Subject: Re: Routledge Guidebook to Being and Time
Date: Fri, 22 Jan 1999 09:23:04 -0000


Henk wrote

>It depends perhaps on what one expects. For some reason
>or other Mulhall does not make it clear to me why I
>should read Being and Time. This is possibly not
>Mulhall's but Routledge's fault. I have the same
>problem with their introduction to Plato's Politeia.


I think you're right it's Routledge's fault. But why should a 'guidebook'
serve this purpose?

>Dreyfus leaves no doubt that he has lived for twenty
>years with Being and Time, and why it has become a part
>of his life. He confronts the teachings of the young
>Heidegger with those of contemporary philosophers as if
>he has a stake in the outcome of the dispute.


Which of course, he has.

>The problem with Dreyfus is of course the fact that he
>might shy people away from reading the second part of
>Being and Time. And I do not think that this is the
>right way to teach philosophy - certainly not Heidegger,
>with his "Weg - nicht Werke".


There's a comment in Dreyfus and Rabinow's book on Michel Foucault which I
always found rather intriguing. From memory, it says something like "here
[in Les mots et les choses] F is summarising and criticising H very
effectively. There is no way to make this clear without writing a commentary
on Division II of Being and Time, so let the reader beware". Dreyfus thinks
the second division of B&T is less polished than the first: I find it
difficult to disagree. But, it is incredibly important, and I think that
Dreyfus' book may suffer as a result of its neglect. It has important
implications for the interpretation though, as it makes it a lot easier to
strip out all the unwanted existential overtones.

Thanks for this exchange: it's been interesting.

Stuart



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