Rating: 
Summary: Unprecedented Thinking from an Unprecedented Thinker
Review: Being and Time (1927) is the magnum opus of one of the greatest philosophers of the 20th century and arguably Western Philosophy. Spending 7 years writing this first of 67 books, Martin Heidegger turns Husserlian phenomenology (Husserl being Heidegger's main teacher) on its head and introduces to the Western tradition a whole new way of understanding ontology (the formal study of existentia). Being and Time is the first installment of a greater work that was to compromise two parts each with three divisions. Being and Time is only the first two divisions of Part One of that endeavor. For the continuation of Heidegger's overall project, readers must purchase "The Basic Problems of Phenomenology" and "Kant and the Problem of Metaphysics." These three books together compromise the existing (though still not complete) totality of Heidegger's undertaking. "The Basic Problems of Phenomenology" is particularly helpful because it outlines all three Divisions of Part Two of the project. If you read Being and Time, I recommend these other two as well, though they are by no means an easy read folks. To read either of those books one will require a background in the history of philosophy, especially in Aristotle, Descartes, and Kant. As for Being and Time itself, this is not a beginner's book. If you were just attracted to the title and have no background in philosophy, I do not recommend this book--you will be lost and hate it. This is not to say you are not an intelligent person, the problem is the language and understanding of Heidegger's worldview. This is not to say he doesn't have good ideas, they just take much time to acquire, a lifetime really. The language is difficult not because Heidegger is arrogant and not because German is generally that hard to translate into English. The true reason why Heideggerian text is so hard to comprehend is because there are no words that explain the thoughts that Heidegger is dealing with. He had to invent his own language becuase language was itself to confining to what Heidegger was conceiving. If you're serious about this fellow, it would be worthwhile to learn the major word-concepts one at a time: Dasein, authenticity, inauthenticity, care (Sorge), ontic/ontical vs. ontological, existentiell vs. existential, thrownness, being-in-the-world, fallenness, being-with, idle talk, disclosure, discoveredness, hermeneutic circle, ontic-ontology, Being of beings, being-in, pre-ontological, call of conscience, et cetera. This is not to discourage but to prepare for the huge undertaking that this book demands. Personally I love this book. It is extremely hard and Americans in particular struggle with this German philosopher. Philosophy majors and even professional philosophers can find Heidegger to be extraordinarily difficult so be patient and reserve any judgment stemming from your frustration of the language. You will find many of Heidegger's books much easier than this one. I recommend George Stenier's book "Martin Heidegger" if you're new to him. Dreyfus' book Being-in-the-World is alright for terminology, but it is too epistemological and often misrepresents Heideggerian thinking. Skip over chapter 4 and the stuff on A.I. and "expert systems" et cetera. The Cambridge Companion to Heidegger is excellent for undergrad. philosophy students. Look at chapters 4-7 in particular and the Introductory section. Re-read these chapters several times for it all to sink in, or else you'll miss stuff. If you're still interested in Being and Time at this point and recognize the historical significance of Heidegger, here are some introductory remarks on the book itself. The book is broken down into two Divisions. Division I is often referred to as the "hermeneutics of everydayness"; meaning that humans interpret their existence through the way the world is disclosed to them via their day-to-day lives. As Heidegger says on page 42: "What is ontically nearest and familiar (i.e. our day-to-day lives) is ontologically the farthest, unrecognized and constantly overlooked in its ontological (i.e. existential) significance." Thus in order to understand the abstract existential problems of Being, we must first realize our human being essentially is. Heidegger uses the German phrase Da-sein (German for "being-there) to signify human being, or more specifically, the possibility of understanding Being through the disclosure of the "There". Division II is often referred to as the "hermeneutics of suspicion" because this is Heidegger's attempt to break out of our everydayness and explain primoridally the existential underlying constructs of Dasein. The road to this understanding passes through death, because death is the ultimate possibility for all Dasein, for we are essentially temporal. The temporality of our being-in-the-world forces us to realize the fundamental truths of our existence. It should be noted that Later Heidegger rejected Division II of his book. Sartre and the existentialist movement misreads Division II and it eventually forced Heidegger to abandon that half of the work. But unlike what Dreyfus thinks, I still see the importance and relevance of that Division. But readers may want to note that most contemporary Continentalists emphasize Division I a heck of a lot more than Division II. Hopefully this was useful. Best of luck friends. Drake University
Rating: 
Summary: vague
Review: By giving this book three stars I am grudgingly admitting its historical importance. However, the potential reader should keep in mind that there are plenty of works out there that convey just as much if not more information, on the same subjects, but with greater clarity and readability. _Being in Time_ is no longer an absolutely "essential" work as it might have once been. A modern philosopher could easily skip this book and pick up the same concepts elsewhere, with less headache and aggravation. Some advocates of this book would probably argue that the subject matter and the concepts discussed are by their nature very difficult, and it would have been impossible for Heidegger to convey these concepts any more clearly than he did. This is simply not true. All the advocates of "historically significant" works need to realize that there is a difference between well written and poorly written books, and this one falls into the latter category... Here are my alternative suggestions:
1. The psychoanalytic school, especially Freud and Jung, gets a lot closer to explaining the concept of being, as well as other concepts central to man's existence, than does Heidegger's phenomenology.
