1973??!! that's a half century ago. how is it possible to find this course marterial online? it seems he is one of the best lecturer on this subject. I could find audio files of the course somewhere on the net ,but no visual.
Present at hand and ready at hand has more to do with how we comport ourselves to the world. The hammer is still there when you are experiencing it as ready at hand so it isn't as simple as things/actions
@@sagetmaster4 We are in time, are we of time? We cannot control, cancel, lessen, increase, escape from being inside time can we? Only gravity, not acceleration, which seems to be just a macroscopic phenomena seems to have an "of time" dimension. The gravity of large objects determines how we experience time. Any act of doing, ready at hand, comports with "timing". As we are in time we can "impose" time on our objects. To put it another way hammering or throwing a Frisbee is controlled by gravity, as is our musculoskeletal structure. "Timing" is being and doing together. Possibly all scientific measurement is such. Walking down the road is doing. Getting on a scale and weighing yourself is "timing". Exactly the same as hammering a nail. Can doing and timing be separated?No. Can being and doing be separated? Maybe.Does science suggest they can be separated: the mechanical, objective, universe; or does science suggest they can't be separated: the quantum mechanical, subjective, universe?
Present-at-hand is the Aristotelian and Cartesian idea of substance i.e. the idea that things are things in themselves, that there is something in them substantial which can be studied or put into word-models philosophically and scientifically. Ready-at-hand is an anti-Aristotelian/Cartesian perspective. There is nothing substantial to any kind of material being, our form exists in relation to our functional coping as biological or material beings aka evolution. Like all living beings, Dasein creates itself (or rather "bes" itself) through consciousness of its present coping situation as a body. There is no such substantial thing such as hammer, a hammer is a conceptual tool that materializes the developing consciousness of Dasein communities and relations. We have immediate powers such as the use of our limbs, but we stand in the same relation to our limbs as we stand to a hammer. Limbs are not our substance, yet they are a constitutive part of our particular being. Some creatures don't need limbs, Dasein does. Yet homo sapiens could hardly be substantialized as a being with two arms and two legs. To sum up Heidegger's revolution in philosophy, we might say he shifted philosophical consciousness (and maybe scientific consciousness) from "substances" to "situations." Sarte would later interpret this idea of "situation" as the existential-personal dilemma and philosophical drama of every Dasein. But for Heidegger Sartre's existential philosophy was foolishness, because it tried to substantialize man all over again and create a substantial duality within man. This is a brief and summarized sketch of what I took from Profess Dreyfus's lectures on Heidegger. The headline here is that it was not some cheap insight like existentialism that made Heidegger a world-historical philosopher. Heidegger created a new philosophical and scientific perspective which no longer took as its subject some substance to be analyzed or defined or understood, in the tradition of Aristotle and Descartes. Heidegger started from a biological-evolutionary perspective and interpreted Dasein or man as a coping activity of consciousness. Heidegger did not ask questions like "what is a hammer" or "what is justice." Heidegger asked, given life as a present material situation that evolves by coping, what is the coping environment for human life. If Freud was trying to get at the unconscious, Heidegger was trying to liberate philosophy altogether from such metaphysics. He borrowed the key insight of 19th century i.e. evolution, in both the Hegelian and Darwinian sense. But Heidegger's revolutionary significance was to overthrow Descartes, in much the same way that Descartes once overthrew Aristotle.
![일상 속 기분 좋음 [Proto disco meme]](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/DwmEIaZ7XGQ/mqdefault.jpg)
I appreciate that someone would bringing up the question of the body so early
I took his course on Being and Time at U.C. Berkeley in 1973. Amazing to be able to see this lecture.
That awesome, here you are all that time later.
1973??!! that's a half century ago.
how is it possible to find this course marterial online?
it seems he is one of the best lecturer on this subject.
I could find audio files of the course somewhere on the net ,but no visual.
Speaking of equipment what was this recorded with? The quality for 2006 is stellar.
Something ready at hand i guess
Thanks for posting!
🙌🏾
Present at hand - things, ready at hand - doing? Matter and motion? Being and time.
Present at hand and ready at hand has more to do with how we comport ourselves to the world. The hammer is still there when you are experiencing it as ready at hand so it isn't as simple as things/actions
@@sagetmaster4 We are in time, are we of time? We cannot control, cancel, lessen, increase, escape from being inside time can we?
Only gravity, not acceleration, which seems to be just a macroscopic phenomena seems to have an "of time" dimension. The gravity of large objects determines how we experience time.
Any act of doing, ready at hand, comports with "timing". As we are in time we can "impose" time on our objects. To put it another way hammering or throwing a Frisbee is controlled by gravity, as is our musculoskeletal structure. "Timing" is being and doing together. Possibly all scientific measurement is such.
Walking down the road is doing. Getting on a scale and weighing yourself is "timing". Exactly the same as hammering a nail. Can doing and timing be separated?No. Can being and doing be separated? Maybe.Does science suggest they can be separated: the mechanical, objective, universe; or does science suggest they can't be separated: the quantum mechanical, subjective, universe?
@Xaviar 77versus99 "they"?
@Xaviar 77versus99 ok illuminati, thanks for the update.
Present-at-hand is the Aristotelian and Cartesian idea of substance i.e. the idea that things are things in themselves, that there is something in them substantial which can be studied or put into word-models philosophically and scientifically.
Ready-at-hand is an anti-Aristotelian/Cartesian perspective. There is nothing substantial to any kind of material being, our form exists in relation to our functional coping as biological or material beings aka evolution. Like all living beings, Dasein creates itself (or rather "bes" itself) through consciousness of its present coping situation as a body.
There is no such substantial thing such as hammer, a hammer is a conceptual tool that materializes the developing consciousness of Dasein communities and relations.
We have immediate powers such as the use of our limbs, but we stand in the same relation to our limbs as we stand to a hammer. Limbs are not our substance, yet they are a constitutive part of our particular being.
Some creatures don't need limbs, Dasein does. Yet homo sapiens could hardly be substantialized as a being with two arms and two legs.
To sum up Heidegger's revolution in philosophy, we might say he shifted philosophical consciousness (and maybe scientific consciousness) from "substances" to "situations."
Sarte would later interpret this idea of "situation" as the existential-personal dilemma and philosophical drama of every Dasein. But for Heidegger Sartre's existential philosophy was foolishness, because it tried to substantialize man all over again and create a substantial duality within man.
This is a brief and summarized sketch of what I took from Profess Dreyfus's lectures on Heidegger.
The headline here is that it was not some cheap insight like existentialism that made Heidegger a world-historical philosopher. Heidegger created a new philosophical and scientific perspective which no longer took as its subject some substance to be analyzed or defined or understood, in the tradition of Aristotle and Descartes.
Heidegger started from a biological-evolutionary perspective and interpreted Dasein or man as a coping activity of consciousness.
Heidegger did not ask questions like "what is a hammer" or "what is justice." Heidegger asked, given life as a present material situation that evolves by coping, what is the coping environment for human life.
If Freud was trying to get at the unconscious, Heidegger was trying to liberate philosophy altogether from such metaphysics. He borrowed the key insight of 19th century i.e. evolution, in both the Hegelian and Darwinian sense.
But Heidegger's revolutionary significance was to overthrow Descartes, in much the same way that Descartes once overthrew Aristotle.