Dasein and reason

17 Oct

Before entering into the concept of being-in-the-world, a provisional translation of Dasein, it is necessary to understand the extent to which ontology distances itself from Cartesian rationalism, at which point it approaches, for those who desire a deeper dive “Cartesian Meditations” (post) since Husserl was Heidegger’s teacher and he kept some concepts.

The two well-known Cartesian categories for something are res extensia and res cogitans, about which Heidegger wrote: “Doubtless this [with regard to God] needs production and preservation, but within the created entities [or only considering these ] … there is something that needs no other entity, in regard to the production and conservation of creatures, for example of man.

These substances are two: the res cogitans and the res extensa “(Heidegger, 2015, p.144). Thus the Cartesian dualism is not only between two finite substances, which are naturally distinct, but between the two finites and the infinite, and Heidegger clarifies immediately after returning to the medieval ontology, sometimes called fundamental or ontotheology by other authors, the question (Heidegger, 2015, 145), that is, “in the affirmations God is or the world is, we preach the being … the word ‘is’ can not indicate the being each time referred to in the same sense (αυυωυúς, unívoce), since between both there is an infinite difference of bein.

If the meaning of ‘is’ was univocal, then the servant would have the same sense of not created or the uncreated would be demoted to a servant “(idem). It solves the quarrel of the universal, between realists and nominalists, “Being does not perform the function of a simple name [the nominalists thought], since in both cases it is understood to be” (ibid.).

Explicit and surpasses scholasticism ” positive sense of the signification of the s’ as an ‘analogical’ meaning to distinguish it from univocal or merely synonymous signification “(ibid.).

The quotes are of Heidegger’s own to indicate the analogy of being as substance, and extending to contemporaneity neither the analog nor digital are to be, belong only to the ontic, or in our designation to the artifacts.

Finally, it underscores the Cartesian ontology that “falls far short of scholasticism” which left the sense of being and the character of the “universality” of that meaning contained in the idea of ​​substantiality “(ibid.), While acknowledging that even medieval ontology questioned very little this sense.

Although Descartes is able to recover in some respects, he notes for his time and is worth even today, we have not even freed ourselves from the crisis of European thought of the last century, “the Cartesian ontology of the world is still today in force in its fundamental principles”, materiality.

Heidegger, M. Ser e Tempo (Being and time), 10a. Brazilian edition, Trad. Revised by Marcia Sá Cavalcante, Bragança Paulista, SP: Editora Universitária São Francisco, 2015.


Comentários estão fechados.