Re: slow readings proposal for Heidegger.THINKNET

David Schenk wrote:
>I've been quiet on the list for a while, primarily because of other work,
>but also because I've been pondering various ways of avoiding flame and
>ruffled feathers, so to speak. Anyway, I'd like to know if anyone would
>be interested in a slow readings of Heidegger's philosophy of time.
>Specifically, I propose starting *on the THINKNET address* with Division
>II of _Being and Time_, moving on to the last part of _Basic Problems of
>Phenomenology_, and then tackling selected sections from _Metaphysical
>Foundations of Logic_. I figure such a project should take us well into
>the winter, so it's a big job. As for Heidegger's later philosophy of

>time, I have no idea what we might do, except read _On Time and Being_ and
>then go on to whatever else people suggest.

>I have a special interest in a readings of his earlier philosophy of time
>for two reasons: (1) I'm temperamentally more interested in Heidegger's
>earlier philosophy, and (2) I'm trying to revise a paper on his early
>philosophy of time for eventual publication.

>Alternatively, if the focus of all this seems to narrow or perhaps just a
>bit too ambitious, we could try to restart the readings of _Introduction
>to Metaphysics_ that was attempted some while back (I'm afraid I did a
>poor job of it last time).

>If someone would prefer something else, anything else, I really am all
>ears (um, metaphorically speaking, that is). Anyway, I'd like to know who
>would be interested. Please post all responses, pre-emptive postings, and
>whatever on the THINKNET address, not here on Village. If I get no
>response, I'll just start posting stuff on _BT_ Div.II by default.

I want to note my support of this. I'm a little skeptical of slow readings.
They're great in theory, but in practice they tend to bog down. I'm very
much interested inthis topic though. Themes of authenticity / inauthenticity
have seen a lot of action on this list, and they also happen to be themes
that figure strongly in BT Div. II. I, for one, would take an interest
in further discussion of that part of Heidegger's work. I'm not sure, though,
that a fully distinct discussion of it is warranted. It's hard to get
enough interest in a slow reading to support the investment of time and
energy. Do others share my opinion?

Anthony Dowler


--- from list [email protected] ---

------------------

Partial thread listing: