REVEALING BOREDOM
On the philosophy of Heidegger.
Geoffrey Hamilton
February 28, 1995
"Why is there any Being at all - why not far rather Nothing?" This most
profound of questions, said by Heidegger to be the basis of metaphysics,
could form the heart of an equally profound philosophy. Unfortunately
Heidegger doesn't give us a philosophy, but takes on the role of the
Delphic riddler to deal with this "ground-question". He writes about
his comprehensible ideas so mysticly that they verge on undifferenciated
nonsense, and he only seems to stand back from the brink due to the
seriousness of the subject - the truth of existence.
His basic doctrine says that emotions reveal this truth of
existence and ironically (because these states are so easily observed
in many of his readers) boredom and dread are the primary revealers.
In general he confuses, deifies and mystifies ideas and could easily
be dismissed today if his influence on philosophy had not been so great.
In his philosophy "Man alone exists" is the central crux and
undermining it would destroy his credibility - if reason and logic were
the actual measures of credibility. (To be charitable to this central
idea it will be rephrased 'Humanity
alone exists' in order to clarify his intention. 'Dasein' is Heidegger's
word which describes this quality and will be used as such.)
Without intending to deny the reality of objects that seem to
exist (like a rock) Heidegger is instead positing by 'humanity alone
exists' that to exist is to have consciousness (which does not by
virtue of itself create existence) which is capable of projecting
itself into the future. This Dasein figure does this projecting by
virtue of emotional states like boredom and dread which in turn reveal
(not perceive) being and nothing.
Dasein is projected into these a priori 'facts' of
Being and Nothing, but it is important to note that both are one in
the same "...because Being itself is finite in essence and is only
revealed in the Transcendence of Dasein as projected into Nothing".
An initial problem arises with Heidegger's misrepresentation
of the common idea of nothing. He says that nothing becomes an
entity for people due to it presence as a concept in language,
"...where science tries to put its own essence in words it invokes
the aid of Nothing" , "Nothing is admitted.... therefore it...somehow
or other 'is'...". He acknowledges the absurdity of this idea but then
states, the "Nothing...must be given in advance", in order to look for
it. As though hypothesizing means discovering for most people. So
nothing becomes something. He seems to think that this kind of
existence is all that is required to make the non-existing exist
for people. By this premise he expects us then to believe that a
character like Oliver Twist actually exists because language can
presuppose that he does. Further, his straw person representation of the
common understanding of nothing is supposed to justify his use of
emotive means for 'revealing' nothing.
Also Heidegger confuses common ideas about negation with
his nothing: he makes the mistaken assumption for us that if something
is not, for example, a dog then it is therefore 'nothing', rather than
something else like a cat. To be more germane, his representation of the
common ideas of nothing - that it is the negation of 'the totality of
what-is' - is wrong.
Nothing instead is commonly understood the way
Heidegger himself understands it in one definition, something that
"...represents complete lack of differentiation"; which means we haven't
yet come to the point of understanding, categorizing and labeling it.
So nothing and ignorance are synonymous in many ways.
Heidegger's definition of his Nothing, also implies that
Nothing cannot be differentiated even from 'the totality of what-is'.
He claims that Nothing and Being are the same so then why is this tension
of Being and Nothing being played out? Why? Because he wants to make it a
symbol for the threshold of death that all humanity faces.
This death threshold dilemma seems to be essentical for
Heidegger. Dread of death and boredom with life. This is because
he says dread of death projects one in the midst of the truth of what
isn't and boredom with life places one inside the truth of what is without
the need of cognitive processes. This may be so, but, suspending the
relevence of all this, nowhere in his text is a reason given why this
Dasein is so unique to humanity.
He seems to rely on a reader's prejudice that assumes talents
like projecting, consciousness and dread are strictly human. If one
compares it with the history of the right to vote, where a 'person'
can arbitrarily be defined as only male, white, rich, educated, or
over a certain age; Dasein too has many such restrictions. But if the
reader refuses to extend this homocentrism, which colonizes our ignorance
of the totality of what-is and therefore makes unconscious, unprojecting
and unable to dread what could possibly be all three (this includes
animal, vegetable, and mineral), it is then possible to see how Dasein might also
be a quality of the totality of what is and what isn't. Therefore
Dasein too is ultimately completely lacking reasoned differentiation.
What one is left with then is an enigma. The totality of what
is and what isn't is the same thing. Existence in Heidegger's sense then
is offered to all. Dasein might be everywhere. But even if Dasein
offers a special club membership to humanity only, the act of projecting one's being
into the future to sense the finitude is still lacking relevancy. If
one does not choose to sense the finitude, or cannot, what does it
matter? His authentic or inauthentic being is irrelevant in the presence
of the finitude. He offers no reason for its relevancy. He even denies
reason a place of honour. But he does offer something else entirely to
his many fans - not justification but mystery.
Mystery is not a literary genre or a simple curiosity, it's
more. Akin to myth it motivates. By myth and mystery we project
(motivate) ourselves into the future, and it's not Being and Nothing
that are revealed, but more myth and mystery. Heidegger uses and offers
these qualities, whether he knows it or not. It is his obscure style
that does much of this work.
An obscure style like Heidegger's is not a hinderence to his
influence, it helps it. Like the Babylonian, Delphic, Catholic, Aztec,
capitalistic, psychoanalytical and romantic mysteries (among many)
that have preceded his, mixing the comprehensible with the incomprehensible
has been the most successful method of influence making. The
incomprehensible myth offers a specific value that is nearly
universal, like the incomprehensible Truth of existence. This is the 'hook'
which attaches the individual to the myth. The incomprehensible,
the mystery, offers the possibility, not the actuality, of this
value being given.
Total comprehension reveals meaningless
tripe and is not actually wanted by either party; the giver and receiver.
Myth and mystery offers and withholds, like the carrot out of reach of the mule.
Heidegger calls his own version of this value,
this motivation, "standing-in" (caring or interested enough to put up
with Dasein). As he does not describe how it can happen we can assume,
by his example, myth and mystery is how .
Finally, it is vitally important to note how Heidegger's
method is, at times, revealing his religiosity, "In sacrifice there
is expressed that hidden thanking which alone does homage
to the grace where with Being has endowed the nature of man, in order
that he may take over in his relationship to Being the guardianship of
Being. Original thanking is the echo of Being's favour wherein it
clears a space for itself.... This echo is man's answer to the
Word of the soundless voice of Being....Obedient to the Voice of
Being, thought seeks the Word through which the truth of Being
may be expressed". These quotations have the ring of another
Ron L. Hubbard. In the same way one can legitimately point to the
tiny flaws in a magician's performance to prove a fraud, these
quotations point to the religiosity behind Heidegger's whole philosophy.
Whether Being is capable of a soundless voice, and whether one
is capable of being obedient to it (or not) is an issue for faith alone
since neither Heidegger nor the wider world has shown this to be
possible in any other way. Yet, like much of his philosophy, if one
believes it is just possible, then Heidegger has unfortunately
succeeded. 'Man alone exists' lacks differentiation. Nothing and
Being lacks differentiation. Dasein lacks differentiation. So myth
and mystery is all he offers.
(02/03/1995)
back
Heidegger Overview
