---------- Forwarded message ----------
Date: Wed, 19 Jul 1995 21:01:41 -0700
From: Mail Delivery Subsystem <MAILER-DAEMON@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
To: kevinje@xxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: Returned mail: Host unknown (Name server: jefferson.village.virgina.edu.: host not found)
The original message was received at Wed, 19 Jul 1995 21:00:54 -0700
from kevinje@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx [137.82.27.42]
----- The following addresses had delivery problems -----
<heidegger@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> (unrecoverable error)
----- Transcript of session follows -----
550 <heidegger@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>... Host unknown (Name server: jefferson.village.virgina.edu.: host not found)
----- Original message follows -----
Return-Path: <kevinje@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
Received: from interchg.ubc.ca by unixg.ubc.ca (8.6.10/1.14)
id VAA19259; Wed, 19 Jul 1995 21:00:54 -0700
Date: Wed, 19 Jul 1995 21:00:28 -0700 (PDT)
From: Ningzhouszekh <kevinje@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
X-Sender: kevinje@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
To: heidegger@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
cc: kevinje@xxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: Response: disclosure
Message-ID: <Pine.SOL.3.91.950719201723.23322B-100000@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII
Thanks to all those who replied to my message (Lois, David and Tom at the
time of this construction) regarding the nature of disclosure. David's
quote of Dreyfus seems to be very much in line with what I have been
thinking about disclosedness. To me, disclosedness is the a priori,
ontological familiarity of the world that Dasein possesses and which
provides the ground for the possibility of uncovering [entdecken,
discovering] entities within-the-world. What is primarily disclosed,
then, is Dasein, and what discloses is also Dasein (hence the strength of
the quote that Dasein *is* its own disclosedness). Disclosedness is
constitued by a "three-fold structure", state-of-mind, understanding and
discourse, which makes up the existential analysisi of Being-in as such
(the Being of the "there" of Da-sein). The handy definition of
disclosedness, then, seems to be something like: having the character of
having been laid open, but the significance of disclosedness seems to be
that it is the Being of Dasein *which* discloses at the same time as it
is that which *is disclosed*. Disclosing Dasein reveals itself.
I think that is is also important, however, to understand this
disclosing of Dasein as not anything like an appropriation or
interpretation of Dasein's structure; maybe not even like an
understanding. I think that H wants to say that all these things come
essentially later than disclosure, and are in fact previously conditioned
by that which is appropriated, interpreted or to be understood (i.e. the
structures which are disclosed). As far as I know, Heidegger introduces
the term "to disclose" on p.105 of BT. At this point, the translators
echo a warning of Heidegger: that while disclosure is not be be seen as
a type of "inference" from what is given, it is also not be seen as
anything that gives us a *detailed awareness* of the structure of that
which has been laid open. What is disclosed is shown to be implicit,
already there, in what is given and hence *available* for further
analysis (i.e. an interpretation), although this analysis must
neccesarily antecede the laying bare at hand. To those who understand
German a great deal better than I, this warning seems to be summed up in
the slogan that: "Heidegger explains the meaning of the verb
"erschliessen" [to disclose] in terms of the cognate verb
"aufschliessen" (BT p.105).
Does it follow from all this then that only ontolgoical
structures can be disclosed while only entites can be discovered? If so,
then Lois's example may be an excellent example of a discovery that seems
to bear a very close structural constitution to an act of disclosure. To
point to the stars as a 'big dipper' allows us to discover an arrangement
which was already there, but which had not been noticed -the orientation
of the speaker directs us towards a discovery. Similarly, to be anxious
(to use a well respected example I believe) discloses the ontological
structure of thrown Being-in-the-world, an *aspect of Being* (to use
words that Lois may approve) which was already there, existing as
implied by the current state-of-mind, but which had not been noticed -in
this case the orientation of the Dasein in question discloses an aspect
of Being which belongs to that Dasein itself (Dasein is itself both "the
disclosure and the disclosed" and, hence, has disclosedness in both of
the ways which I have deemed essential above).
A final note of the short lived Dreyfus (hate'im er luv'im)
dispute. Forget Dreyfus as persona-non-grata for *real* Heideggerians;
you should see my shelves stocked full of Quine.
More later.
"Everyone knows that everyone dies; but not now".
Kevin Eldred
--- from list heidegger@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx ---
------------------