Last year I shared in a couple of posts the foreign langauge that Real Analysis was. Here is an example.
This semester I'm taking a course entitled The Philosphy of Language. We have begun by doing readings from Heidegger's Being and Time. Here is an example:
The statement that Da-sein, existing, is its there means: World is "there"; its Da-sein is being-in. Being-in is "there" as that for the sake of which Da-sein is. Existing being-in-the-world as such is disclosed in the for-the-sake of which, and we called this disclosedness understanding. In understanding the for-the-sake-of-which, the significance grounded therin is also disclosed. The disclosure of understanding, as that of the for-the-sake-of-which and of significance, is equiprimordially concernd with complete being-in-the-world. Significance is that for which world as such is disclosed.
Hmm . . . this is going to be interesting.
Although it is written in English, I find it far more foreign than the mathematical symbols above! What do you think?
The professor stated this work is far more understandable in the original German - um, somehow that was not a comfort to me!
Although it is written in English, I find it far more foreign than the mathematical symbols above! What do you think?
The professor stated this work is far more understandable in the original German - um, somehow that was not a comfort to me!
3 comments:
Heidi, Heidegger is my favorite philosopher. I had to read several commentaries before I could read the original "Being and Time," but now I can. It is like reading a new language. It was definitely worth the effort though. Heidegger shapes all my theories on creativity and puzzle solving. I can recommend some commentaries or I can explain some things to you, if you want.
Tony
Wow! Yes please!
I can tell there is something there, and it is drawing me.
I didn't quite know what I was getting into. Given the course title, "Philosophy of Language" I was imagining something more like linguistics - something I now know is VERY different from what this course is about.
I've always enjoyed reading popular works on philosophy, but the only philosophy course I had was 24 year ago - a survey course - so, perhaps I was arrogant to leap frog over all the lower and upper division philosophy and jump into a graduate level class!!
One certainly could not do that with mathematics, and I'm hoping this is not analogous!
Heidi, the best explanation I've found is in Hubert Dreyfus' book.
Being-in-the-World: A Commentary on Heidegger's Being and Time, Division I. by Hubert L. Dreyfus
If you have particular questions such as 'what is being-in-the-world' or 'how does Heidegger differ so from philosophers that preceded him' just let me know. I can dig up a paragraph here and there from papers that I've written on him.
Tony
Post a Comment