Between Technê and Technology

In his later work, Heidegger argued that Western history involved a sequence of distinct understandings of being and correspondingly distinct worlds. Dreyfus illustrates several distinct world styles by contrasting Greek, industrial, and technological practices for using equipment. By reading Being and Time in the light of Heidegger’s later concerns with the history of being, Dreyfus shows how Heidegger’s own account of equipment in Being and Time helped set the stage for technology by encouraging an understanding of being that leaves equipment and natural objects open to a technological reorganization of the world into a standing reserve of resources. Seen in the light of the relation of nature and technology revealed by later Heidegger, Being and Time appears in the history of the being of equipment not just as a transition but as the decisive step toward technology.

Author(s):  
Mikko Immanen

This chapter delves into Herbert Marcuse's ignored reception of Martin Heidegger's lectures by reconstructing the debate about Georg Wilhelm Friedrich Hegel between Marcuse's Hegel book and Heidegger's Hegel lectures. It suggests that the Hegel debate formed the most interesting dimension of Marcuse's Freiburg period. It also elaborates how Marcuse and Heidegger sought to articulate their emerging positions in concrete philosophy and the history of being through a contestation with Hegel. The chapter explains how Heidegger had judged Hegel's debate of history in Being and Time as the unfolding of spirit that is an exact opposite of his own concern with human finitude. It cites Marcuse's argument that the early Hegel understood by “life” is not a feature of the world spirit but of finite human existence.


2008 ◽  
Vol 42 ◽  
pp. 5-13
Author(s):  
William McNeill ◽  

The present paper remains modest in its scope: It seeks only to undertake some exploratory and preparatory investigations with a view to addressing a more difficult and far-reaching question. The issue, in brief, is the following: In the 1920s, Heidegger engages in an incisive and comprehensive critique of techn!, which I shall render here as “production” or “productive comportment,” arguing that it furnishes the foundation and horizon for Greek ontology, and by extension for the entire Western philosophical tradition, a horizon that is problematically reductive because the ontology it gives rise to understands the Being of beings in general in terms of independent presence-at-hand, the appropriate mode of access to which is theoretical apprehension. Not only philosophy and ontology, but science and its outgrowth, modern technicity—itself a monstrous transformation of techn!—would be an almost inexorable consequence of this fateful Greek beginning. The project of a “destructuring of the history of ontology” announced in Being and Time would seek to retrieve and to open up an entirely other dimension of Being, a dimension foreclosed by the Greek beginning and yet awaiting us precisely as the unthought of that beginning and the tradition to which it gave rise. The destructuring would take as its guiding thread an understanding of the Being of Dasein—designating the being that we ourselves in each case are—as radically temporal, never simply present-at-hand, and essentially inaccessible to theoretical apprehension. Yet the critical resource for this analytic of the Being of Dasein was, for the early Heidegger, itself provided by Greek philosophy: It was Aristotle’s insight into the Being of the human being as praxis, and its authentic mode of self-disclosure, phron!sis, that led Heidegger to see the radically different kind of temporality pertaining to human existence, by contrast with the theoretically ascertained time of nature as something present-at-hand, and provided a key insight into the essence of “truth” (aletheia) as unconcealment. Aristotle’s insight into this more primordial sense of aletheia or “truth” as the knowing self-disclosure of our radically temporal Being-in-the-world as praxis, as opposed to truth conceived as a property of logos, judgment, or theoretical knowledge, was a forgotten thread of Greek philosophy that could shed light upon the limits and foundations of the theoretical tradition that dominates the subsequent history of ontology.


