INTRODUCTORY CHAPTER Man, in his existence is always confronted with the question, that is, "to be itself or not itself."1 But then a question is raised, what does it mean to be one's self, how is it, if man is to act as such? Is to be one's self to act in conformance with one's nature, that is, to how one should be, granted by experience and light of natural reason that man knows it is such. But what is this nature? Human nature, that is, when referring to man. Of man's experiences he develops his nature, or is it the other way around, that his nature dictates his experiences. How valid is this nature and/or these experiences? Man knows, his reason can assess which is which, but can reason suffice as an assessment tool? Are there standards that man can look up to and measure himself so as to see if he was himself by virtue of these standards? And if ever there are, how valid are these? Where do they derive? The questions are legion, but it points to one designation, that a question of priority has not been answered: what is man? In fact even, of a question before the question: what is that which makes man be known, that which grants man to be known? The circumstance that the question is asked presuppose that it has not been answered, if so thus answered, it was not adequate. Thus there is an inquiry. The questions will guide the attempt at a discovery. 1 Heidegger, Martin, Being and Time, trans. John Macquarrie & Edward Robinson (Oxford: Basil Blackwell, 1962)33. This will be referred to as Being and Time. 2 Man is a being alongside other beings, that is, of other men and things. This being alongside supposes nearness and being near allows him to inquire into them. Inquiry then supposes knowing, but what is it that man has known. Everyday man is surrounded with things, thus he has grown familiar with them. If so doing, he has known them, and if to know, out of an understanding, there to foster is a relationship that is both good and beneficial. But then looking at the present human situation, of his relationship to the world (that is of things and men) is there such a good and beneficial relationship? Yes, benefits there are, but who benefits, only man. Good? Yes, but only man is in a condition that is good. Even worst still is to consider that there are only some men, that is, others (men) are part of those who are suffering, reduced to be like things used and abused. Thus there is an inquiry. Where have man and his understanding of the things around him strayed to? Did man, in the first place really understood that which he was supposed to be familiar with. Where lies the problem? Statement of the Problem For the German philosopher Martin Heidegger man in the contemporary age is living an inauthentic life. This inauthenticity he accounts for man's misrelating to the world, that is, of things and other men. He sees this misrelating as a threat to man's existence, that if not given immediate attention leading to a resolution, man is to perish together with his history. This inauthenticity that he speaks of is grounded in oblivion, the forgetting of being. But what is being? In its basic linguistic formulation it is understood as that which is, has existence and not nothing. Man is a being and so are things, and in this fundamental structure he can relate, make sense and know. And yet this definition does not capture its essence for it can easily be assigned to anything as long as it is, thus 3 it can be reduced to a mere entity, but being is more than mere existence in space and time. Heidegger understands being to be that which gives significance or meaningful presence to things and men, that they are as they are is because of their being. Man is always attuned to being, of his own being and that of others. He is able to understand because it is being that grants knowing, just as a book is a book or man is a man, it is because being gives to them their designation, so there is a relationship made possible by an encounter between beings, that they be known and understood there is harmonious relationship to develop. This is conditioned by a primordial understanding, of man having not yet forgotten, he understands things and other men unto their being. But everyday man is surrounded with entities, himself being one, and this made him grow familiar with them. This familiarity turned man's attitude towards neglect, for since he thinks that he already knows their being, it no longer becomes a matter of continuously knowing and understanding them, but instead it happens that there is a taking for granted. The familiarity leads man to take beings for granted unto their essence, thus he forgets and no longer knows, worst is, that man does not even know that he no longer knows, that he no longer remembers.2 Man lives in a state of oblivion. He relates to entities as if he understands them in their being, but is not. This lead to man's misrelating to things and other men, he misuses beings and this misuse backfires and threatens him and his existence, man is endangered. But man need not just wait for his destruction, for he can do something to prevent the impending threat and it is through a re-trieve of his original understanding of being. The researcher gives a proposal as to how a retrieve is to be accomplished, and this is through the asking of the fundamental 2 Polt, Richard, Heidegger: An Introduction, (Ithaca, New York: Cornell University Press, 1999)1-2. 