English (United Kingdom)

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/featured_content/oa?rat=en

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/highlighted_journal/

Global: Zendy Plus annual

Presents the access of premium content as premium feature

Premium Content

Presents the keyphrase highlighting as premium feature

Keyphrase Highlighting

Presents the summarisation as premium feature

Summarisation

Insights

Presents the pdf analysis as premium feature

PDF Analysis

Presents the zaia usage as premium feature

ZAIA

Global: Zendy Tools annual

Global: Zendy Free Plan

Global: Zendy Tools monthly

Global: Zendy Plus monthly

It seems that complaints about Heidegger’s style of writing are common fare in secondary literature and the classroom. This paper argues that both Heidegger’s obtuseness and obscurantism work as methodological devices for effectively communicating and demonstrating his thought. By obfuscating, he forces breakdowns, which pulls the reader out of her ready-to-hand mode of reading/revealing, which otherwise threatens to fall into comprehending via reference from one’s average everydayness. By being obscure in some passages where taking the meaning in multiple ways will not interfere with the main points being made, Heidegger enables his students to form personal (existentiell) interpretations, allowing for the possibility of authenticity. Therefore, one of the most hated aspects of BT defence of a person, or vindication of an institution, etc., from accusation or aspersion.” Res Cogitans (2016) 7 Mckerracher | 159 2155-4838 | commons.pacificu.edu/rescogitans (BT in other words, instead of cluttering one’s thoughts with additional knowledge to be heaped upon or against pre-existing assumptions, the study of B&T clears a region for authentic thinking in a less obstructed light. Even when, with someone like Foucault, the influence is less obvious, one can reasonably doubt that his work would have provided such a novel perspective if not for Heidegger’s clearing. Indeed, near the end of his life Foucault gave credit to Heidegger as always being his “essential philosopher.” 2 Although much of what will be argued in this paper can and probably does apply to his later work, this paper focuses on B&T as the essential Heidegger text. 3 Levinas, Emmanuel. Ethics and Infinity, Richard A. Cohen. (Pittsburg: Duquesne University Press, 1985), 41. 4 Thomson, Iain. "Rethinking Levinas on Heidegger on Death," The Harvard Review of Philosophy, Vol. XVI (Fall 2009), pp. 23-43. 5 Heidegger, Martin. Being and Time, trans. Macquarrie and Robinson (New York: Harper & Row, 1962), 167. 6 Elden, Stuart. Mapping the Present: Heidegger, Foucault and the Project of a Spatial History. (Bloomsbury Academic: 2002) 1. Res Cogitans (2016) 7 Mckerracher | 16

Why Wrestle with Being and Time? A Justification of Heidegger’s Methodology of Obscurantism and Obfuscation