2

Can we study being without making reference to kinds of being or the being of entities ? Can we identify pure being? Heidegger apparently thought we could and should. Did he really think this ? If so, how can I get best access to his views ?

  • 2
    There may be too many questions here. It might help to pick one question and then reference some text which motivates the question. This would provide some context. Welcome to Philosophy! – Frank Hubeny Dec 22 '18 at 23:22
  • See Logic and Ontology for an initial overview. – Mauro ALLEGRANZA Dec 23 '18 at 10:59
  • 1
    This, of course, is Heidegger's project. Western philosophy at least since Plato had gone wrong, he thought, because it looked for kinds of being rather than the nature of being itself. – Geoffrey Thomas Dec 23 '18 at 18:45
2

“Metaphysics … speaks continually and in the most various ways of Being. Metaphysics gives, and seems to confirm, the appearance that it asks and answers the question concerning Being. In fact, metaphysics never answers the question concerning the truth of Being, for it never asks this question. Metaphysics does not ask this question because it thinks of Being only by representing beings as beings. It means all beings as a whole, although it speaks of Being. It refers to Being and means beings as beings.

From its beginning to its completion, the propositions of metaphysics have been strangely involved in a persistent confusion of beings and Being. This confusion, to be sure, must be considered an event and not a mere mistake. It cannot by any means be charged to a mere negligence of thought or a carelessness of expression. Owing to this persistent confusion, the claim that metaphysics poses the question of Being lands us in utter error. Due to the manner in which it thinks of beings, metaphysics almost seems to be, without knowing it, the barrier which keeps man from the original involvement of Being in human nature."

Martin Heidegger - Existence and Being

  • 1
    This seems to me to be on the right lines. I have upvoted to remove a downvote. Heidegger is key here, and you are right to indicate this. I don't think the question should be closed, now that the irrelevant reference to 'philosophy of education' has been deleted. – Geoffrey Thomas Dec 23 '18 at 18:54

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.