This thesis articulates a novel interpretation of Heidegger’s explication of the being (Seins) of gear (Zeugs) in §15 of his masterwork Being and Time (1927/2006) and develops and applies the position attributed to Heidegger to explain three phenomena of unreflective action discussed in recent literature and articulate a partial Heideggerian ecological metaphysics. Since §15 of BT explicates the being of gear, Part 1 expounds Heidegger’s concept of the ‘being’ (Seins) of beings (Seienden) and two issues raised in the ‘preliminary methodological (...) remark’ in §15 of BT regarding explicating being. §1.1 interprets the being (Sein) or synonymously constitution of being (Seinsverfassung) of a being (Seienden) as a regional essence: a property unifying a region (Region), district (Bezirk), or subject-area (Sachgebiet) – a highly general (‘regional’) class of entities. Although Heidegger posits two components of the being of a being, viz. material-content (Sachhaltigkeit, Sachgehalt) and mode-of-being (Seinsart) or way-of-being (Seinsweise, Weise des Seins, Weise zu sein) (1927/1975, 321), the unclarity of this distinction means that it does not figure prominently herein. §1.2 addresses Heidegger’s distinction between ontological and ontic investigations and his notion of ‘modes of access’ (Zugangsarten, Zugangsweisen). Part 2 expounds §15 of BT’s explication of the being of gear. §2.1 analyses Heidegger’s two necessary and sufficient conditions for being gear and three core basic concepts (Grundbegriffe) enabling comprehension of these conditions and therewith a foundational comprehension of gear. Heidegger explicates the being of gear through content of unreflectively purposeful, non-intersubjective intentional states. I term such states ‘mundane concern’, which is almost synonymous with Hubert Dreyfus’s term ‘absorbed coping’ (1991, 69). Heidegger’s explication highlights around-for references (Um-zu-Verweisungen) as the peculiar species of property figuring in mundanely concernful intentional content. §2.2 clarifies Heidegger’s position on the relationship between to-hand-ness (Zuhandenheit) and extantness (Vorhandenheit) in the narrow sense: two of Heidegger’s most widely discussed concepts. I reject Kris McDaniel’s recent reading of Heidegger as affirming that nothing could be both to-hand and extant simultaneously (McDaniel 2012). Part 3 develops and applies Heidegger’s phenomenology of mundane concern. §3.1 explains the phenomena of situational holism, situated normativity, and mundanely concernful prospective control. §3.2 undertakes the metaphysical accommodation of around-for references, which §3.1 posited as featuring prominently within mundanely concernful intentional content. This thesis thus contributes not only to Heidegger scholarship, but also to contemporary debates within the philosophy of action and cognitive science. (shrink)

Heidegger is often attacked for his failure to offer a thematic account of the body in his Being and Time (Aho, 2005). The general misunderstanding of Heidegger’s negation of body arises from the different meanings associated with the term ‘body’. Body can be understood from two perspectives: body in terms of corpse and body in terms of lived-body. Doctors study body as corpse or object because that is required in their training and education. Heidegger’s Being in his Being and Time (...) ruled out all dichotomy of the body. The aim of this paper is to understand the Heideggerian perspective on Dasein as not a negation of bodilyness but a phenomenological understanding of Dasein body, and as such to highlight the dimension of lived-body in Heidegger’s Being and Time. The paper will re-examine how Heidegger’s philosophy of Dasein contributed to the phenomenology of lived-body in terms of his analysis of habitual body. Indo-Pacific Journal of Phenomenology , September 2008, Volume 8, Edition 2. (shrink)

This paper examines the role of the body in the social and psychological study of ageing. Drawing upon the phenomenological tradition, it argues that the body occupies a halfway house between materiality and subjectivity, unsettling those social psychological and biological frameworks by which age and ageing are traditionally understood. While offering no simple resolution of this ambiguity, the paper highlights the intrinsic nature of this dilemma. After reviewing recent research and writing concerning body awareness, body ownership and body affordance, the (...) thesis is proposed that much of what constitutes bodily ageing can be seen as a series of ‘normal abnormalities’. These result in our experience of bodily ageing pivoting uneasily between an object and a subject position. This dialectic is incapable of synthetic resolution but still, to varying degrees it preoccupies many in later life. It is rarely confronted in its full complexity, however, in ageing studies. The phenomenological tradition provides an under-utilised framework for future investigations in this field. (shrink)

En este artículo se desarrollan las consideraciones heideggerianas acerca de la corporalidad expuestas en Zollikoner Seminare, atendiendo a la posición fundamental desde la cual estas se despliegan. Se discute acerca de la necesidad, por parte de Heidegger, de abordar el problema del cuerpo vivo al margen de las consideraciones científicas y, por consiguiente, se enfatiza el sentido íntimo de un eventual "cambio de método" que pareciera conducir la reflexión sobre el cuerpo a la aclaración de su modo de ser propio, (...) con el fin de clarificar cómo es que aquel puede ser entendido como un existencial. (shrink)

. Este artículo se propone discutir las dificultades que pertenecen al ejercicio de pensarnos en cuanto corporales. Guía de estas reflexiones son los índices heideggerianos sobre la corporalidad humana realizados en Zollikoner Seminare. Dichos seminarios advierten que la actual experiencia de nuestro cuerpo, pese a poder ser estimada como inmediata, se halla mediada por nuestros propios supuestos epocales y se enraiza ya en el pensar ontológico de Occidente. Así, este artículo intentará examinar las aporías filosóficas de tal mediación histórico-epocal, exponiendo (...) la reflexión heideggeriana del cuerpo desde el claro del ser (Lichtung) como una respuesta a la idea tradicional de subjetividad fundada en la noción de “mera presencia” (Vorhandenheit). (shrink)