2. Kierkegaard, who came decades before Heidegger, is still ten times the writer Heidegger ever was. I suggest reading literally every book by Kierkegaard before reading the historical curiosity known as _Being and Time_.
3. _Theodicy_ by Leibnitz, another work which came much earlier but is also much better. At least Leibnitz clearly conveys his personal belief system, and actually argues central philosophical concepts like good and evil and the existence of God.
And this brings me to my conclusion. My main problem with _Being and Time_ is basically this: How can an author write a 400 page philosophical book, which takes nearly a month to read, and not even discuss issues like good vs. evil and the existence vs. non-existence of God? Why is it that after devoting a month to this man's work, I still don't even know what Heidegger's own spiritual beliefs are? This is the most impersonal book I have ever read. There is no trace of authorial intention or indentity, no soul to this work. It provides no real-world anecdotal examples with which to clarify any of its concepts. Heidegger never bothers to describe a real life situation in which his concepts come into play. This book is so completely disconnected from reality, the reader has to wonder if Heidegger ever left his house. At least in psychoanalysis, authors like Jung will actually provide real-life psychological case studies to back up their sweeping generalizations about human behaviour. With Heidegger, all we get is the sweeping generalizations and no case studies to demonstrate how people might exhibit the behaviours he attributes to humanity. Maybe Heidegger did have a good personality, but we'll never know based on this work.
Rating:
Summary: Being and Time...
Review: Frankly, I don't know where to begin. Should I give this One Star or Five Stars? But then it struck me: does it matter? No - it doesn't. The enormous and numerous difficulties encountered in this reading are not due solely to the style in which it was written, and more so, not to what it is trying to say. Not at all. A third factor, underplayed (or completely unknown) by many is the book is written for a person who is in himself concerned, in the highest and most dangerous extent, about the issue of being, to a person who's being is at stake, and therefore, to a person who has in his mind the "guidelines" of thought, the very well and spring and "metaphysical beginning," as regarding the question of being, beingness, the being of others, and above all, the historical condition of the world, from where it has originated, and, without hesitation, to where it is going. Being and Time is a book for those who already posses at their grasp a certain type of intensity, a "monomania," if you will - it is not at all for your average "open-minded" person, not for anarchist of spirits and the all-too liberal "humanist," not for liberators, not for fighters, but for those who (this is said at my own risk)...for those who have at least dreamt all of this philosophy *already* and are only now, for the first time, encountering what their dream is like when it is put into words. I must admit that I doubt that just anyone can understand this book without having been acquainted - not with...mere philosophy - but with that same haunting intensity which plunged Heidegger to the conception of this book. We all must understand that this book *has* and will always be misunderstood or regarded as an oddity by many professionals and critics - but the book is clear. It's very clear. It demands that you think for yourself. No. It demands that you have thought for yourself all those ideas, or at least felt that strange and inexplicable feeling which, by all means, borders on these ideas. Philosophically I disagree with Heidegger and even think he is naive - but that is refreshing to see. Nevertheless, the beauty (yes, beauty), enigma, and power that this book has is undeniable - even in disagreement, Heidegger deserves more sincere and distant reverence than any other philosopher in the 20th century. At the end, one summing up comment: this book does not teach you anything new, it only illuminates and builds on what you should already know, thought about, felt so intimately.