4 question, that is, of "Why are there beings at all instead of nothing?"3 To ask the question is an attempt of man to restore his fundamental bearing, to re-orient himself of his original place and relationship in-with the world. Thus in the development of the paper the following objectives are to be met: 1. Man will have to identify the problem of being and have to make it his own, as for the being that he is, that which affects the totality will always have to relate to its parts. 2. Man asks the question. The inquiry into being supposes that man has decided to ask the fundamental question (Why is there something rather than nothing?) and that this is a privileged asking, that is, it comes from a unique relation of man to himself, as a being (Dasein) capable of inquiry into his own being and of others. An asking that is out of his own freedom. 3. The technicality of the language of being, its development throughout the entire exposition, of the terms like Dasein, of the difference between mere entities and Being, will have to be clarified and thoroughly exposed so as to establish a concrete formulation towards a resolution, that is of the meaning of man, authenticity, and their original relation to Being. Significance of the Study Looking at a particular human situation, of his abuse of the environment and its resources, it can be emphasized the importance of man's need for re-trieve of his originary understanding of being. 3 Sheehan, Thomas, "Reading Heidegger's 'What is Metaphysics?'" in The New Yearbook for Phenomenology and Phenomenological Studies I (2001) 185. This will be referred to as Reading. 5 Man is here seen as a mindless consumer who views the environment as a reserve where goods are stocked, waiting and ready for consumption. He challenges the environment to give up everything that she has in order to provide for his needs, even when it is no longer necessary. Because of man's disorientation, that in turn made him selfish; he could not resist his dominating tendencies and just keeps going. These resulted to the natural resources now running dry and that sooner it could no longer provide. Man endangers his world and himself, of this situation he is blind. Global warming and other environmental calamities are resultant of these abuses. If man is to save himself, he must find a way to retrieve his original understanding of being, that is, of himself and others. An effort towards a re-establishing of the fundamental relation must be attempted. Scope and Limitation This study is an attempt to restore man of his original understanding of being via the asking of the fundamental question. With this asking, which is not achieved by merely reading and hearing but really to ask, that is, to participate into that which are brought up by the questioning, is to properly approach the reading of the research. The whole paper is an inquiry into being. This primarily being the core of Heidegger's doing of philosophy, concentration on his exposition and attempt at definition via the fundamental question will be given priority. The topic in discussion will also be localized in order to address a particular social problem, that is, of the environment. As to what may be implied after an understanding of being, that would lead to a resolution. 6 Methodology The researcher recognizes the difficulty of Heidegger's thought in his pursuit of being, and that an attempt to synthesize his work becomes if not impossible a dangerous task as it may be misinterpreted and certain judgments be not justified. The entire work will then anchor on careful analysis and interpretation, to safeguard a way of doing philosophy of a thinker. Careful readings of Heidegger's text and by other various reliable authors are to be appropriated. Analysis is then to follow in the localization of the topic in discussion, where the process is to be guided by observation of events in a macro level. Reading of texts or articles of current events will also be done, so as to assure of an up to date paper that is to address the particular epoch, which is of today. Review of Related Literature An article by Tad Beckman titled "Martin Heidegger and Environmental Ethics"4 talks about the destruction of the environment caused by man's misunderstanding of the essence of technology. Here he elaborates the threat man is facing because of his challenging of the environment to give up its resources through the use of technology which is then clearly not its case. Here he writes of man's poetic relation with the environment where if he is able to restore, a beneficial relationship arises. He also makes the attempt to uncover the essence of technology and makes it clear to the readers what it is really with technology that in its originary sense it is not meant to do or give harm to the person or his environment but instead it develops and promotes life and 4 Beckman, Tad, "Martin Heidegger and Environmental Ethics," (2000), in http:// www2.hmc.edu/~tbeckman/personal/HEIDART. HTML (accessed October 29, 2009). 