Date: Wed, 19 Mar 2003 18:06:10 +0100
Subject: Re: Being and Time-section one


Page 0:

"What counts, is to pose anew the question for the 
sense of Being."

Anew, because it has been posed already, as is
shown in the quote of Plato. We thought we knew
what the word 'being' ('on') meant, Plato says, till the
moment we explicitly began to ask. Then we found
out we did not really know, or: that we really did not
know it at all.

Therefore, Plato writes, we have fallen into aporia,
(not knowing a way (poros) in nor out)

Do we know, like Socrates, that we don't know?
No, not even that. H: "We are not even in the 
embarrassment of not understanding the
expression 'being/seiend' "

Therefore an understanding should be wakened
(so that the embarrassment is felt)


When it is time, that is involved in every understanding
of Being (Seinsverstaendnis), as its 'horizon', then time
must have been forgotten too. Although Nietzsche is not
named in BT, his interpretation of metaphysics, man's best
thinking sofar, as 'revenge against time' cannot be
very remote from Heidegger's introduction in of BT.

In "What is called thinking", a conclusion of the
interpretation of Nietzsche's thoughts on Uebermensch
and eternity, contains the question:

"But what about Being and time? Must not the one and
the other, Being and time together, must not both in
their connexion at first become questionable and at last
worthy-of-asking?"

And when Heidegger also writes here, that the effect of
a real thinker does not disappear, also and esp. not when
he is disregarded, would he not have thought of Nietzsche
and BT?

rene











  














-----------------------------------
drs. Rene de Bakker
Universiteitsbibliotheek Amsterdam
Afdeling Catalogisering 
tel. 020-5252368              


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