Heidegger Martin is a philosopher who, like Archimedes, turned the entire philosophy of the twentieth century upside down. You can understand him or not, treat him positively or negatively, but his influence on modern culture, especially linguistic culture, cannot be compared with any other thinker of the twentieth century. His areas of activity are phenomenology and hermeneutics. It was these areas that became the subject of research by later philosophers, his followers or opponents. Heidegger also carried out the so-called language revolution. He is considered the founder of linguistic philosophy along with Ludwig Wittgenstein. Martin Heidegger, whose philosophy and biography will be the topic of this article, is also the author of the doctrine of all-encompassing Being and the creator of German existentialism.

Early biography

The hero of our essay was born back in the nineteenth century, on the territory of the then German Empire, in the Grand Duchy of Baden (Upper Swabia). This happened on September 26, 1889, in the town of Meskirch, which is located south of Stuttgart. Heidegger Martin was born into a rather modest family. His parents belonged to the Catholic faith. His father, Friedrich, was a craftsman, and his mother, Johanna, was a peasant woman who owned a small plot of land. The family did not have the opportunity to give their son a full education, and he was sent to a boarding school in Konstanz with church money. His upbringing was greatly influenced by the Catholic theologian Konrad Graeber. Young Martin became so religious that he entered a Jesuit college, and even wanted to take monastic vows at first. But then it turned out that the young man had problems with his heart, and he abandoned his church career. However, in 1909 he entered the theological faculty of the University of Freiburg. Two years of study completely turned the young man’s life around, and he realized his calling. In 1911 he transferred to study at the Faculty of Philosophy. Four years later, he finishes it, having defended not one, but two dissertations - on judgment in psychologism and on the teachings of Duns Scotus. His attitude towards the church also changes. If, upon entering the university, Heidegger Martin wrote enthusiastic Catholic poetry, then by 1915 he actually broke with the church, declaring that from now on he had entered the path of thinking.

Independent life

Of course, such a turn was not easy for the future philosopher. The church stopped funding his education. Heidegger Martin experienced hunger and poverty. It was then that he realized what a “borderline situation” was like for a little man who had encroached on “the plans and secrets of the great.” He does everything to get a government scholarship. Begins to study natural sciences, especially physics and the new theory of relativity at that time. New areas of knowledge open up for the student. He is immediately fascinated by the problem of time. But his patron also turns out to be a Catholic, who demands, in exchange for payment of a scholarship, obedience and work on the specified topic - to study the teachings of Thomas Aquinas and remain within the boundaries of theology. But when in 1915 Martin Heidegger, whose philosophy had already begun to take shape, was enrolled as a privatdozent at the faculty, he thought that he could finally take up own research. But the First World War was in full swing.

Start of teaching activity

The philosopher was drafted into the army, but due to neurasthenia and heart disease, he was assigned to censor letters. It was unpleasant for him to do this, but it still left time for his favorite activities. Heidegger Martin began to read Nietzsche, who had been his idol since his youth, Dostoevsky, and Rilke. Genderlin became his idol. And the study of Fichte and Hegel helped him structure his thinking. As he admitted in his early autobiography, the lectures of Dilthey and Rilke helped him overcome the dislike of history that he had developed as a result of his interest in mathematics and the natural sciences. He became interested in the philosophy of the Middle Ages, and especially scholasticism, considering that the latter formulated the methodology of scientific evidence. Heidegger's teacher was Edmund Husserl, who appeared at the University of Freiburg. In 1916, Martin gave a course of lectures on analytical philosophy. They were written not without the influence of Husserl. He also begins to write sarcastic articles against the clerics. These traits - forced conformism, which later turned into violent attacks on those who subjected him to humiliation - were then preserved by the thinker for the rest of his life.