7 understanding between beings. The author anchors his report on Heidegger's celebrated essay entitled "The Question Concerning Technology,"5 where he gives a clear exposition of its content. Another article is Damon A. Young's "Not Easy Being Green: Process, Poetry and the Tyranny of Distance."6 Here he gives the facts and presents the many places that must be saved from destruction, and the sad reality that these places are too distant for man. The distance, he mentions does not allow man to authentically speak of their being, and if man cannot speak of their being, of what is, it would be very difficult to address the problem as it would turn out to be a mere pondering upon of that which is not really the case and just imagined, therefore relying in mere theorizing. This would hurt the attempt to restore man's original understanding, for how can man understand if he is too far from that which he attempts to understand. Thus, he suggests that these distances be overcome with Whiteheadian process metaphysics, and of poetics as understood in the Heideggerian sense, and as developed in a concrete community life.7 Young anchors his presentation by concentrating on the human condition and he builds support from a careful reading of numerous texts on philosophers of language and metaphysics, all which have contributed to making sense of things in relation to the environment. 5 Heidegger, Martin, "The Question Concerning Technology" in Basic Writings from Being and Time (1927) to the Task of Thinking (1964), ed. by David Farrell Krell (U.S.A.: Harper San Francisco, 1977). This will be referred to as The Question. 6 Young, Damon, "Not Easy Being Green: Process Philosophy, Poetry and the Tyranny of Distance," in Ethics, Place and Environment, 5:3(2002):189-204. 7 Ibid., 189. 8 CHAPTER 1 MAN AND HIS BEING-SITUATION Prologue to an Inquiry into Being The German philosopher Martin Heidegger, in his published lecture entitled "An Introduction to Metaphysics"8 wrote: ...it is in the very nature of philosophy never to make things easier but only more difficult....it is the authentic function of philosophy to challenge historical being-there and hence in the last analysis, being pure and simple.9 These are the thoughts that run in Heidegger's doing of philosophy. He speaks of a difficulty, grounded in philosophy's nature and functions to challenge man and his attempt to understand himself and the things around him. Man, endowed with his capacity to think, asks many questions in his lifetime and these questions he attempts to answer. Man makes the effort to find out that which will satisfy his need to know. This is a human peculiarity, and in this quest man employs different methods to attain that he wants to achieve, of a knowing of the things and of other men. One of the methods that he employs in this wanting to know is philosophy. Philosophy like a tool is utilized to facilitate the operations of his act. Results are expected in the process. But is philosophy really such a tool? This paper will have to deal with philosophy. In formulating the problem of the research and exposing the arguments towards a resolution, philosophical methods 8 Heidegger, Martin, An Introduction to Metaphysics, trans. and with an intro. by Ralph Manheim (New Haven: Yale University Press, 1959). This work will be referred to as Introduction. 9 Ibid., 11. 9 and techniques are to be employed so that there be results. But the question arises: what is philosophy? And what right does it have to become the ground of the research, that it be philosophical? First, that which is spoken of, philosophy, will have to be understood in terms of generality, that is, where all its branches and systems meet (particular to this research are metaphysics and phenomenology). Now, it is to be made clear, and as Heidegger would write that all that can be said of philosophy is what it cannot be and what it cannot accomplish.10 Thus, it has first to be developed the ground where the research is to be laid upon, to present a foundation, which is of doing philosophy with an understanding of it, or better yet, of which it is not. Heidegger writes of three things that can be said of philosophy, of which it cannot be. First, "All essential philosophical questioning is necessarily untimely."11 A particular doing of philosophy, though usually understood as being done so as to address a particular epoch, is not really its case, as it is intended to address that which is of the future or that it is to connect with its past. It is always either projected or retraced. Its actualization does not settle in the present, questions are always moving back and forth. It does not stop. It only develops. Thus, it cannot be adjusted in the present but it compels the present to be adjusted. Second, since philosophy is untimely, that it does not settle, "it is one of those few things that can never find an immediate echo in the present."12 A philosophy is never popular in its present, it does not show. A doing of philosophy is always in the process of thinking, drawing from its past, projecting into the future. It is not a quick fix to any problem in the present. A philosophy does not become"...fashionable, either it is no real 10 Heidegger, Introduction, 9. 11 Ibid., 8. 