3 Pages
Unlock Document

Sol Goldberg

Martin Heidegger Being and Time in Heidegger’s Oeuvre and in the History of Philosophy • Important considerations: often treated as Heidegger’s major work (like critique of pure reason), but this is not the case; a response to Husserl; he was under pressure to publish at the time; published in the context of neo-Kantian concerns; this work is never finished. • The portion of the work that wasn’t completed: Thedestructuring of the history of metaphysics. • Instead of this work, we could have had a major re-interpretation of Aristotle’s metaphysics. • Heidegger’s turn: there’s a difference between a tu rn in H’s mind, and a turn in PHL; H keeps asking the same question despite talk of “turns”—the question of being. • H relates being to other PHL activities and thinkers. • On the one hand, addressing one question from different angles; and questioning whether all these angles can be systematized (H doesn’t seem to be concerned that it all fit together). • “Ways not works”—H: all H’s texts are ways into thequestion of being, but none are a final answer. • The Question of Being In The History of PHL • Don’t take too seriously, the claim that the question of being has been forgotten. • What he really means is: ....we’ll come back to that later. • H’s question is opposed to the classic question: What is a being in so far as it is a being? —Aristotle; beings as beings, not one or another aspect; classic view, being is just a higher order being. • H: Being cannot be thought of as a higher order of being. • H: Being should be distinguished from beingness... • beingness: the act of being; . • Being (with capital): Being is not itself an entity (H’s special version of being, whereas the small b being is the classic view). • Being in Time’s 2 big contributions to our liet motif • inauthenticity vs. authenticity • uncoverdness vs. disclosure (section 7) The “necessity” of the question of Being vs. the “necessity” of restating this question • 2 distinct questions: the necessity of the question of being; the restating of the question of being (are we restating being or beingness) • Priority here: basically means the same as necessity. • It is the question you cannot avoid in your existence—the question of being has priority to all others, hence, necessity. The is different that reforming the question itself • Section 1—attacks dogma that sanctions the neglect of this question. • H: PHL may not appeal to obviousness. • The three prejuduces • 1) being is universal • 2) indefinable • 3) self-evident • Does he take these to be fundamentally wrong? No. What’s wrong is that they are taken as grounds for no longer being concerned with the question of Being. • Instead of producing dogmas, these prejudices shoul
More Less

Related notes for PHL217H1

Log In


Join OneClass

Access over 10 million pages of study
documents for 1.3 million courses.

Sign up

Join to view


By registering, I agree to the Terms and Privacy Policies
Already have an account?
Just a few more details

So we can recommend you notes for your school.

Reset Password

Please enter below the email address you registered with and we will send you a link to reset your password.

Add your courses

Get notes from the top students in your class.