outline for heidegger, intro 1 video

1 W. D. S. Pennington Outline for Heidegger, Martin: Being and Time, Intro. 1 03.00.21 How does Heidegger begin? By way of a general philosophical critique, followed by an assumed and specific historical critique, before moving to a positive argument. The subject on the table is the general phenomenon of existence—defined as being.

The principle problem? We do not have an adequate understanding of being Being is hidden from us; assumed is our responsibility to reveal it Heidegger moves to dismiss 3 broad philosophical objections from the outset—objections that act as theoretical roadblocks to an investigation into the essential characteristics of being: that being, as a universal, is a given; that being is indefinable; and that being is self-evident Further, there is a deficit that has come about with modernity; a critique of modernity hangs in the background, which Heidegger will make more explicit later on. Assumed is a certain alienation from being—the growth of technology, the domination of reason and rationality, and the overall attempt to overcome nature are at the heart of this modern alienation. As a result, being has been eclipsed and obscured.

This contemporary blindness means that we must formulate our inquiry from the ground up; this will involve, in part, a resurrection of certain strands of ancient thought, especially derived from Aristotle, that involve metaphysical and ontological considerations; but even this offers incomplete and unresolved dilemmas, and so with this reappropriation of the ancients will follow the development of a novel method.

We do this because we seek an understanding of being—we are naturally compelled, since this is the most basic and most concrete question to be asked How, then to formulate an inquiry concerning being?

Heidegger first makes a categorical separation between Being and beings—depending on our subject, the formulation of the question will determine our method, e.g. there will be a difference in investigating Being than beings.

More specifically, the investigation of being as a general phenomenon will be somehow separate and special than the investigation of any given being or beings The question is complicated, since any formulation we make as beings will necessarily be a selfformulation on being itself. We encounter here the problem of self-referentiality: we are simply too close to our own being Heidegger wants to work out of this confusion and complication by way of Dasein. He asserts the priority of Dasein as a privileged site of being unique to human experience Dasein is to be considered as the place where being meets itself, greets itself, find itself to be a problem, an issue and a question. Dasein describes the experience of being comporting itself toward existence; it is being that understands itself in terms of its own existence. Heidegger will come to define it as “being-there” or as a type of sheer “presence”—the effort in part being the displacement of the enlightenment subject of rationality, to replace the “I” of this subject with something more elementary, diffuse and essential.

So, in part Heidegger wants to train us to think through our own essence, our own being, differently than we have.

What Heidegger is offering is a type of therapy, of sorts—an attempt to resolve being to itself, to develop a method through and by being by which being can come to understand itself. Heidegger

2 wants to provide a method by which we can work through the self-referentiality of our own being without falling into the pitfalls of enlightenment thought.

What is at stake here is twofold: firstly, in adding needed transparency and clarity to our general capacity to field inquiries. We are thus making our inquiries aware of their most basic and essential premises—without which they suffer from an internal and crippling blindness Secondly, by way of assumption, Heidegger relies on the notion that, as individuals, our being is made less without a proper understanding of itself. When our own being is hidden from us, we exist less fully. To exist as completely human, therefore, demands a relationship to being that we have yet to fully explore or know.

The main take away points from the introduction, part 1?

Today, we do not know being, do not know how to properly address or speak of being—and yet, we are nonetheless compelled to know, address and speak of being.

Thus, a certain type of approach to being is required in order to reveal being in full.

This approach will be special and different from preexisting modes of thought in that it will involve the development of an understanding of the principle of Dasein By way of Dasein, a space is cleared for a new type of thinking—a thinking that rejects the basic premises and constraints of enlightenment thought and Cartesian rationality This thinking has the capacity to reveal being to us; more generally, this thinking has the capacity to reveal being to itself.

Some general considerations: Heidegger’s highly idiosyncratic language; he appropriates and transforms the quotidian into a high philosophical style.

The density of the work necessitates a certain meditative approach Be willing to think differently, to take your time, to embroil yourself in the beautiful and nuanced contradictions of being This is the type of work that, if consumed properly, has the capacity not only to open and deepen your relationship to the greater and outside world, but open and deepen your relationship to yourself.

What do I suggest? Let this stand as less a text and more an encounter, and experience. Have patience, and expect to transform.

Thank you.