Rating: 
Summary: Catching your hand with your hand
Review: In "Being and Time," Heidegger tackles the biggest and seemingly unanswerable question of them all: Why is there something rather than nothing? In the introductory chapter, he narrows the focus of this ancient query: What significance does Being have for Dasein (human being), the asker of the question? He rejects analysis of the phenomena found "within" consciousness (as Heidegger's mentor Edmund Husserl prescribed) in favor of investigating the structure of human existence--how we exist. Heidegger claims that we exist as "thrown projections," that is, "thrown" into already-existent and distinctly historical nations, cultures, families; and always "project" a concrete future against a background of possibilities. In Chapter three, he examines of the primary modes of "being-in-the-world." We are entangled in a world which has two possibilities: the "ready-at-hand" and the "present-to-hand". The former state involves our mode of "taking-care-of-things" when we are in the flow of normal everyday activities; the "thingness" of beings is covered up, because we are absorbed in what we are doing. The latter state is disclosed when a disruption in the flow occurs: we notice the thingness of things in the world; in this state, the background significance of our activities (the projection) recedes. His analysis reveals that the second, "derivative" form of "existing-as" has lead to both philosophical problems and the scientific outlook, and in the course of his "deconstruction" Heidegger undermines the many readymade answers Western philosophy/science has used to essentialize reality. Fundamentally, Dasein is "always already ahead of itself," and this existential state cannot be encompassed by discourse, or symbolized in any way. Hence Heidegger's almost mystical idea of "silence" in the face of this state, which leads to the "call of conscience" which can bring a person to a state of "authentic being-towards-death" (my professor who taught "Being and Time" spent ten years trying to tease out a substantive doctrine to Heidegger's concept of authenticity. But there is none, and Heidegger admits it; to do so would contradict his idea of authenticity, for each person, always already thrown, must LIVE resolutely as the possibilities of life whittle away). Part two of "Being and Time" was unfinished. There are several strains of mysticism throughout this work (Heidegger was trained as a theologian) particularly with regard to anxiety (angst) revealing the possibility of nothingness as our ground, a la Meister Eckhart.
"Being and Time" is a tough book to read, no doubt about it. Heidegger coined many torturously hyphenated phrases to express his concepts, and many questions remain unanswered, especially with regard to Part 2 on Temporality for which I've docked it one star (many of these threads are picked up and refashioned in Hubert Dreyfus's book "Being-in-the-World", an excellent intro to BT). But with effort this is one of the most challenging philosophical inquiries ever written.
Rating:
Summary: Catching your hand with your hand
Review: In "Being and Time," Heidegger tackles the biggest and seemingly unanswerable question of them all: Why is there something rather than nothing? In the introductory chapter, he narrows the focus of this ancient query: What significance does Being have for Dasein (human being), the asker of the question? He rejects analysis of the phenomena found "within" consciousness (as Heidegger's mentor Edmund Husserl prescribed) in favor of investigating the structure of human existence--how we exist. Heidegger claims that we exist as "thrown projections," that is, "thrown" into already-existent and distinctly historical nations, cultures, families; and always "project" a concrete future against a background of possibilities. In Chapter three, he examines of the primary modes of "being-in-the-world." We are entangled in a world which has two possibilities: the "ready-at-hand" and the "present-to-hand". The former state involves our mode of "taking-care-of-things" when we are in the flow of normal everyday activities; the "thingness" of beings is covered up, because we are absorbed in what we are doing. The latter state is disclosed when a disruption in the flow occurs: we notice the thingness of things in the world; in this state, the background significance of our activities (the projection) recedes. His analysis reveals that the second, "derivative" form of "existing-as" has lead to both philosophical problems and the scientific outlook, and in the course of his "deconstruction" Heidegger undermines the many readymade answers Western philosophy/science has used to essentialize reality. Fundamentally, Dasein is "always already ahead of itself," and this existential state cannot be encompassed by discourse, or symbolized in any way. Hence Heidegger's almost mystical idea of "silence" in the face of this state, which leads to the "call of conscience" which can bring a person to a state of "authentic being-towards-death" (my professor who taught "Being and Time" spent ten years trying to tease out a substantive doctrine to Heidegger's concept of authenticity. But there is none, and Heidegger admits it; to do so would contradict his idea of authenticity, for each person, always already thrown, must LIVE resolutely as the possibilities of life whittle away). Part two of "Being and Time" was unfinished. There are several strains of mysticism throughout this work (Heidegger was trained as a theologian) particularly with regard to anxiety (angst) revealing the possibility of nothingness as our ground, a la Meister Eckhart.
"Being and Time" is a tough book to read, no doubt about it. Heidegger coined many torturously hyphenated phrases to express his concepts, and many questions remain unanswered, especially with regard to Part 2 on Temporality for which I've docked it one star (many of these threads are picked up and refashioned in Hubert Dreyfus's book "Being-in-the-World", an excellent intro to BT). But with effort this is one of the most challenging philosophical inquiries ever written.
