Tuesday, June 02, 2015
Babette Babich on intellectual debt.
The issue is not a matter of possessiveness, but relevance. For Heidegger as he goes on to ask, “what has any of that to do with Being and Time? – what have these scriblings to do with philosophy”? (Überlegungen XII-XV Gesamtausgabe 96, p. 217) At stake is not today’s now frequently touted ‘Ressentiment’ as having to be the driving motor whenever Heidegger criticizes anyone but and much rather Heidegger’s own understanding of his own work and his long-standing conviction that this work was not, indeed, understood. Now folks can say that he was wrong and everyone who has read and/or published on Being and Time has understood it, but I, for one, am not persuaded this is the case. And I hold this because, as I read it, and just to state this briefly, Being and Time is not about (as it has been taken to be about) Dasein.
From "Heidegger’s Black Night: The Nachlass & its Wirkungsgeschichte".
Comments: Post a Comment

<< Home
For when Ereignis is not sufficient.

Appropriation appropriates! Send your appropriations to enowning at gmail.com.

View mobile version