>>I wish that Heidegger had the grasp of science that Husserl
>>had, though, or at least of mathematics.
>
>Apparently Heidegger was sufficiently versed in mathematics to mark the
>equivalent of postgrad work (according to the Cambridge Heidegger reader),
>and was also an acquaintance of, I think, Werner Heisenberg. There's even a
>suggestion in the secondary literature that *Being and Time* was conceived
>in part as a philosophical ground for the then contemporary quantum
>physics.
Never knew about the math proficiency. I guess what I really wish (if I can
alter my earlier wish) was that he wrote more explicitly about math and the
objects of science in more depth. Everything that I've read has been only
covered through quite general metaphors, but makes little to no distinction
between the different ontic realms, the differences between which I
consider *essential* to an understanding of the world (and not just the
understanding of "science" in general - an idea that is often worse than
useless). Though I must say that what he did have to say was very useful.
I've not been able to track down the relationship between Heidegger and
Heisenberg, aside from a scant reference from Heidegger to Heisenberg in
"Science and Reflection." Anyone know where I can find out more about this?
Also, this leads to another question:
Anyone know of a good biography of old man Heidegger???
Hopefully (but doubtfully) one that doesn't take a strong side on the whole
National Socialism question but merely informs one about it.
-jeff
--- from list heidegger@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx ---
>>had, though, or at least of mathematics.
>
>Apparently Heidegger was sufficiently versed in mathematics to mark the
>equivalent of postgrad work (according to the Cambridge Heidegger reader),
>and was also an acquaintance of, I think, Werner Heisenberg. There's even a
>suggestion in the secondary literature that *Being and Time* was conceived
>in part as a philosophical ground for the then contemporary quantum
>physics.
Never knew about the math proficiency. I guess what I really wish (if I can
alter my earlier wish) was that he wrote more explicitly about math and the
objects of science in more depth. Everything that I've read has been only
covered through quite general metaphors, but makes little to no distinction
between the different ontic realms, the differences between which I
consider *essential* to an understanding of the world (and not just the
understanding of "science" in general - an idea that is often worse than
useless). Though I must say that what he did have to say was very useful.
I've not been able to track down the relationship between Heidegger and
Heisenberg, aside from a scant reference from Heidegger to Heisenberg in
"Science and Reflection." Anyone know where I can find out more about this?
Also, this leads to another question:
Anyone know of a good biography of old man Heidegger???
Hopefully (but doubtfully) one that doesn't take a strong side on the whole
National Socialism question but merely informs one about it.
-jeff
--- from list heidegger@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx ---