Fall 1999 Paper Topics (Paper #1), First Set
Choose one historically significant person or work of art, and argue that it counts as an articulating (either glamorizing or renewing) or as a reconfiguring instance of 'truth setting itself to work', according to Professor Dreyfus's uses of those terms. Be sure to discuss how you think Heidegger would use these terms, with specific textual support. Also, be sure to consider the other possibility (articulator or reconfigurer) of this person or work of art.
Heidegger claims (OWA, p. 42) that
"The all-governing expanse of this open relational context is the world of this historical people."
Why is it important, given Heidegger's understanding of 'world', that the Open be 'all-governing'? Are there limits or degrees to which an Open can (or needs to) be 'all-governing'?
Professor Dreyfus claimed (8/31) that the 'worldly' element of truth strives to become "clear, consistent, and complete". Is this true of the worldly element in general, or merely of it as it happens in an Enlightenment understanding of being? How else might (or has) the worldly element manifest itself? _That is, how might (or does) the struggle between earth and world set up different styles ('rift-designs') in different epochs in the history of the truth of being?
Contrast the traditional metaphysical and Heideggarian understandings of 'essence'. Why, according to him, is the traditional metaphysical understanding of 'essence' inadequate? Why would metaphysicians be drawn to such a view? What understanding does Heidegger advocate in its place? Why does he think this is an improvement? (Hard topic)
If Heideggerian thinking doesn't make any practical difference, why is it worth doing? That is, what good is what Heidegger calls 'sovereign knowledge' (BQP, p. 5)? Is this the wrong question to ask?
What does Heidegger mean when he says that aletheia was experienced by the early Greeks but not interrogated by them? Why is this a natural (not a stupid) oversight? On the basis of what you have read thus far, what important consequences might Heidegger think this oversight has for the history of the West?
According to Heidegger, the artist is neither a genius nor a pure receiver: for instance, Heidegger claims both that "the truth that discloses itself in the work cannot be derived from what went before" and also that it is not "an arbitrary demand" (OWA, p. 75). What role does Heidegger think the artist plays in the creation of art? How does Heidegger avoid these two extreme views?
Do a careful exegesis of the two full paragraphs on page 53 of Origin of the Work of Art.
NOTE: You are encouraged to write on a topic of your own, but before you begin, you must have Liz's or Forrest's approval.
Length: 8 pages (2250 words)
Due: Friday, October 8th, 1999, in the Howison Library by 4 p.m. One grade increment (for example, A to A-) will be taken off for papers that are handed in by Tuesday in class, and a full grade will be taken off for each class after that.
Suggestions:
Raise specific questions, and answer them as specifically as possible.
Support your arguments with details from the text.
Avoid jargon, such as "metaphysics of presence," "nihilism," and so forth. In using words such as "beingness" and "world," be sure to make clear Heidegger's sense of the term.
Avoid merely repeating what was said in lectures or sections.
Develop your arguments, wherever possible, with attention to the phenomena that the author is working with.
IMPORTANT: Keep a hard or soft copy of your essay.
Go to:Bert Dreyfus Home | Home | Syllabus | Discussion Sections | Contacts | Newsgroup | Previous lectures | Paper Topics | Liz's Page
University of California at Berkeley • Philosophy Department
Last updated on 9/21/99