Author(s):  
Thomas Sheehan

Martin Heidegger taught philosophy at Freiburg University (1915–23), Marburg University (1923–8), and again at Freiburg University (1928–45). Early in his career he came under the influence of Edmund Husserl, but he soon broke away to fashion his own philosophy. His most famous work, Sein und Zeit (Being and Time) was published in 1927. Heidegger’s energetic support for Hitler in 1933–4 earned him a suspension from teaching from 1945 to 1950. In retirement he published numerous works, including the first volumes of his Collected Edition. His thought has had strong influence on trends in philosophy ranging from existentialism through hermeneutics to deconstruction, as well as on the fields of literary theory and theology. Heidegger often makes his case in charged and dramatic language that is difficult to convey in summary form. He argues that mortality is our defining moment, that we are thrown into limited worlds of sense shaped by our being-towards-death, and that finite meaning is all the reality we get. He claims that most of us have forgotten the radical finitude of ourselves and the world we live in. The result is the planetary desert called nihilism, with its promise that an ideally omniscient and virtually omnipotent humanity can remake the world in its own image and likeness. None the less, he still holds out the hope of recovering our true human nature, but only at the price of accepting a nothingness darker than the nihilism that now ravishes the globe. To the barely whispered admission, ‘I hardly know anymore who and where I am’, Heidegger answers: ‘None of us knows that, as soon as we stop fooling ourselves’ ([1959a] 1966: 62). Yet he claims to be no pessimist. He merely wants to find out what being as such means, and Being and Time was an attempt at this. He called it a fundamental ontology: a systematic investigation of human being (Dasein) for the purpose of establishing the meaning of being in general. Only half of the book – the part dealing with the finitude and temporality of human being – was published in 1927. Heidegger elaborated the rest of the project in a less systematic form during the decades that followed. Heidegger distinguishes between an entity (anything that is) and the being of an entity. He calls this distinction the ‘ontological difference’. The being of an entity is the meaningful presence of that entity within the range of human experience. Being has to do with the ‘is’: what an entity is, how it is, and the fact that it is at all. The human entity is distinguished by its awareness of the being of entities, including the being of itself. Heidegger names the human entity ‘Dasein’ and argues that Dasein’s own being is intrinsically temporal, not in the usual chronological sense but in a unique existential sense: Dasein ek-sists (stands-out) towards its future. This ek-sistential temporality refers to the fact that Dasein is always and necessarily becoming itself and ultimately becoming its own death. When used of Dasein, the word ‘temporality’ indicates not chronological succession but Dasein’s finite and mortal becoming. If Dasein’s being is thoroughly temporal, then all of human awareness is conditioned by this temporality, including one’s understanding of being. For Dasein, being is always known temporally and indeed is temporal. The meaning of being is time. The two main theses of Being and Time – that Dasein is temporal and that the meaning of being is time – may be interpreted thus: being is disclosed only finitely within Dasein’s radically finite awareness. Heidegger arrives at these conclusions through a phenomenological analysis of Dasein as being-in-the-world, that is, as disclosive of being within contexts of significance. He argues that Dasein opens up the arena of significance by anticipating its own death. But this event of disclosure, he says, remains concealed even as it opens the horizon of meaning and lets entities be understood in their being. Disclosure is always finite: we understand entities in their being not fully and immediately but only partially and discursively; we know things not in their eternal essence but only in the meaning they have in a given situation. Finite disclosure – how it comes about, the structure it has, and what it makes possible – is the central topic of Heidegger’s thought. ‘Time is the meaning of being’ was only a provisional way of expressing it. Dasein tends to overlook the concealed dimension of disclosure and to focus instead on what gets revealed: entities in their being. This overlooking is what Heidegger calls the forgetfulness of the disclosure of being. By that he means the forgetting of the ineluctable hiddenness of the process whereby the being of entities is disclosed. He argues that this forgetfulness characterizes not only everyday ‘fallen’ human existence but also the entire history of being, that is, metaphysics from Plato to Nietzsche. He calls for Dasein resolutely to reappropriate its own radical finitude and the finitude of disclosure, and thus to become authentically itself.


1963 ◽  
Vol 16 (3) ◽  
pp. 255-262
Author(s):  
Edward E. Lowinsky

The first volume of Helmut Osthoff's work on Josquin Desprez (ca. 1440–1521) dealing with the Netherlandish master's biography and his Mass compositions marks an epoch in Josquin research. It is the first monograph devoted to the greatest musical figure of the Renaissance.Josquin's genius was mighty enough to encompass both old and new worlds of music, the old world of masterly contrapuntal construction and of mathematical symbolism of Netherlandish vintage, and the new world of euphonious harmony and of musical expression of Italian and of humanistic origin. As an artistic personality Josquin is a novelty in the world of music: he is the first composer in Western history of whom we can form some picture of personality and of whom we have a goodly number of anecdotes, all of which show him to be endowed with a penetrating sense of his artistic mission and a vast, almost condescending, yet at times melancholy, sense of humor toward the great patrons who commanded his services.