Marriage and friendship with Husserl

Heidegger's marriage also causes alienation from Catholicism. He married the Lutheran Elfriede Petri, the daughter of a Prussian officer, who had previously been his student. The wife immediately considered her husband a genius and always helped him in his work, playing the role of secretary. True, Martin was forced to constantly convince his family and loved ones that Elfrida was about to convert to Catholicism. In 1919 and 1920, they had two sons - Georg and Hermann. To earn money, Martin Heidegger, whose basic ideas were just beginning to crystallize, lectures for theology students. But they consider him abstruse and do not understand, but young people from secular faculties come to see him with pleasure. The philosopher is increasingly interested in phenomenology. He begins a personal correspondence with Husserl and conquers the master with his charm. Their friendship lasted more than ten years, serving as great support for the young philosopher. Heidegger becomes an assistant to Husserl, who teaches a course in phenomenology in Karlsruhe. Its mission is to introduce students to the discipline. But already from the introductory lectures it is clear that he begins to comprehend phenomenology in his own way.

Professor

At this time he was already formally breaking with the church. Heidegger's wife refuses to baptize the child according to the Catholic rite. He writes a letter to his former curator Krebs. There he openly declares that his research led him to reject the Catholic system, but Christianity and metaphysics gained him new meaning. At this time, the University of Marburg is looking for a candidate for the position of extraordinary professor. Husserl gives him a positive recommendation. His financial situation is strengthening, but the small town itself, where the philosopher is forced to move, irritates him. He settles in rural areas Todnauberg, in a mountain chalet. Martin Heidegger's brilliant ideas begin to emerge here. Walks in the forest, clean air, trips to Heidelberg and new friendship with Karl Jaspers support his spirit. But he cannot get the position of a full professor, and his relations with his colleagues, with the exception of the Protestant theologian Bultmann, are very bad. During this period of 1925-1927 he writes “Being and Time.”

Martin Heidegger as a rising star. Reflections on Man and Mortality

This work has become a classic for the philosopher. He considers a special type of being or “dasein”. In this way he interpreted the Husserlian category of transcendental subjectivity. We are talking about a person, that is, about a being with consciousness and finitude. But the philosopher claims more. Through the category of “design” he longs to comprehend the meaning of existence in general. After all, it is man who is the starting point for such an understanding. It represents being-in-the-world. Its main characteristic is its mood. This is a specific feature of human “here-being”, which has an existential structure. After all, the meaning of our relationship to the world is not in contemplation, but in emotional and practical understanding. This is the only way to achieve what Husserl calls “contemplation of phenomena.” Heidegger calls this state “pre-understanding.” It is reflected in the very structure of language. The philosopher calls the method of human existence existence, which tries to ask what it is and how it exists. This is how people reveal their abandonment in the world. They are aware of the phenomenon of death. And this, in turn, leads to an understanding of “real” time, that is, finite for the “I”. We are talking about those periods of life when a person does not passively wait, but does something. Therefore, the history that records such acts is itself genuine time. When the work was published, and Husserl saw that “Being and Time” contained not the development of his phenomenology, but the original existentialism of Martin Heidegger, he was offended by the author, and a cooling occurred between friends.

Freiburg period

After the publication of Being and Time, Heidegger experienced triumph. In 1928, Husserl resigned and Martin took his place. This time he does not have to fight with competitors - in the eyes of the public he is a worthy successor to the teacher. A year later he reads his professorial speech. Later, a separate work on this topic will be published, for which Martin Heidegger also became famous, “What is Metaphysics.” After all, the attitude towards this area of ​​philosophy in European thought in the twenties and thirties of the last century was very critical. Heidegger also perceived it in two ways. On the one hand, traditional metaphysics is outdated and needs to be “overcome.” On the other hand, it is the basis of all European culture. After all, it represents a way out of existence. If we combine metaphysics and “design”, we will get an understanding of being as a whole. These are the roots of all philosophy, as Descartes suggested. The calling of any metaphysics is to open, to “highlight” being and its secrets. Time helps to reveal beings in their finitude. And metaphysics is to reveal it in the light of being.

Nazi period

Martin Heidegger (we will talk briefly about his relationship with Nazism below) in the 30s was considered one of the greatest minds of our time.

