Date: Wed, 19 Mar 2003 01:40:42 +0800
Subject: Re: Being and Time-section one



On Monday, March 17, 2003, at 04:00  AM, BILL.HORD wrote:

> What do you all think about the interpretation of dasein as a verbal, 
> that is, as referring to an 'activity', and thus similarly referring 
> to being as an activity?
>
> This interpretation, which I understand as basically Aristotelian, is 
> consonant with Heidegger's critique of Descartes and Cartesian 
> platonism.
>
> Whether this is all agreeable or not, I think Heidegger in section 1 
> is opening a space in which he can approach the question of being. So, 
> all preinterpretations of being, including this one, are in a sense 
> premature.
>
> Bill Hord

I agree on the last bit about pre-interpretations. We need to formally 
suspend belief about what the term 'being' might mean in order to first 
open it to question. Dasein as 'activity' is rather general, although 
Dreyfus uses this term in reference to Heidegger's notion of practical 
understanding that is covered in the first division after this intro. 
Activity is used instead of 'action' cos the latter is traditionally 
associated with notions of practical understanding that are mediated by 
thought or rationality, a subjective interpretation that is opposed by 
both Dreyfus and Heidegger.

But 'Dasein', or one's own lived experience, is more than just 
activity, it's also perceptual and theoretical intentionality, or 
intentional comportments in general. Yet Dasein will be more than just 
intentionality as well, there is the 'world understanding' that goes 
before intentional comportments, and there is the temporal structure 
that ties all these together and constitutes a sense of unity to a 
process that is constantly changing... so I guess there's a 'verbal' 
sense to it, but all this lies ahead of us in the existential 
phenomenological analytic of Dasein.

Regards,

Malcolm



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