En este artículo se desarrollan las consideraciones heideggerianas acerca de la corporalidad expuestas en Zollikoner Seminare, atendiendo a la posición fundamental desde la cual estas se despliegan. Se discute acerca de la necesidad, por parte de Heidegger, de abordar el problema del cuerpo vivo al margen de las consideraciones científicas y, por consiguiente, se enfatiza el sentido íntimo de un eventual "6cambio de método" que pareciera conducir la reflexión sobre el cuerpo a la aclaración de su modo de ser propio, (...) con el fin de clarificar cómo es que aquel puede ser entendido como un existencial. The article examines Heidegger´s considerations of corporeality in the Zollikon Seminars, focusing on the fundamental position from which they are made, and discusses Heidegger´s need to address the issue of the living body separately from scientific considerations. Therefore, it emphasizes the profound meaning of a possible "change of method" that seems to lead the reflection on the body toward the clarification of its inherent mode of being, in order to explain how it can be understood as an existential. Neste artigo, desenvolveram-se as considerações heideggerianas sobre a corporalidade expostas em Zollikoner Seminare, atendendo à posição fundamental a partir da qual estas se realizam. Discute-se sobre a necessidade, por parte de Heidegger, de abordar o problema do corpo vivo à margem das considerações científicas e, consequentemente, enfatiza-se o sentido íntimo de uma eventual "mudança de método" que parece conduzir a reflexão sobre o corpo ao esclarecimento de seu modo de ser próprio, com o objetivo de esclarecer como aquele pode ser entendido como um existencial. (shrink)

In this article, I respond to important questions raised by Gallagher and Jacobson in the field of cognitive science about face-to-face interactions in Heidegger’s account of ‘intersubjectivity’ in Being and Time. They have criticized his account for a lack of attention to primary intersubjectivity, or immediate, face-to-face interactions; he favours, they argue, embodied interactions via objects. I argue that the same assumption underlies their argument as did earlier critiques of a lack of an account of the body in Heidegger ; (...) namely that because the body is not explicitly discussed in Being and Time, embodiment, rather than stressing the immediacy of experience, is insufficiently acknowledged in his emphasis on ‘being-in-the-world’. Through placing Gallagher and Jacobson’s accounts of intersubjectivity and the body alongside Heidegger’s accounts of Mitsein and Leib, this article shows Heidegger’s radical position on the body as immersed in a holistic environment, and its reverberations on his account of intersubjectivity. I argue that Dasein’s embodied engagement in the world is always one of immediacy and that the body of the other is perceived as ‘tied into’ its context, as well. In so doing, I offer an Heideggerian account of ecstatic involvement which moves away from the distinction between primary and secondary intersubjectivity toward an immediate engagement with objects and people always already ‘tied into’ a context; an account that, through the concept of Fürsorge, includes shifts of attention between objects and people that allow for the ethical distinctions Gallagher and Jacobson are looking for. (shrink)

At the beginning of Being and Time, Heidegger rejects Husserl’s classical phenomenology on three grounds: he claims that Husserlian phenomenology is impaired by indeterminate concepts, by naïve personalism, and by obscurities in its account of individuation. The paper studies the validity of this early critique by explicating Husserl’s discourse on human persons as bodily-spiritual beings and by clarifying his account of the principles by which such beings can be individuated. The paper offers three types of considerations. After a summary of (...) Heidegger’s early critique of Husserl, the second section of the paper distinguishes between two dimensions of Husserl’s discourse on human persons. It argues that Husserl does not put forward one analysis of the being of humans, but explicates two different accounts and then studies critically their mutual relations of dependency: on the one hand, the naturalistic account of human beings as layered beings and on the other hand the personalistic account of human beings as peculiar kinds of unified wholes in which the mental and the bodily are inextricably intertwined. The third section of the paper clarifies Husserl’s theory of individuation and its consequences for our discourse on human persons. Finally, the fourth section explicates the conceptual means by which Husserl develops his account of human beings as persons. The paper ends in drawing some conclusions for contemporary philosophical anthropology. (shrink)

The ‘body’ has remained the pivotal and essential mechanism for analysis within disability scholarship. Yet while historically conceptualized as an individual’s fundamental feature, the ‘disabled identity’ has been more recently explained as a function of ‘normalcy’ through social, cultural political, and legal discriminations against difference and deviancy. Disability studies’ established tradition of consultation with philosophical endeavour remains apparently unwilling to exploit or utilize Martin Heidegger’s understanding of ‘Being’ and interpretation of Dasein as a possible framework for unravelling the complexities of (...) contemporary discrimination and oppression of those others. This paper in tracing Heidegger’s explanation of humankind, inspired by arguments proposed by Cerbone (Int J Philos Stud 2:209–230, 2000) and in consultation with Levin (The body: classic and contemporary readings, Blackwell, Malden, 1999), Aho (2009), Malpas (Heidegger’s topology: being place, world, MIT Press, Cambridge, 2008), and Rae (Hum Stud 33:23–39, 2010) among others, will interpret the ‘embodied’ reality of ‘Being,’ of being-disabled-in-the-world as primarily involved within the practical context and structured according to impersonal, normative social norms, rather than detached, theoretical contemplation or observance. (shrink)