하이데거의 사유에서 무의 지위에 대한 해석 (2) －「형이상학이란 무엇인가?」에서 존재론적 차이와 무에 대한 해석을 중심으로－
On the Status of the Nothing in Heidegger’s Thought (Ⅱ) -On the Basis of Interpretation of the Nothing and Ontological Difference in Heidegger’s “What is Metaphysics?”-
0
조회
0
다운로드
4
인용
0
참고문헌
키워드
초록
The focus of this paper is to clarify the relationship between Nothing and ontological difference in case of the early Heidegger. This study is based on the text, “What is Metaphysics?” (WM) with the “On the essence of ground”, which is written at the same year of WM. First, I criticized the preceding interpretation proposed by W. Schulz, who interprets the Nothing as Dasein’s powerlessness. Also the interpretation of W. Richardson, P. Hoffman regarding Nothing was critically dealt with. Meanwhile I was inspired by the preceding interpretations raised by Park, Chan Kook and Kim Chong Uk, who interpret the Nothing regarding Da-sein’s transfer. Also I was inspired by interpretation raised by A. Guzzoni, who interpreted the Nothing as the same as the extensively grasped beings as such. I will interpret the Nothing “Moving back of beings-in-their-totality (eine Abweisung auf das Seiende im Ganzen)” and “Returning back of being-in-their-totality (eine Verweisung auf das versinkende Seiende im Ganzen)”. In this case, the former means the collapse of public world (die öffentliche Welt) and they-selves (das Man-selbst). Moreover the latter is interpreted as the Dasein’s transfer (Umwendung) and disclosedness of beings as such. Consequently, I will interpret that beings as such do not have their ground as the external cause such as God. Rather beings as such revealed as the beings already in itself bearing Being (Sein)
Abstract
The focus of this paper is to clarify the relationship between Nothing and ontological difference in case of the early Heidegger. This study is based on the text, “What is Metaphysics?” (WM) with the “On the essence of ground”, which is written at the same year of WM. First, I criticized the preceding interpretation proposed by W. Schulz, who interprets the Nothing as Dasein’s powerlessness. Also the interpretation of W. Richardson, P. Hoffman regarding Nothing was critically dealt with. Meanwhile I was inspired by the preceding interpretations raised by Park, Chan Kook and Kim Chong Uk, who interpret the Nothing regarding Da-sein’s transfer. Also I was inspired by interpretation raised by A. Guzzoni, who interpreted the Nothing as the same as the extensively grasped beings as such. I will interpret the Nothing “Moving back of beings-in-their-totality (eine Abweisung auf das Seiende im Ganzen)” and “Returning back of being-in-their-totality (eine Verweisung auf das versinkende Seiende im Ganzen)”. In this case, the former means the collapse of public world (die öffentliche Welt) and they-selves (das Man-selbst). Moreover the latter is interpreted as the Dasein’s transfer (Umwendung) and disclosedness of beings as such. Consequently, I will interpret that beings as such do not have their ground as the external cause such as God. Rather beings as such revealed as the beings already in itself bearing Being (Sein)
참고문헌 (28)
- 신상희, "이정표 1, 하이데거" (2005), 한길사
- 하이데거, "형이상학의 근본개념들" (2001), 까치
- 김재철, "아리스토텔레스에 대한 현상학적 해석" (2010), 누멘
- 하이데거, "셸링" (1997)
- 하이데거, "사유의 사태로" (2008)
- M. Heidegger, "Wegmarken" (1976), Vittorio Klostermann
- M. Heidegger, "Zur Sache des Denkens" (1976), Vittorio Klostermann
- M. Heidegger, "Metaphysische Anfangsgründe der Logik im Ausgang von Leibniz" (1978), Vittorio Klostermann
- M. Heidegger, "Die Grundbegriffe der Metaphysik: Welt-Endlichkeit-Einsamkeit" (1975), Vittorio Klostermann
- M. Heidegger, "Schelling: Vom Wesen der Menschenlichen Freiheit" (1809), Vittorio Klostermann
- M. Heidegger, "Die Metaphysik des Deutschen Idealismus" (1991), Vittorio Klostermann
- M. Heidegger, "Grundbegriffe" (1981), Vittorio Klostermann
- M. Heidegger, "Phänomenologische Interpretationen ausgewählter Abhandlungen des Aristoteles zur Ontologie und Logic" (2005), Vittorio Klostermann
- 김상환, "스으라의 점묘화", 철학연구, 30, pp.359~396 (1992)
- 김종욱, "하이데거의 무 (無)와 불교의 공 (空) 사상", 하이데거연구, 6, pp.23~54 (2001)
- 박찬국, "원효와 하이데거의 비교 연구", pp.282~293 (2011), 서강대학교출판부
- 박찬국, "하이데거에서 ‘근거의 본질’에 대해서 Ⅰ", 존재론 연구, (14), pp.97~129 (2006), 한국하이데거학회
- 박찬국, "현대에 있어서 고향상실의 극복과 하이데거의 존재물음", 하이데거연구, 1, pp.99~102 (1995)
- 발터 슐츠, "근대형이상학에 있어서 철학자의 신" (1995), 사랑의 학교
- Alberto Rosales, "Heideggers Kehre im Lichte ihrer Interpretationen", Dietrich Papenfuss und Otto Pöggeler, Zur philosophischen Aktualtät Heideggers, Symposium, pp.119~140 (1989)
- Alfredo Guzzoni, "Ontologische Differenz und Nichts", Martin Heidegger zum, 70, pp.35~48 (1959), Günther Neske Pfullingen
- David R. Cerbone, "World, World-entry, and Realism in Early Heidegger", pp.279~299, Heidegger Reexamined
- Klaus Held, "Heidegger und das Prinzip der Phänomenologie”, Gethman-Siefert⋅ Pöggeler(hg.), Heidegger und die praktische Philosophie", Frankfurt am Main, pp.111~139 (1988)
- Piotr Hoffman, "Heidegger and the Problem of Idealism", pp.319~327, Heidegger Reexamined
- Ute Guzzoni, "Werden zu sich" (1982), Alber GmbH Freiburg
- Walter Schülz, "Űber den philosophiegeschichtlichen Ort Martin Heideggers", pp.95~139 (1970), Perspektiven zur Deutung seines Werkes
- Walter Schülz, "Der Gott der Neuzeitlichen Metaphysik" (1991), Neske
- William J. Richardson, "Through Phenomenology to Thought" (1963), The Hague