2020 ◽  
Vol 114 (3) ◽  
pp. 378-431
Author(s):  
Matthew Melvin-Koushki

Abstract The heavily Neoplatonic and antiquarian-perennialist tenor of Safavid philosophy is now widely recognized by specialists; but few have acknowledged its equally notable Neopythagorean turn. Likewise, that the primary mode of applied Neoplatonic-Neopythagorean philosophy as a Safavid imperial way of life was occult science has been ignored altogether, making impossible a history of its practice. The case of the Twelver Shiʿi sage-mage Mīr Dāmād – famed down to the present as an occult scientist – is here especially illustrative: for he was largely responsible for this Neopythagoreanization of Safavid philosophy, which saw the remarkable transmogrification of Ibn Sīnā himself into a Neopythagorean-occultist, by his espousal of a peculiarly Mamluk-Timurid-Aqquyunlu brand of philosophical lettrism (ʿilm al-ḥurūf) in at least three of his many works. The example of this imperial Neopythagoreanizing lettrist is thus crucial for understanding the intellectual and religiopolitical continuity of Safavid Shiʿi culture with Sunni precedent, as well as contemporary Persianate and Latinate parallels. Within Western history of science more broadly, Mīr Dāmād and the host of his fellow Muslim kabbalists must now be restored to the master mathesis narrative whereby scientific modernity is but the upshot of early modern Western philosophers’ penchant for reading the world as a mathematical text.


2020 ◽  
Vol 1 (1) ◽  
pp. 77-84
Author(s):  
Gianni Vattimo ◽  
Paolo Diego Bubbio ◽  

Vattimo argues that the core of Gadamer’s hermeneutics resides in the identification of interpreting with changing the world, and analyzes the ontological turn in hermeneutics in light of such identification. Vattimo advocates for a radical reading of Gadamer’s claim “Being, which can be understood, is language” and maintains that hermeneutics requires a profound revolution in ontology, overcoming the idea of Being as a given object “out there”. In light of the dialogue that Gadamer’s Truth and Method establishes with Heidegger’s Being and Time, Vattimo concludes that hermeneutic ontology has its core in the identification of reality with the history of effects; not as a descriptive proposition, but as the meaning of Being in whose horizon hermeneutics interprets the experience of the world. A coherent philosophy of interpretation, conceived as a call to transform the objective reality of things “out there” into truth, namely into language and project, actually changes the world.


IEE Review ◽  
1991 ◽  
Vol 37 (10) ◽  
pp. 355
Author(s):  
D.A. Gorham

1997 ◽  
pp. 3-8
Author(s):  
Borys Lobovyk

An important problem of religious studies, the history of religion as a branch of knowledge is the periodization process of the development of religious phenomenon. It is precisely here, as in focus, that the question of the essence and meaning of the religious development of the human being of the world, the origin of beliefs and cult, the reasons for the changes in them, the place and role of religion in the social and spiritual process, etc., are converging.


2016 ◽  
Vol 3 (2) ◽  
pp. 200-224
Author(s):  
Bilge Deniz Çatak

Filistin tarihinde yaşanan 1948 ve 1967 savaşları, binlerce Filistinlinin başka ülkelere göç etmesine neden olmuştur. Günümüzde, dünya genelinde yaşayan Filistinli mülteci sayısının beş milyonu aştığı tahmin edilmektedir. Ülkelerine geri dönemeyen Filistinlilerin mültecilik deneyimleri uzun bir geçmişe sahiptir ve köklerinden koparılma duygusu ile iç içe geçmiştir. Mersin’de bulunan Filistinlilerin zorunlu olarak çıktıkları göç yollarında yaşadıklarının ve mülteci olarak günlük hayatta karşılaştıkları zorlukların Filistinli kimlikleri üzerindeki etkisi sözlü tarih yöntemi ile incelenmiştir. Farklı kuşaklardan sekiz Filistinli mülteci ile yapılan görüşmelerde, dünyanın farklı bölgelerinde mülteci olarak yaşama deneyiminin, Filistinlilerin ulusal bağlılıklarına zarar vermediği görülmüştür. Filistin, mültecilerin yaşamlarında gelenekler, değerler ve duygusal bağlar ile devam etmektedir. Mültecilerin Filistin’den ayrılırken yanlarına aldıkları anahtar, tapu ve toprak gibi nesnelerin saklanıyor olması, Filistin’e olan bağlılığın devam ettiğinin işaretlerinden biridir.ABSTRACT IN ENGLISHPalestinian refugees’ lives in MersinIn the history of Palestine, 1948 and 1967 wars have caused fleeing of thousands of Palestinians to other countries. At the present time, its estimated that the number of Palestinian refugees worldwide exceeds five million. The refugee experience of Palestinians who can not return their homeland has a long history and intertwine with feeling of deracination. Oral history interviews were conducted on the effects of the displacement and struggles of daily life as a refugee on the identity of Palestinians who have been living in Mersin (city of Turkey). After interviews were conducted with eight refugees from different generations concluded that being a refugee in the various parts of the world have not destroyed the national entity of the Palestinians. Palestine has preserved in refugees’ life with its traditions, its values, and its emotional bonds. Keeping keys, deeds and soil which they took with them when they departed from Palestine, proving their belonging to Palestine.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document