Wait a second!
More handpicked essays just for you.
More handpicked essays just for you.
Phenomenology importance
Heidegger HIS VIEW OF EXISTENTIALISM
Heidegger HIS VIEW OF EXISTENTIALISM
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
Recommended: Phenomenology importance
In this short paper, I will try to explain German philosopher Martin Heidegger's concept Being-in-the-World in his major work Being and Time (Ger. Sein und Zeit). However, first of all, in order to get his point of view about Being-in-the-World and phenomenological tradition in philosophy, it seems necessary to me that to be familiar with his philosophy's general structure.
In daily language, people often mention the word 'Being' in different situations. But, usually, by Being they mean being. But what is Being? Is it a totality of beings or a method that can be used to understand beings? However, since Being is not a being, it is not possible to understand beings by using Being. Furthermore, because of the fact that Being is not a being or a thing, it is neither temporal nor in time. The relationship between Being and Time should be searched somewhere else. In order to investigate this, Heidegger wrote his masterpiece Being and Time (Sein und Zeit).
Heidegger claimed that the answer of the question of 'Being' can be found via a fundemental ontology which he created. This is an ontology which every ontology comes out from that. The subject of this fundemental ontology is an ontologically unique being: Dasein or the life of human being. What makes Dasein ontologically unique is that it is the only being who tries to understand its own being during its lifetime. Dasein literally means 'being there' (Da – Sein). However, in Heideggerian conception, 'Da' means clarity more than there. Heidegger uses Dasein in its everyday usage but he also means something else by using Dasein. “Heidegger follows the everyday usage in this respect (Dasein standing for the being that belongs to persons), but he goes somewhat further in that he...
... middle of paper ...
...nites, 1) being, 2)facticity, 3) falling. These three phenomenons match with these three ecstacy (Ger. Ekstase) of the time: a) future (Ger. Zukunft), b) having-been-ness (Ger. Gewesenheit), c)enduring as presence (Ger. Gegenwart). What establishes the essence of the time is the union of these three ecstacies.
Heidegger, who aimed to establish a fundemental ontology, in his uncompleted work Being and Time, investigated the existential characteristics of Dasein and the relation between Dasein and temporality. As it is shown, according to Heidegger, investigating human always means to investigate the question of Being. In order to investigate human being or Da-sein, it is obligatory to answer the question of Being. The point that Heidegger wanted to reach in Being and Time could be summarized by his own words: “ Dasein is not in time yet time itself” (Heidegger, 85).
Opposed to this view of the persistence of objects through time is three dimensionalism. Three dimensionalism appears to be more in line with our common everyday sense of how objects persist through time; one in which we believe in, as Chisholm puts it, “the concept of one and the same individual existing at different times” (143). In contrast to the four dimensionalist, then, the three dimensionalist maintains that objects persist by being “wholly present” at each point at which they exist. Ultimately, Chisholm uses his arguments against temporal parts in order to support his general theses concerning personal identity over time. However, it is not within the scope of this paper to explore the underlying reasons Chisholm might have had for arguing against the four dimensionalist: that topic is best left to a more extensive project on the subject of the persistence of objects through time. For now, we will just take a look at three criticisms that Chisholm proposes for the temporal parts theorist: (1) that the so-called spatial analogy is not accurate, (2) that the doctrine of temporal parts does not solve the Phillip drunk/ Phillip sober puzzle, and (3) that the doctrine is of no use in solving various other metaphysical puzzles.
ABSTRACT: Phenomenology and logical positivism both subscribed to an empirical-verifiability criterion of mental or linguistic meaning. The acceptance of this criterion confronted them with the same problem: how to understand the Other as a subject with his own experience, if the existence and nature of the Other's experiences cannot be verified. Husserl tackled this problem in the Cartesian Meditations, but he could not reconcile the verifiability criterion with understanding the Other's feelings and sensations. Carnap's solution was to embrace behaviorism and eliminate the idea of private sensations, but behaviorism has well-known difficulties. Heidegger broke this impasse by suggesting that each person's being included being-with, an innate capacity for understanding the Other. To be human is to be "hard-wired" to make sense of the Other without having to verify the Other's private sensations. I suggest that being-with emerged from an evolutionary imperative for conspecific animals to recognize each other and to coordinate their activities. Wittgenstein also rejected the verifiability criterion. He theorized that the meaning of a term is its usage and that terms about private sensations were meaningful because they have functions in our language-games. For example, "I'm in pain," like a cry of pain, functions to get the attention of others and motivate others to help. Wittgenstein's theory shows how Dasein's being-with includes "primitive" adaptive behavior such as cries, smiles, and threatening or playful gesture. As Dasein is acculturated, these behaviors are partially superseded by functionally equivalent linguistic expressions.
Borgmann agrees with Heidegger that the simple kinds of things are those that focus a gathering of information about the world and benefit human beings by highlighting important life concerns, though he thinks that Heidegger sees the use of these things as too much an escape from technology rather than an affirmation of it. These simple, focal things are premodern objects, such as Heidegger’s example of an earthen jug, or even activities. The jug gathers and discloses the world because it is made of the earth and is used to store wine from grapes that grow in the earth; furthermore, the jug is used in the human context of tradition, ...
