Heidegger`s Being and Time - Essay Example

Heidegger’s Being and Time Existentialism is a belief that s the meaning and ethics comes from one’s own experiences in the world, making meaning and ethics a very personal plight. It is also very subjective. It started to become popular in the 19th century with Kierkegaard, Nietzsche, Sartre, de Beauvoir and Heidegger. Being and Time is a book by Martin Heidegger. It was never finished but it still continues to be an influential book, in fact, it is Heidegger’s most influential book. It is so influential that it actually had a great impact on the field of 20th century philosophy, particularly existentialism. Heidegger points out the problem of “being” than reflecting on consciousness or pre-conceived notions of a particular object. His problem was that we are slaves of that pre conceived notions and his book Being and Time chronicles all of that. Heidegger claims that Western philosophy has been misunderstood ever since Platonic times. Everyone assumes something as something “to be” rather than something for what it is. Thus, the matter of the object turns to being an object rather than being the supposed object itself. His main concern is that all objects have gotten to be slaves of history and their so-called properties that we forget about the other things the object can do. With that, we also become slaves to properties as well. For Heidegger a correct investigation of things should focus on the things or elements that are the object themselves. Heidegger also says that the reason for philosophy being misunderstood is that the philosophers have overlooked the basic facts that pre-theoretical ways offer; instead they have applied those generalizations equally to all things that they are studying. That’s why the philosophy is flawed, according to Heidegger. Thus, he proposed a new way of appreciating objects. Although he understood that we appreciate things via our innate understanding of things, such as the “common sense” which is actually prone to error. This is because as humans, we are always readily affected by our beliefs in God, our logical thinking and practically the reality. This makes our relationship with objects, particularly technology and the way of out thinking affects it. Another point that Heidegger wants to emphasize is the phenomenological approach that Husserl started. This is existentialism on its basic roots. According to Husserl, philosophy could be and should be a description of one’s experience. For Heidegger, philosophy or the understanding of experience is already embedded in the world, therefore centuries of conditioning of how we should interpret the experience are already there, making the interpretation not as unique as one would think because it is already influenced by history and other stuff. Hence, Husserl’s understanding of reality is more “intentional”. For Heidegger, describing an experience should also consider who that description is for. Anything, with philosophy, is a possibility, and therefore one should be careful in analyzing stuff philosophically. Heidegger’s ideas, however new and noble and adventurous for his time, were not as accepted well because of his affiliations. He supported Nationalist Socialism and he was actually a member of the Nazi Party. All of his supporters claim that his philosophy was not affected by his Nazism or vice versa. They are saying that that affiliation is irrelevant (but others claim that being a member of the Nazi Party was a personal error on his part. The book Being and Time tries to talk about the question about the sense of being and philosophizing it in a manner that the people would understand his point. According to him, “Being is not something like a being” and the things that determine a being is based on the terms that they already understand. But for him, one should be basic abut all of these things and be fundamental about it, negating any previous ideas by using logic. This is Heidegger first academic book. It was published in 1927. This was just a first half of a book. He was planning to write another named “Destruktion” which talks about the destruction of modern philosophy but it never pushed through. Being and Time practically overthrows the beliefs about one’s perception of an object. Traditionally, we see an object and our basic assumption or theory about it supersedes our other ideas for it and we practice the age-old “correct” way to use the object. Heidegger’s view overturns the idea of theory-practice. For him, the theoretical part of analyzing an object is artificial, thus it’s never true and it cannot be really part of the truth of an object. He has terms for this: Present at hand and ready to hand. Now these two terminologies are used to describe all our interactions with the objects in the world. Ready to hand is a way of thinking that we use when we are not theorizing over an object when we use it. Take, for example, the hammer. If seen in a ready to hand way (not theorizing), we can actually use it immediately, no fuss. We never use the present at hand thinking when we interpret a hammer because that’s where most of the time we can get wrong. We only see the hammer in a present at hand manner when we care about what is going to happen to the hammer, like if it’s going to be thrown away and we