On Tue, 2 Jul 1996, M.Eldred_artefact wrote:
> Christopher Rickey wrote
> "The advantage the Beitraege had over any others is that Poeggeler mentioned
> their existence since he had access to the manuscript."
>
> Are you being glib or ironical?
> The Beitraege do indeed have a special status, although it is wrong of Poeggeler
> to refer to them as a "work".
Neither. I merely noted that the Beitraege achieved their fame far
predating its publication due to Poeggeler's mention of it as Heidegger's
true "masterpiece," a rather extraordinary claim to make in 1963 in light
of the preeminence of Being and Time.
> The Beitraege (1936-38) were continued in 1938-39 under the title "Besinnung",
> which will appear as GA Bd. 66. Two main differences strike me, looking at the
> rough table of contents: 1) Die Technik and 2) Das seynsgeschichtliche Denken
> are dealt with.
Are you saying these are not discussed in the Beitraege?
Chris
--- from list heidegger@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx ---
> Christopher Rickey wrote
> "The advantage the Beitraege had over any others is that Poeggeler mentioned
> their existence since he had access to the manuscript."
>
> Are you being glib or ironical?
> The Beitraege do indeed have a special status, although it is wrong of Poeggeler
> to refer to them as a "work".
Neither. I merely noted that the Beitraege achieved their fame far
predating its publication due to Poeggeler's mention of it as Heidegger's
true "masterpiece," a rather extraordinary claim to make in 1963 in light
of the preeminence of Being and Time.
> The Beitraege (1936-38) were continued in 1938-39 under the title "Besinnung",
> which will appear as GA Bd. 66. Two main differences strike me, looking at the
> rough table of contents: 1) Die Technik and 2) Das seynsgeschichtliche Denken
> are dealt with.
Are you saying these are not discussed in the Beitraege?
Chris
--- from list heidegger@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx ---