Christian,
>First: I think, Heidegger is a very difficult thinker, because we must
"translate" every term of
>his speaking into ordinary language to avoid paraphrasing Heideggers terms.
Most papers forget
>this - and say - nothing. Iread your discussion about Heideggers nacism and
the formal question
>about "Being" and "being". It is very difficulty for me, to translate the
english terms back
>into german terms. Sometimes I wonder about, because it seems to be
tautological.
>But, I will buy the english-translation of "Sein und Zeit" to understand=20
>some terms you are using.
Even in that standard English translations there are huge translation
problems with conceps like "Jeden Augenblick" (At any moment) because of
differences in English/German translations of "each" and "any" and "every".
You may well find you are reading a slightly different book in English.
[snip]
>Conclusion: In my opinion we have to make a difference between Being1 (B&T)
and Being2 (late=20
>=FFHeidegger).
Thank you very much for clearing this up. Most of my friends have only read
the later stuff and I have only read the early stuff and we both think that
the other is waaaay off base. I fugured that either Heidegger meant
something different later on or they were importing too much metaphysical
training into the whole thing. Is there a "Care1" and "Care2"? That seems
to be somewhere else we disagree all the time.
I also really liked your "how" and "what" distinctions. I was attempting,
at one point, to get my take on this across (in English) by making whole
phrases into nouns (ie, "I am going-to-the-store" - where "going to the
store" is, in fact, "how" I am - of course, this was in the context of
Being-toward-the-end). Perhaps I am importing too much metaphysical
training but this seemed to change the definition of "what" into a "how".
"What" I am becomes "how" I am and is much more flowing (organic, motion,
"be-comming"). The word "am", in English, has become almost a adverb (or at
least unthought of). In the sentence above, "am going" is the verb and, in
my opinion, "am" loses its strength because of this.
-Nik
--- from list heidegger@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx ---
------------------
>First: I think, Heidegger is a very difficult thinker, because we must
"translate" every term of
>his speaking into ordinary language to avoid paraphrasing Heideggers terms.
Most papers forget
>this - and say - nothing. Iread your discussion about Heideggers nacism and
the formal question
>about "Being" and "being". It is very difficulty for me, to translate the
english terms back
>into german terms. Sometimes I wonder about, because it seems to be
tautological.
>But, I will buy the english-translation of "Sein und Zeit" to understand=20
>some terms you are using.
Even in that standard English translations there are huge translation
problems with conceps like "Jeden Augenblick" (At any moment) because of
differences in English/German translations of "each" and "any" and "every".
You may well find you are reading a slightly different book in English.
[snip]
>Conclusion: In my opinion we have to make a difference between Being1 (B&T)
and Being2 (late=20
>=FFHeidegger).
Thank you very much for clearing this up. Most of my friends have only read
the later stuff and I have only read the early stuff and we both think that
the other is waaaay off base. I fugured that either Heidegger meant
something different later on or they were importing too much metaphysical
training into the whole thing. Is there a "Care1" and "Care2"? That seems
to be somewhere else we disagree all the time.
I also really liked your "how" and "what" distinctions. I was attempting,
at one point, to get my take on this across (in English) by making whole
phrases into nouns (ie, "I am going-to-the-store" - where "going to the
store" is, in fact, "how" I am - of course, this was in the context of
Being-toward-the-end). Perhaps I am importing too much metaphysical
training but this seemed to change the definition of "what" into a "how".
"What" I am becomes "how" I am and is much more flowing (organic, motion,
"be-comming"). The word "am", in English, has become almost a adverb (or at
least unthought of). In the sentence above, "am going" is the verb and, in
my opinion, "am" loses its strength because of this.
-Nik
--- from list heidegger@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx ---
------------------