Take a minute to relax. Enjoy the lightness, or surprising heaviness, of the paper, the crispness of the ink, and the regularity of the type. There are over four pages in this stack, brimming with the answer to some question, proposed about subjects that are necessarily personal in nature. All of philosophy is personal, but some philosophers may deny this. Discussed here are philosophers that would not be that silly. Two proto-existentialists, Søren Kierkegaard and Friedrich Nietzsche, were keen observers of humanity, and yet their conclusions were different enough to seem contradictory. Discussed here will be Nietzsche’s “preparatory human being” and Kierkegaard’s “knight of faith”. Both are archetypal human beings that exist in accordance to their respective philosopher’s values, and as such, each serve different functions and have different qualities. Both serve the same purpose, though. The free spirit and the knight of faith are both human beings that brace themselves against the implosion of the god concept in western society.
The only similarity between Marx and Kierkegaard – beyond disagreeing with Hegel – is they both find Hegel to be apathetic. As Kierkegaard summarized in Either/Or, and as Marx exemplifies in his many writings, either one is to resign themselves to inaction for the greater good or one commits to action regardless of the consequences. Hegel, they argue, commits himself to the former. He resigns himself to universal ethics, acting on the greater good at the expense of the individual. Here, Kierkegaard and Marx swerve away from Hegel. Kierkegaard believes the faithful must act as an individual in a relationship with God. Marx believes that the individual, acting in concert with other like-minded individuals, is key to enacting the Bloody Revolution and working towards the worker's paradise. Hegel's disregard for the individual is the source of Marx's and Kierkegaard's disenchantment with Hegel's philosophy.
Heidegger proposed "to demonstrate, by the success of an actual interpretation of [Plato’s gigantomachia] that this sense of Being [as presence] in fact guided the ontological questioning of the Greeks...." I will show Heidegger failed this self-imposed test. Then with Heidegger’s interpretation as a starting point, I will show the basic structure of the text.
Kraus, Peter. "Heidegger on nothingness and the meaning of Being." Death and Philosophy. Ed. Jeff Malpas and Robert C. Solomon. New York: Routledge, 1998.
In this essay we will consider a much more recent approach to time that came to the fore in the twentieth century. In 1908 James McTaggart published an article in Mind entitled 'The Unreality of Time', in which, as the title implies, he argued that there is in reality no such thing as time. Now although this claim was in itself startling, probably what was even more significant than McTaggart's arguments was his way of stating them. It was in this paper that McTaggart first drew his now standard distinction between two ways of saying when things happen. In this essay we shall outline these ways of describing events and then discuss the merits and demerits of each, and examine what has become known as the 'tensed versus tenseless' debate on temporal becoming.
our existence in reality is a question which philosophers have tackled throughout time. This essay will look at the
In his work, Who is Man, Abraham J. Heschel embarks on a philosophical and theological inquiry into the nature and role of man. Through analysis of the meaning of being human, Heschel determines eight essential traits of man. Heschel believes that the eight qualities of preciousness, uniqueness, nonfinality, process and events, solitude and solidarity, reciprocity, and sanctity constitute the image of man that defines a human being. Yet Heschel’s eight qualities do not reflect the essential human quality of the realization of mortality. The modes of uniqueness and opportunity, with the additional singular human quality of the realization of mortality, are the most constitutive of human life as uniqueness reflects the fundamental nature of humanity,
(2) Dr Heidegger was an old scientist, who has a very strange way of presenting himself. He works by himself in his study. Which many find to be a “very curious place.”(Pg. 578) [Frag -1] In his study there is a picture of a women [Hostage 50] who once was his lover. She was going to be the one that he was going to marry, but she had been affected with a disorder and had taken some of the pills he prescribed and died. “She had swallowed one of her lovers prescription’s and died on the bridal evening.”(Pg. 579) It is thought that Dr. Heidegger might have had something to do with her death, but it was unknown. “The greatest curiosity of the study remains to be mentioned.”(Pg. 579) [Why was this uotation included?] The doctor had an experiment that would turn back the hands of time, but he would not have any part of it, he just wanted to observe. [How is this paragraph related to the thesis?]
One of the aims of Being and Nothingness is to describe consciousness, or human subjectivity. Sartre distinguishes two different modes of consciousness in order to accurately describe human subjectivity. These two modes are being-for-itself and being-for-others. Being-for-itself refers to a transcendent conscious being (Oaklander, 238). Transcendence is the antithesis of facticity. I will describe facticity first, in order to make the concept of transcendence more tractable. Facticity denotes the concrete details of the subject’s being including past decisions, plac...
Wittgenstein, Ludwig; G. E. M. Anscombe, P.M.S. Hacker and Joachim Schulte (eds. and trans.). Philosophical Investigations. 4th edition, Oxford: Wiley-Blackwell, 2009. Print.
The question of whether human beings have any intrinsic characteristics, or of what they may be, has been contemplated throughout the history of modern philosophy by thinkers such as Descartes and Locke. I believe, however, that it is the work and thought of Martin Heidegger to which a careful consideration of Being There will be most particularly relevant. Heidegger's concept of a human being is as an instance of that entity he calls "Dasein," a German term most literally translated into English as "there-being." Not only is this phrase reminiscent of the novel's title, it also describes rather appropriately the primary activity (if it can be called that) with which Chance's life is occupied.