One of the darkest points in the philosopher’s biography is his membership in the NSDAP. French sociologist Paul Bourdieu even wrote a book about this, “The Political Ontology of Martin Heidegger.” There he assures that even in the most abstract texts of the thinker of the thirties, his sympathy for National Socialism can already be traced. But this approach is subject to reasonable criticism. Many biographers of the philosopher believe that working among students inspired by national ideas, he did not particularly read either Mein Kampf or other writings of similar politicians. He took more into account the sentiments of young people and thus became involved in Hitler's organizations. He even hoped that the Nazi Party would be able to reform universities. In 1933, Heidegger was elected rector of the University of Freiburg. For this reason, he joins Hitler’s party, and in his “speech from the throne” one can trace theses about labor service and the service of students for the sake of the greatness of the state. But this is not all that the new curators demand from him. Now he must take a strong anti-Semitic stance. This is too much for Heidegger. In addition, he begins to be burdened by dependence on state ideology. He is surrounded by “colleagues” who are ready to do anything for the sake of their career. Two years later, the philosopher loses the post of rector and “goes into the shadows.” During the entire time he held an administrative position, he was unable to write a single line. Everything was spent on officialdom and fuss. And now Heidegger saves himself by philosophizing and studying cultural history. Of course, he remains a member of the party because he does not want to give up his life. This continues until 1945.

Condemnation, loneliness and support from friends

At the end of the war, Freiburg was occupied by French occupation forces. A special commission for denazification is created. A special case is being opened against Heidegger. He is accused of supporting Hitler in 1933-34. The commission removes Heidegger from teaching and prohibits him from lecturing in Germany. The philosopher himself, in one of his letters to Hannah Arendt, called this process “inquisitorial.” This woman herself, also a former student of Heidegger, as well as his lover, was Jewish by origin. As a victim of the Nazi regime, she explored the problem of totalitarianism in her books. But she was outraged by this attitude towards the brilliant philosopher and came to his defense. At the end of the forties, the thinker’s student Hans-Georg Gadamer also joined this campaign. He reminds the whole world who Martin Heidegger is. The philosopher's books are beginning to be published again, especially on his anniversary. And a new generation of young scientists and writers admires him again. Then the Faculty of Philosophy of the University of Freiburg poses to the university senate the question of how a mind that can be put on a par with Hegel and Dilthey is removed from teaching. So the thinker reappears in classrooms crowded with grateful students.

Martin Heidegger, philosophy. Briefly about the post-war period of creativity

Despite all the political crises, the thinker did not waste time. Work was the best medicine for him. But the experience was not in vain for him. Many biographers believe that after the war, a kind of revolution took place with the philosopher. He focused on the study and description of Being, but not only “in time,” but as a category distinct from “existence.” He began to deny his connection with existentialism. In his lectures, he argued that he was no longer interested in personal existence, but in a certain meaning that allows all things to “be.” He became interested in Kiergegaard and subsequently had a huge influence on Sartre. The category of “nothing,” which in his early works had a positive character, now became frightening for him. He began to think not only about the “silence” of God, but also about His “absence” for humanity.

Man and Being

What was the main thing for such a brilliant philosopher as Martin Heidegger? Being. He first uses the term to describe man's way of being, arguing that it is radically different from other forms of life because humans are aware of themselves and their finitude. But after the war, the philosopher begins to develop other aspects of this problem. Now he writes that a person has a choice. He may prefer real life, realizing his calling. Or he may choose an inauthentic existence, mindlessly adapting to established patterns of behavior. The ontology of Martin Heidegger in the late period lies in the fact that the analysis of “dasein” became with him the way to understand being as such. The method for this is phenomenology. That is, first we record and describe the experience of life as it is, without superimposing on it unnecessary concepts that only confuse everything. A person exists in an infinite number of ways - he does something, produces, studies, creates. But at the same time, he can become a mindless object, used and manipulated by others. It is not just banal, it is likened to a thing. Such a person is deprived of his “I”, reliability, authenticity. It’s as if he really “doesn’t exist.”

