In his seminal text Being and Time, Martin Heidegger attempts to investigate the nature of being, and by extension, human consciousness, in an intelligible way that allows one to actually make useful claims regarding the nature of Being despite the human mind's inability to escape the imaginary limitations inherent to human consciousness (imaginary meaning the very real, functional limitations to human imagination due to human's inescapable perception of time). Thus, while he implicitly criticizes previous formulations regarding the nature of human experience, he is more concerned with correctly answering a fundamental question than dismantling any specific, traditional view of human experience, because according to Heidegger, nearly all previous conceptions of human experience have erred from the outset due to their assumptions and misformulations regarding the essential "question of Being." By examining Heidegger's claims regarding being as such, one is able to see how Heidegger manages to sidestep the limitations of human experience in order to describe it in such a way as to avoid the pitfalls of relying on human sensory perception in order to describe human experience.
Before investigating Heidegger's arguments in greater detail, it will be useful to briefly examine the most common, traditional means by which philosophers, and humans in general, have attempted to describe their own experience, as a means of demonstrating the disruptive and novel nature of Heidegger's work. In short, the traditional view of human experience begins with the synthesis of sensory information in the self, and all observations regarding the nature of human experience stems from this initial reflection on said sensory information. A human, having perceived one's own self, then proceeds to perceive objects, and in particular...
From this, the individual makes assumptions regarding these other people by predicting that they, like the individual, share a similar sensory experience of the world. From here, the individual begins to make meaning out of the various objects in the world by synthesizing the behaviors and expressions of others in much the same way that the individual's initial conception of the world is the result of the internal synthesis of sensory information.
The prevalence of this view is due to the fact that it appears at first glance to be an intuitive and wholly natural description of human experience, and indeed, it is. However, this view ultimately fails to fully describe human experience precisely because it is so intuitive; put another way, this view is easy to accept because it does not challenge any of the underlying assumptions and preexisting biases of experience, due to the fact that it does not, and in fact cannot, describe human experience from outside of that experience, in the same way that a person entrapped in language cannot think, or even imagine a thought, independent of that language. Due to these limitations, "a dogma has developed which not only declares the question about the meaning of Being to be superfluous, but sanctions its complete neglect" due to the fact that Being is regarded as "the most universal and emptiest of concepts," not requiring "any definition, for everyone uses it constantly and already understands what he means by it" (Heidegger 21). The limitations of human experience make it appear "that 'Being' is of all concepts the one that is self-evident," but in the end, "this is merely a semblance," because "subjecting the manifold to tabulation does not ensure any actual understanding of what lies there before us as thus set in order" (23, 77). Thus, Heidegger's goal is to find a way to describe experience and Being as such, independent of any individual experiences or beings, as this is the only way to satisfactorily and intelligibly describe human experience.
AS previously mentioned, Heidegger is not expressly concerned with deconstructing earlier concepts of human experience, but rather with providing a positive description of that experience. In order to escape from the limitations of perception, then, the first step is to acknowledge those limitations; that is, to acknowledge that "to work out the question of Being adequately, we must make an entity -- the inquirer -- transparent in his own Being," and furthermore, to realize that "the very asking of this question…
The documents we provide are to be used as a sample, template, outline, guideline in helping you write your own paper, not to be used for academic credit. All users must abide by our "Student Honor Code" or you will be restricted access to our website.
Human Beings Make Sense of Things In the early-1900s, Edmund Husserl sought to provide psychology with a truly scientific basis, not by copying the physical sciences but through the description of conscious experiences. This would be a truly humanistic psychology, grounded in human life and experience rather than materialistic and mechanistic theories like functionalism and behaviorism. Karl Jaspers called for a psychology that would describe phenomena such as "hallucinations, delusions,
This object, though, sets in human consciousness in many divergent ways -- perception, memory, retention, etc. Depending on the manner in which the idea is intentional, the object may be identical but interpreted different and thus a divergent sense of reality for individuals. Opposite of Descartes and Kant, there is no one finite way of describing this object and it is entirely dependent upon the method of reduction and
Existentialism takes the human subject -- the holistic human, and the internal conditions as the basis and start of the conceptual way of explaining life. Taking idealism From Descartes, Kant, and Hegel, then building upon it, existentialist thinkers strip away the external and look at questions that surround human existence, and the conditions of that existence, rather than hypothesizing or dreaming of different forms of being. Thus, the inward
This work provided an intensive discussion historical forces that were to lead to modern humanism but also succeeds in placing these aspects into the context of the larger social, historical and political milieu. . Online sources and databases proved to be a valid and often insightful recourse area for this topic. Of particular note is a concise and well-written article by Stephen Weldon entitled Secular Humanism in the United States.
This is crucial to note because it disproves the idea that "Zumthor's architecture is preoccupied with materials and tectonics" so that "his design process somehow began and ended with concerns about physical matter" (Platt & Spier 2001, 21). If this were the case, the weight of the stone itself would likely have been highlighted, but instead, Zumthor chooses to subvert this weight by punctuating the stone with light, thus