Rating:
Summary: Back to Macquerrie
Review: In case you've not already ordered the new translation of Being and Time -- I'm more and more dissatisfied with the terminology the translator has adopted. She's refused most of the hypenation of terms that kept Macquerrie closer to the German and adopted some weird coinages that don't lend themselves to tracking the network of concepts that Heidegger presented. The sentences seem to be a bit cleaner and less perambulating, but it seems at the expense of accuracy ... I'm on page 71, and have decided to go back to Macquerrie for my second pass-through.
Rating:
Summary: Unprecedented Thinking from an Unprecedented Thinker
Review: Kudos to the translator for making the effort; certainly Heidegger isn't an everyday walk in the park. However, the difficulty in reading Heidegger's work is absolutely essential to fully Understanding how the inquery into Being is to be conducted. This recent translation lends too easily to the science of psychology, and is, hence, antithetical to the originality of Heideggerian 'brand' humanism. The profundity of "being and time" is to be discovered by the individual, by his own means; to use public language obliterates any hope of this.
Rating:
Summary: A new ground for philosophical inquiry?
Review: Okay, reading these reviews, I am frustrated... but, of course that is to be expected. Heidegger, more than most philosophers, lends himself to a multiplicity of interpretations. Rather than add my own semi-detailed interpretation of this work and its historical importance to this list [which would just further frustrate others, I am sure], I would just like to recommend to anyone approaching this book for the first time that they keep in mind the central inquiry that Heidegger is engaging in: the meaning of Being... and, as he explicitly states, this book is a preparation for further exploration, and not to be read as a completed "system" in itself. While the influence of Kierkegaard is obvious, relating this work to Dostoevsky (as another reviewer has) I think misses the point entirely. For all of the talk of "authenticity" and the "psychologizing" of this work that later commentators have engaged in, Heidegger is intersted in re-grounding all philosophical inquiry... not in explicating some mere existential-humanistic outlook. Whether he suceeds or not is, to say the least, debatable. I would also recommend giving a _very_ close and thorough reading to his essay "What is Metaphysics" before approaching _Being and Time_. A final note on this translation-- I had already wrestled with the previous translation from beginning to end before purchasing this one. This translation was more than worth the price of purchasing the book again. Stambaugh's translation is simply masterful.
Rating:
Summary: Difficult but necessary
Review: Reading Heidegger for the first time was a laborious chore, one that I disdained every minute of. However, I think it was the fact that I was not ready for this work when I first read it. After beginning more work in Theology and discovering the work of the great 20th century theologian Karl Rahner, I found myself more interested in the work of Heidegger. Rahner was a student of Heidegger's in Germany, and you can see his influence running deeply through Rahner's work. Reading it a second time with a more open mind, I found it to be enlightening, though still immensely difficult. The translation is not bad, as everyone seems to have trouble with Heidegger as they do with Hegel. Heidegger's ideas on death and the angst man has when facing death are integral to my own work, and the entirety of Being and Time should be read by anyone thinking of delving into post-modern philosophy and existentialism. An earlier reviewer suggested to read this without Sartre: I completely disagree. Heidegger and Sartre should be read together, as they have so much to share with one another that to ignore one is to miss the point of the 20th century movements in thought. They are, together, the two heavy-hitters of the 20th century, though thinkers like Camus and Merleau-Ponty may make a claim for space there as well. Being and Time is Heidegger's magnum opus, and should be read with an open mind and a notebook to keep track of all the ideas.
Rating:
Summary: Difficult but necessary
Review: Reading Heidegger for the first time was a laborious chore, one that I disdained every minute of. However, I think it was the fact that I was not ready for this work when I first read it. After beginning more work in Theology and discovering the work of the great 20th century theologian Karl Rahner, I found myself more interested in the work of Heidegger. Rahner was a student of Heidegger's in Germany, and you can see his influence running deeply through Rahner's work. Reading it a second time with a more open mind, I found it to be enlightening, though still immensely difficult. The translation is not bad, as everyone seems to have trouble with Heidegger as they do with Hegel. Heidegger's ideas on death and the angst man has when facing death are integral to my own work, and the entirety of Being and Time should be read by anyone thinking of delving into post-modern philosophy and existentialism. An earlier reviewer suggested to read this without Sartre: I completely disagree. Heidegger and Sartre should be read together, as they have so much to share with one another that to ignore one is to miss the point of the 20th century movements in thought. They are, together, the two heavy-hitters of the 20th century, though thinkers like Camus and Merleau-Ponty may make a claim for space there as well. Being and Time is Heidegger's magnum opus, and should be read with an open mind and a notebook to keep track of all the ideas.
|