see it as something that “that is there because it has a purpose on this earth”. It weighs us down. Being and Time talks about things. How useful a thing is, and the like. For Heidegger, there is no such thing as a useful thing. For him, being useful is a total product of the factors that makes the things useful. These factors are: serviceability, helpfulness, usability and handiness. Now, a useful object is something that is all of these. “Useful” objects are only useful when they are grouped with other objects that are also geared to do what they do, like a desk is useful when it has a lamp and a chair. It will be more useful when you put a stack of paper and pens. Thus, referencing an objects is the way to make it work, as well as grouping it with others. These things and their properties never show themselves outright as we have a shortsighted view of things. For example, when we say “room”, we do not imagine a space inside four walls but rather a space with furniture. It would be more detailed and specific when you qualify a room as the “bedroom” or “bathroom”. These are called referencing. This is due to association. We use objects because we associate them to things that we know prior. We use and appreciate objects because of their “past”. But we do not really grasp it. Say when you hammer a hammer, it just occurs. You do not know the thematic impacts of hammering a hammer. Hammering just occurred because it’s how it’s done. It has appropriated its usefulness already. Because of that, Heidegger thinks that we are subordinates to things. The more we use it, the more useful it becomes for us and the more the hammer becomes real as it becomes part of your life. The more you use the hammer, the more you tend to realize the handiness of the hammer. Heidegger says that handiness cannot be grasped theoretically but the human practical behavior is a product of theoretical thinking. Handiness only occurs when one uses an object. Like, when it is actually handy. It is certainly not a theme for circumspection or even introspection. When something is already at hand, that’s the time when it’s handy. It does not have any theoretical background to work. It’s how it is. Everyday association is not about the daily tools we use but more on the work associated about the things that we use. Is the work handy? No. Does it present handiness? No. Being handy can actually be based physically, unlike theoretically, which one has to deal abstractly. Useful things reveal themselves outright and they are always at our disposal. Thus, they are not theoretical. Handiness is basically the opposite of theoretical because when we look at things theoretically, we overlook its handiness. But association comes in and it makes us look at handy things theoretically sometimes and this makes us circumspect. Practical behavior is definitely not handy. However, it is also not atheoretical. Even if we act like many people act, and we behave like how we’re “supposed” to, this association is not working like that because we are human. We are influenced by many things. We act observe other people but we can decide if we follow their behavior or not. Unlike the handy things which cannot decide, we can actually alter our associations and theoretical ideas, whatever they may be. Human practical behavior involves cognitive skills unlike the hammer which is actually used because of one’s previous ideas and notions about the hammer. Theoretical behavior is just looking, observing. Living practical behavior in the other hand involves more than observing. It modifies the association and follows it at the same time. Referencing is different for many different people. This is where Heidegger’s opinion about an object’s relevance to someone will matter. Take for example, a plant. It is handy to a botanist but it is practical to a geologist studying the soils. Practical because of the theories that surround the soil and the plant is useful as well to the geologist but they’re just part of the referencing and the association. Knowing sets of instructions to do things won’t suffice if an object is not handy because handiness occurs when you use it correctly, according to what its objective is, as defined by its association and references. Theoretical knowledge on the other hand is just ideas that can set the motion of a handy object. They can be useful, they can be not. They are there to promote the use of an object, but not necessarily promote to use it. They are there for you to decide if an object is worthy or not. Application of theoretical knowledge is practicality and practicality is the combination of the theoretical and the handiness quotient of an object. Not all objects therefore, are handy. They can be, especially when they are used with other objects. They can be, when we understand where it came from, both actually (leather comes from hide, hide comes from cows) and figuratively. They are handy as well when we know their uses. Handiness should not be confused with characteristics of an object. Sometimes, these characteristics are forced upon the object, like color for example. That’s irrelevant. Handiness is only present when the object are “themselves”. Reference: Martin Heidegger, Being and Time, trans. John Macquarrie and Edward Robinson. New York: Harper & Row, 1962. Read More