Sunday, March 19, 2006
In-der-Blog-sein
Per Caritatem on how Heidegger missed the love connection.
Per Caritatem on how Heidegger missed the love connection.
Heidegger as we recall speaks of a human being as Dasein—emphasizing that a human being is not an object. Here, Marion seems to suggest that even Heidegger’s critique doesn’t overcome modern problems because he fails to emphasize two crucial themes: personal relationships and love. As Rosemann points out, Being and Time is all about the self—about leaving inauthentic forms of existence behind and embracing our own existence. In passing over personal relationships and love, Heidegger fails to recognize that love is the acknowledgment of one’s need for the Other.¶ 12:50 PM
Comments:
<< Home
While Being and Time is certainly Dasein focused (as, in my opinion, his later writings aren't) it's hard to miss the focus on the Other in it (IMO). I'd go so far as to suggest the Other is always there in the margins of Being and Time.
The Other surfaces in mitdasein and as, arguably, the source of inauthenticity. [Extra credit question: Could Robinson Crusoe be inauthentic?]
However, I just searched books.google and Heidegger never mentions agape or erato.
However, I just searched books.google and Heidegger never mentions agape or erato.
True, but the word minne does.
The ordiginary word "thanc" is imbued with the originary nature of memory: the gather of the constant intention (Meinen) of all that the heart holds in present being. Intention here is understood in the sense of the Old High German word for "love" (minne): the inclination (Zuneigung) with which the inmost meditation of the heart turns towards all that is in being - the inclination that is not within its own control and therefore also need not necessarily be first enacted as such. (WhD, 93/141)
The ordiginary word "thanc" is imbued with the originary nature of memory: the gather of the constant intention (Meinen) of all that the heart holds in present being. Intention here is understood in the sense of the Old High German word for "love" (minne): the inclination (Zuneigung) with which the inmost meditation of the heart turns towards all that is in being - the inclination that is not within its own control and therefore also need not necessarily be first enacted as such. (WhD, 93/141)
Just to add, I snagged that quote from Sikka's Forms of Transcendence, 71, as it immediately came to mind. One more quote from WhD.
The thanc, the heart's core is the gathering of all that concerns us, all that we are for, all that touches us insofar as we are, as human beings. (WhD, 157/144)
One can't help but wonder if this isn't a bit of the manifestation of Kierkegaard in Heidegger. This original gathering both determines and maintains what touches us as humans. Thus it's the origin of what comes to presence. Sikka argues that it is thus "coessential with the meaning of love."
The thanc, the heart's core is the gathering of all that concerns us, all that we are for, all that touches us insofar as we are, as human beings. (WhD, 157/144)
One can't help but wonder if this isn't a bit of the manifestation of Kierkegaard in Heidegger. This original gathering both determines and maintains what touches us as humans. Thus it's the origin of what comes to presence. Sikka argues that it is thus "coessential with the meaning of love."
Interesting. Glenn Gray's translation, "What is Called Thinking" does not include the bit about "minne". It's not the first time someone took liberties amongest the early translations; "Time and Being" and "Identity and Difference" are particularly notorious in that department. And along those lines, did Heidegger really refer to Old English (P. 144)?
It's worth noting that, in this context, the heart in your second quote could refer to heart in the sense of "memorize by heart."
In the meantime, I've found a bunch of references to "love" in Heidegger's texts that I'll check out.
It's worth noting that, in this context, the heart in your second quote could refer to heart in the sense of "memorize by heart."
In the meantime, I've found a bunch of references to "love" in Heidegger's texts that I'll check out.
BTW - is there a new translation of some of those coming? I believe the new translation of Time and Being is pretty good. Isn't it? (For those of us cursed without thoroughgoing German)
I'll do a post on the translation of B&T and link to some of the criticism of it. I thought I had addressed the issue before, but I couldn't find it. It is important enough of an issue that it deserves not to get lost in the blog comments.
I'm aware of half-a-dozen or so new translations in the works, but they are all of texts that haven't been published before.
I most urgent one to me is Time and Being because of its importance. It's Heidegger's final major work, and he intended it that way, so he really goes to the core of the subject matter. The translation has also come under some severe criticism--missing sentences; sentences added by the translator trying to be helpful.
This work is so critical that the official Gesamtausgabe has not come out yet.
I'm aware of half-a-dozen or so new translations in the works, but they are all of texts that haven't been published before.
I most urgent one to me is Time and Being because of its importance. It's Heidegger's final major work, and he intended it that way, so he really goes to the core of the subject matter. The translation has also come under some severe criticism--missing sentences; sentences added by the translator trying to be helpful.
This work is so critical that the official Gesamtausgabe has not come out yet.
Hmm. I didn't realize Stambaugh's translation was so bad. I knew people disliked his B&T translation (although it's the one I have at home), but not the T&B translation.
Post a Comment
<< Home
