Sarah Oliver
Presentation
Heidegger
April 19, 2012
In Lecture I of Part II, Heidegger points out that asking the question of “What is called thinking” can be incredibly diverse and complicated because there is not just one explanation for the question, although at a glance it seems pretty simple to explain. He stresses four ways in which the question can be posed. The first way asks what is designated by the word “thinking,” the second asks what logic has to do with thought, the third asks what the prerequisites are for thinking, and the final question is what actually commands and provokes us to think? It seems that thinking is like baking a cake for Heidegger, no ingredient is more important than the other, just like no question
…show more content…
When the question: “What is called thinking?” is reconsidered in Heidegger terms, it might better be read as asking, “What is it that invites or instructs or directs us into thinking?” or in Heidegger’s own words, “What is it that appeals to us to think?” By asking this question, the thinker becomes the object of the action, the one who is invited into thinking and the action is less about defining what thinking is than in discovering how it is that the pathway into thinking is opened for us.
In Lecture II, Heidegger focuses his attention on the word thinking and what is considered thought provoking. Thinking is a telling and speaking of language. Literature is often used as a medium for both science and poetry and for that reason there is some confusion between what is actually thought provoking. The three should be separated. There is science, there is thought, and there is poetry and the difference between poetry and science is that poetic work is a work of our language much like thinking is, although thinking does not make poetry. Thought and poesy are related because they never just use language as a means of expression, they are the actual makers of language and the final speech.
We view science as thinking because we are immersed in it throughout our everyday lives. Car companies are trying to make cars more efficient and doctors are trying to figure out how to cure cancer. We are
…the scientific method, whether applied to management or astronomy, is merely a model built out of thought-just as thoughts themselves are models built out of consciousness, suggesting how we should act as they carry us forward into the future on the
In the video, Successful Thinking, Heather Collins states that the three questions about thinking are “What did you learn? How do I know? What is the rest of the story?” (Collins) While asking yourself what you learned, you become aware of your
Within the article titled “The Mistrust of Science” by Atul Gawande, the article is a written document of an address at the California Institute of Technology and describes the connection of science to every single human on Earth. This is done because the presenter defines science as “a systematic way of thinking” since science allows humans to contemplate beyond the information being given to them at any time, such as the questions may follow of how, when, where, why, and how? The presenter states the opinion that, no matter what major you are declared as or the type of occupation you hold, science is embedded into the way you are living, despite you not having any knowledge of certain science topics.
To understand the connection between the occasion for Heidegger’s speech and its content, the setting needs to be clarified. Heidegger’s speech takes place during a memorial of the 175th birthday of famous
1.“You could tell right away that Alex was intelligent,” Wester-berg reflects, draining his third drink. “He read a lot. Used a lot of big words. I think maybe part of what got him into trouble was that he did too much thinking. Sometimes he tried too hard to make sense of the world, to figure out why people were bad to each other so often. A couple of times I tried to tell him it was a mistake to get too deep into that kind of stuff, but Alex got stuck on things. He always had to know the absolute right answer before he could go on to the next thing.” (Krakauer ch3, pg 18)
The first point of contention is found at this point of Descartes’ exposition. How does Descartes know he is a thinking thing? There are three ways to analyze this question; let us first examine Descartes’ method. Descartes defines a thinking thing as a "thing that doubts, affirms, denies, understands a few things, is ignorant of many things, wills, refrains from willing,
The distinction Heidegger proposed in Being and Time (4) between several senses of "being" became the starting point of existential phenomenology, and the subsequent work of Sartre and deBeauvoir, on which I will draw in a moment, derives important ideas from it.
“The relationship between the energies of the inquiring mind that an intelligent reader brings to the poem and the poem’s refusal to yield a single comprehensive interpretation enacts vividly the everlasting intercourse between the human mind, with its instinct to organise and harmonise, and the baffling powers of the universe about it.”
Aristotle and Heidegger have conflicting views on what a human or beings are. Although, there are some similarities to each of their set of ideas. Aristotle has a clear hierarchical framework classifying the differences between humans, animals, and plants. Heidegger opposes this strict definitions by discussing this idea of “Dasein” which states of being there. Although, their approaches to this topic are different with the types of question one asks and how they theorize about what is a being. There is key similarities that they discuss almost two thousand years apart. Aristotle and Heidegger are two philosophers that have tackled the enormous question, what is it to be a being? This paper discusses the two different approaches to defining this long standing question.
The National Curriculum for Science (2013), anticipates to advance all pupils’ scientific knowledge and conceptualise understanding through the segmented scientific approaches; biology, chemistry and physics. In addition, pupils should have an awareness of the nature, processes and approaches used within science, through the various scientific enquires that enable pupils to answer questions related to the world and life. Finally, the aims of the science curriculum also consider that children must have the resources to fund the knowledge that is necessary to use science in the, present and future tense states the Department of Education (2013).
As people, we come with earlier knowledge and understandings on subjects and topics of study, “Science” being one of them. We make presumptions, based on either reasonable evidence or that our thoughts and ideas are known as true by others. Through this we have come to understand and define science as its aims, leaving its definition, whether consciously or unconsciously, unchallenged. We have taken advantage of the label that we have set for science, as well as its goals, and failed to look at them further.
The nature and process of science are a collection of things, ideas, and guidelines. “The purpose of science is to learn about and understand our universe more completely” (Science works in specific ways, 3). Science works with evidence from our world. If it doesn’t come from the natural world, it isn’t science. You need to be creative and have flexible thoughts and ideas if you want to be a scientist. Science always brings up new ideas and theories and if you aren’t flexible to those ideas you can’t be a scientist. Science has been in our world for a long time. It is deep into our history and our cultures. The principals of science; are all about understanding our world using the evidence we collect. If we can’t collect evidence on something we simply cannot understand it. If we don’t understanding something about our world, science says that we can learn about it by collecting evidence (Science has principals, 4). Science is a process; it takes time. You don’t immediately come to a conclusion for your hypothesis a few minutes
It is human nature to question our reality in an attempt to better understand our surroundings. Science, for me, is the devotion to better understand the world we live in, rooted in the natural and inevitable questions that all humans ask themselves. I believe that by answering the most fundamental questions, the potential technological advancements are much greater than that generated by applied engineering. Nowadays we can thank Einstein 's theory of relativity for
Science has and always will play a constant important role in my daily life, maybe more so than others. Science for me has not always been my strong subject in school and I very easily tend to get intimidated. But when I look at my daily life and realize how much science plays a role in it, I cannot help but smile. Science is not at all bad, it has allowed me to do many things every day, even if I do not take the time to stop and think about it, it is there. From the way the microwave heats up the water for my coffee every morning or the way my body digests the food I eat every meal and makes
Science is an important part of our every day lives. We wake up each morning because we hear the ringing of our alarm clocks and turn on our faucets to wash our faces with warm water. We turn on the lights in our rooms to see our clothes and get dressed and we put our breakfast in the toaster and sip coffee from our mugs. All these things we do in the short time we are rushing to get ready for work or school, are due to the advancement of science and technology.