12 Ibid. 10 philosophy or it has been misinterpreted and misused for ephemeral or extraneous purposes."13 But if philosophy is designated as such, is it then that philosophy becomes useless and being a thinking process it remains just in the level of theory? The third point presents an argument against this way of looking into philosophy as useless and being purely theoretical. Heidegger would write, "... philosophy cannot be directly learned like manual and technical skills; it cannot be directly applied or judged by its usefulness in the manner of economic or other professional knowledge."14 He would stress that what is useless is a force. If philosophy does not appeal to the present and gives an appearance of being expendable this is because there is no way of determining its task and what must be expected of it. The developments of philosophy have in its every stage its own laws.15 Philosophy is untimely. "What is untimely will have its own times."16 Thus there is no basis for a saying of philosophy as useful or not, only in man's historical development that he will have to wait hoping that he may know. Question: What weight is there in an elaboration of philosophy, of what it is not? It is to safeguard the exposition that is to follow. The exposition will be philosophical; it will be useless in the sense of philosophy having not been understood unto its essence. Here runs the danger to thought, that what is understood as useless is to be disregarded since nothing can be done with it. But Heidegger would write: It is only wrong to suppose that this is the last word on philosophy. For the rejoinder imposes: granted that we cannot do anything with philosophy, might not philosophy, if we concern ourselves with it, do something with us?17 13 Heidegger, Introduction, 8. 14 Ibid. 15 Ibid. 16 Ibid. 17 Ibid., 12. 11 This paper will first have to address this, so as to prevent the impending threat. Readability taken in the sense of popularity and usefulness will have to be dismissed so as to open the possibility of thought and that thinking takes place. Difficulty in Heidegger's way of doing of philosophy will always discourage the uninitiated reader, and this leads to minimizing that which he does not understand as useless, for it has been said that ignorance breeds contempt. Difficulty is a demand of philosophy, and that which is difficult, in order for it to be overcame requires one to be great, that is to do great. And this is always a challenge. Here lies the power of human possibility. This paper is an invitation to philosophy, that is, to philosophize. The Difficult Nature of Elucidating What Philosophy is But what is to philosophize? How is man to philosophize? Heidegger writes that it can only be elucidated what philosophy is not. If to philosophize is to have an understanding of philosophy, and one's actions are grounded in this understanding, if here elucidated is what philosophy is not, does it not imply that man acts in the understanding of this negation? It can be said, maybe. But if man does philosophize by virtue of what philosophizing is not, could it be that what he does be then a basis for answering the question of what philosophy is? To act in an understanding of what philosophy is not is to act in a way opposite of what is thus presented and with these lay the foundation for such a definition, that philosophy is. But what does this presuppose? Man acts in a way opposite of what he understands philosophy to be what it is not, but what it is not demands an understanding of what is, that it need have an object examined beforehand in order for it to be said that it is not rather than it is. Thus it can be said that 12 philosophy has an object, and in the manner of the discussion, philosophy is the object, of what it is. Philosophy is, it can vaguely be said. That something as something can be examined in many different ways, in ways that it be scientific, historic, linguistic, can something like philosophy be examined by these? That they determine whence and what is philosophy, will it suffice? That they are able to say what philosophy is does it give them the final word? Every pursuit has an object pursued, and that which it pursues becomes totally its own, but in a manner that it is to be designated as such in accordance with the process of pursuing, that what is pursued by science becomes scientific, of history becomes historic, that of language becomes linguistic, and that of philosophy it can be said either of these and/or other methods of inquiry. But can philosophy be examined philosophically? That what is known of a person is not known better by the person himself, can it be that a knowing of philosophy stems from philosophy itself that it reveals itself so that it be known. But how is this to be done? To examine philosophy philosophically as to what it is demands that an understanding of philosophy be known in advance so as to proceed with the inquiry, but what is given is what it is not, and it has been established that this is the only thing that can be said about it and to determine what it is be a difficult task. "Anyone can easily see that we are moving in a circle."18 Heidegger makes this point in his lecture on the origin of the work of art. Similar is the problem encountered by 18 Heidegger, Martin, Poetry, Language, Thought, trans. Albert Hofstadter (New York: Harper & Row, 1971)18. This will be referred to as Poetry.