On Mon, 19 Jun 1995, Christopher Stewart Morrissey wrote:
> Presumably getting down to the right way would incorporate the
> complexity! Anyway, the later Heidegger is great stuff. I think highly of it.
Me, too, from what I've read.
> > Is there a typo, by the way, in your above quote? I can't make sense of
> > it as it is. How would something lead from a world to truth (the
> > world)? Could you explain?
> a world = subjective
> the world = objective, truth
Is this a distinction Heidegger makes? Between "a world" and "the
world"? Since Heidegger doesn't really define his terms, or tutor us in
their use, I would appreciate other readers comments on your definition.
That might help me in my reading of him. I do read Heidegger as
picking up Hegel's notion of the 'objective' truth as a truth we
construct when we objectify the world. Is that how you're reading it?
>
> I was asking if you believe Heidegger has blown this distinction to
> smithereens.
The distinction between objectivity and subjectivity? I see him as
shifting the meaning of these terms drastically, as Hegel did before him.
I keep referring to Hegel in interpreting him. I use Hegel as a kind of
base, I suppose, to understand him. However, I see modes of
consciousness in Heidegger as creating, two different language
games (later Wittgenstein), the authentic language game, and the inauthentic
one.
>
> > What I am most appreciative of Heidegger is the way in which he brings
> > modes of being onto the table, modes which affect our experience of the
> > world.
> Yah, me too. What are you reading these days?
I still read at B & T (by reading "at" a text I mean I have read it at
least once quickly and then return to it in my hermeneutic circle of
trying to understand it). The sprinkling of Greek throws me, but for the
most part I think he reads intelligibly (as philosophers go). There
are rich ambiguities in his work that allow for the kind of
conversation we have here, for the search for the hidden meaning in
the text.
There is only a little of his later philosophy that I have read, but I
have acquired it, and read a little, and I think I will find it much
better, even, than B & T. All of the later work that I have read is
either in Poetry, Language, Thought or in On the Way to Language, or (and
I believe I read something like Discourse on Thinking). But I have not
read things like History of the Concept of Time or his work on Nietzche.
All these things sound appealing to me to read. But I am also reading
other philosphers right now. Every now the dialogue here lured me back
into my thinking of Heidegger.
What do you like about his later philosophy? What are you reading?
..Lois Shawver
--- from list heidegger@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx ---
------------------