Re: Gravity and Light

I much appreciate the distinction made in the two recent posts that
Heidegger is not claiming that authenticity is achieved by ripping oneself
free altogether from the "tyranny" of das Man( an impossibilty), but from
the DOMINANT INTERPRETATION of das Man( not impossible, but appropriately
difficult).

As Chris suggests, it would be too easy to simply identify the "tyranny"
with the tradition itself and so rip oneself free from it altogether. One
factically/historically exists within a tradition, so what is required is a
more subtle interpretive move by which( again to grossly oversimplify) one
revitalizes the tradition by recovering the Dasein within das Man ( This
language is from a Heidegger letter in the early twenties).

I think one finds Heidegger himself engaged in such a hermeneutical
recovery in his reading of the preSocratics as over and against Plato and
then his reading of Aristotle as picking up some of those same threads of
authentic thinking after Plato.

I'm not sure of the part played by Destruktion in all of this, and would
much appreciate more comment on this aspect of it, but for openers, I'm
pretty sure that the interpretive move we are considering here does not
begin with Destruktion. That would be too easy and inconsistent with
Heidegger's strong indication of the primacy of the "hermeneutics of
affirmation" at certain moments in relation to certain texts. I hope we
don't dismiss these moments as mere hermeneutical ethnocentricity. When he
passionately performs his readings of Parmenedes and Hericlitus, he is
taking etxraordinary risks and somehow I think he means to demonstrate the
workings of authenticity in interpretation.

Allen




--- from list [email protected] ---

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

Partial thread listing: