Sei sulla pagina 1di 192
Being-in-the-World A Commentary on Heidegger's Being and Time, Division 1 Hubert L. Dreyfus ‘The MIT Pres. Cambridge, Massachusetts London, England For uphon and Gabriele {6191 Mana Ineo ecology Aigsresened, Nop othibook uy ie reprodced in ay Frm by a7 ‘ketone or mechanic cane nudging recordin Inaon forage and etevay without permis wing ror the pase ‘Qwest Bigand Tine ain Heeger rey ob Macqae ‘Se ard Roinon, 01962 SCM Pre i are ed bere ype This ook was etn Nee Basel The MIT Pres ae rated ad bound Ura Congres Cataloging Puan Data ‘eigiahe wera commen on Heldege'sbeing ond dine, ele iiogaphie rere, ISnvingezoities tan oes4ones hk) Heidegger Nn, 168-197. Sln und Bt 2, Onto Space at une L Tie Iboaarsi 080 med sossste LQ 20) 19 Hee v8 Dae Prfece wi Iuroducion: Why Study Being and Time? — 1 1 Heidegger's Sbstantive Introduction 10 2 Heidegger's Methodological niaduction 30 3 ‘A Preliminary Sheth of Beinginthe World 40 4 Acwilebleness and Ocoorenines: 60 5 Worllines: 88 6 Heidegger's Cie of Recent Versions of Catesianiom 108 7 ‘Spatiaty and Space 128 The “Who” of Beery Dasein 141 ‘The Three FaldSouctue of Being 163 10 Afictedness 168 u Understanding 194 12 Teling and Sere 215, 23 Paling 225 4 The CoreSractre 238 15 Philosophical Implications ofa Hermeneutic of Everdamess 246 Appendic: Kerhguard, Dison I, and Later Heidegger Huber L. Dre and Jane Rabin 283 Nes 340 Indes 363, ‘This commentary hasbeen circulating ty sons for over twenty years. I started In 1068 asa set of “Fybate Lecture Notes" ranscribed from my course on Beingand Timea the University of California, Berkeley. n 19751 sated circulating my updated lecture notes to students and anyone else who was inter ‘ested, For a decade thereafter I revised the notes cach Year {ncoxporating and responding to what I learned from my students dnd teaching assistants By 1985 there were 30 many requests for “The Heidegyer Transcripts that Iwas encouraged to transform them intoa book. The fiestdratof the book was finished ime for 21988 NEH Summer Insitute held atthe University of California, Santa Cruz, On the basis of what I leamed from colleagues and partcipantthereandlrng the following summer, when Ttaght course on Beng ond Timeat the Universi of Franklur, [did one final revision for this MIT Pres edition ‘Aboutall that has stayed constant over twenty years revising has been my decision tolimitthe ntesto Division lof Part One of Reng ‘and Tine. sill consider this the most original and important Section ofthe work, fort iein Divison that Heidegger works out hisaccountofbeingiatheword and wesitto ground profound critique of traditional ontology and epistemology. Division Tl of Part One, hich makes up the rest of what we have of Heidegger's proposed two-part book (Division IIT of Part One and all of Part ‘Twowerenever published) ,dividesintotwosomenhatindependent enterprises Fist, there isthe “existential side of Heidegger's thought, which focuses on anxiety death, guilt, and resoloteness and hich, although highly influential on sown andin tsSartian Nersion in Beng and Nothing was, for good reason ater aban. ‘toned by Heidegger himself And yecand there isthe laying outof the temporality of human being/and of the world, andthe ground: Pa ing of both ofthese in a more orginary temporality whose pas, present and fuuredimensionsarenottobe thoughtofassuccesive. ‘Although the chapters on orginary temporality are an extent part of Heidegger's project, his account leads him 0 far fom the pPheniomenonof everydaytemporlitythat Id notfeel could give 2 satstaciory interpretation of the material Moreover the whole of Division Il seemed to me much les carefully worked out than Division Land, indeed, have some erorssoseriousastoblockany consistent reading (subsequently learned that when Heidegger ‘wavupfor he equivalentoftenuse, hesubmittedonlyDivsion for Publication, but the Ministry of Education considered it “insul- Sent” He agreed, in exchange for tenure, o publish a hastily Finished version of Disision IL) In the end, thanks 1 two of my former students, the book has turned out some%hatdiferenty than T had originally planned, Jne Rubin, who was then teaching the Kierkegaard course at Berkeley, agreed to collaborate with me on an article on ‘lerkegaard's influence on early Heidegger. Atroughiy the same time, Berkeley went onthesemester tem, at which ime decided tw add Division Il to my Bang and Time course. Under these com dlidons I became more and more involved in sorting out the cxistenialist side of Heidegger, and our article grew into the pendix ofthis book, ‘With gard to the very dficulZhapters on time, Iwas saved by William Blatter, who, after working on Heidegger as an under fraduate at Berkeley, wrote his doctoral dissertation with John Haugeland at Pitsburgh on temporality in Kant and Heidegger. Hiraccountof emporalityin Bang and Tomepinpoinisand corrects Heidegger's confusions and makes sense of even the most dificult passages. When Blaine publishes his work, itwillbe an important ontrbution toan understanding of Heidegger on timeand ean be ‘thought of as completing this commentary. Another event tht required radially revising the transcripts was the posthumous publication of Heidegger's leture course, in ‘lig thove from the years immediately preceding nd following ‘the publication of Bring and Time in 1927. Hin ofthe Concept of Time (1925), The Bete Prabens of Phenomenology (1937), and The Mapa Foundations of Logi (1928) cas floods of new light on Heidegger's magnum opus. Many pasages that are uninteligible in Beng and Time are spelled outs cleat and simple terms inthe lectures These new plications also confirmed a hypothesis Jobin Pate Haugeland and tad made in 1978 that Bring and Time could be understood asa systematic etique of Husier's phenomenology, tren though Humes! and his basie concept, intentionality, are hardly mentioned inthe book. The appearance of Basic Prolos, whic explicitly undertakes “the tark of. = interpreting more Tadially the phenomena of intentionality and transcendence” scemedaconfirmation ofour approach also justified myemphasis ‘on the nonmenialitie approach to intentionality in Beng and Time, ‘which, thanks to the constant friendly opposition of John Searle, Slready Sigured prominently in my commentary. When Being and Time was published in 1927, i was immediately recognized asa clase, Pethaps fr this reason Heidegger never ‘made any substantive changes to the txt, although he did make ‘mall stylistic changes nthe fourteen subsequent repintings. He also Kept several copies of the book in whieh he’ made notes ‘correcting passages that had been or could be misundersiod and ‘rising the book's substantive claims from the perspective ofhis liter thought. (Heidegger's writings are divided by him into t4o periods those dating roghly from before 1930, and those written from 1930 on.) (Quotations from Being and Timein this book ae followed by two setsof page numbers; the fist (in parentheses) refersto a page of the standard Fglish anslation the second (inbrackets) toa page ‘ofthe tandard German, When [quote from Heidegger’smarginal hotes, cite the page number from San & Zatin the Gesentansgobe {Collected works edition in braces. Chaptersin Bingand Timeare Cited with roman numerals, chapters in this book with arabic numerals (and lowercase forcast) ing and Time is notoriously hard to trandate. Heidegger was determined to avoid the mistaken ontology but into traditional Philosophical terms, but he was also convinced that ordinary fanguage was inevitably misleading and had contributed to and reciprocally ben corrupted by philosophy. He therefore made up ‘many of his own technical terms, Heidegger's translators have ‘trig with this problem with varying degrees of succes Inthe ‘Macquarrie Robinson translation of Being and Tome, which isthe ‘onlone in English, Heidegger's prose is generally well rendered, ‘but many of the technical terms have been translated into English term that ether lack the connotations Heidegger relying on © [point acrostor worse, have jst the connotations Heidegger

Potrebbero piacerti anche