Heidegger and Nietzsche

The early Heidegger practically associated Being as essence and Nothing. A person feels emptiness, and this gives rise to fear and anxiety in him. This becomes the main meaning of his “design”. There is no support, only horror remains, in which Nothingness is revealed. Human life is the impossibility of breaking out of oblivion. After all, any of his aspirations for freedom is, in fact, a leap into Nothing. But the late philosopher argues differently. In his book “Nietzsche and the Void,” Martin Heidegger tries to explain the causes of the cultural crisis in Western Europe, consider Christianity as a phenomenon of the church, the institution of power and the state, and understand what nihilism is. Here he also reflects on Nietzsche's famous saying, “God is dead.” The cause of the humanitarian crisis is the loss of basic values, and, consequently, the disappearance of the highest purpose of existence. But didn’t axiology itself destroy these concepts, which absolutized them and turned them into something dead? What else could Nietzsche have done other than reject everything old and become a nihilist? However, along with this approach, the connection with the highest is lost, and a person is deprived of the opportunity to “question about being.” There is nothing left except the “will to power”, because this is the only goal that comes from nihilism and replaces everything else. Therefore, the consciousness of modern man is alienated from Being and has submitted to time, that is, to the path to death. This began since the time of Socrates, when man began to search for the objective meaning of the world. Western European philosophy began to confuse Being and existence. And in the era of modern times, the dominance of science, technology, the “death of God” and the “unauthenticity of life” everything only got worse. In Nietzsche and the Void, Martin Heidegger develops many of the ideas from his article “Letter on Humanism.” This term has deteriorated. Language has ceased to be the “house of Being”, and many terms have turned into ideologically compromised templates. Therefore, the point is not that God is dead, but that he denies us His presence.

Ontology

Martin Heidegger, whose books gained their former popularity in the sixties of the twentieth century, uses the structures of human consciousness, or, as he puts it, “existentials,” for real thinking aimed at the totality of Being. Unlike other “objects of existence,” people are associated with transcendence. Man has forgotten the truths of Existence. Therefore, the concern of modern culture should be the desire to lead people to “sacredness”. The fate of our existence is determined by language, and therefore it is more likely that it speaks to us than we speak to them. Why? Yes, because language contains the primordial phenomenon of “understanding” and “interpretation”. It is a way of contacting authentic Being, a breakthrough to “true living and thinking.” Understanding itself must have the structure of a circle, which Heidegger called hermeneutic. It will make it possible not to master Being, but to comprehend its depths, to discover its essence, and not the structure of the world. Humanity itself is the only method of correctly understanding ourselves. It makes us an “understanding being.”

Recent years

Even for many scientists and philosophers, reading such an original thinker as Martin Heidegger was too difficult. His books are written in complex, sometimes bizarre language, which, for example, seemed “unbearable” to Berdyaev. He invented new words and their combinations, as if “encrypting” his works for a select few. But at one time Hegel was criticized for the same thing, and Heidegger’s style is characterized by both special expressiveness and literary form. Despite such elitism, the philosopher had enormous popularity. The most famous mind of the twentieth century is, without a doubt, Martin Heidegger. His quotes are still an example of philosophical thinking and acute perception of reality. Especially the message that he left us in the last years of his life: “Man is not the master of existence. This is the shepherd of Genesis." Heidegger died in May 1976 and was buried in his hometown.

At the same time as K. Jaspers, another outstanding German existentialist philosopher, M. Heidegger (1889 - 1976), lived and worked. Having discovered his talent early, he, the son of a humble artisan, thanks to religious mentors, had the opportunity to study and graduate from a Catholic university. Already as a student, Heidegger began to publish his first works. In the beginning it was poetry short notes and laudatory reviews that appeared primarily in the Catholic press.

Here is an indicative excerpt from one such review. It talks about the little-known Danish writer I. Jorgensen, who acted as a supporter and propagandist of the teachings of Charles Darwin, but then “converted” to a devout Catholic.

“Nowadays,” wrote M. Heidegger, “they talk a lot about “personality.” And philosophy is finding new value concepts. Along with critical, moral, aesthetic ones, they operate, at least in literature, also with “personal values.” The personality of the artist comes to the fore. You hear a lot about interesting people: Dandy O. Wilde, the brilliant drunkard P. Verlaine, the great tramp M. Gorky, the superman Nietzsche - these are the most interesting people. And if one of them realizes in the descending hour of grace. the great lie of his gypsy life, smashes the altar of false gods and becomes a Christian, then he is called “vulgar,” “disgusting.”

A talented student is interested in philosophy. It is significant that already in Heidegger’s first philosophical publications the theme of the little man, humiliated and insulted, lost in big world. In other words, M. Heidegger, in search of his own path in philosophy, initially reveals a craving for an existentialist perception of the world. Ultimately, he approaches it, breaking (telling moment!) with Catholicism.

It can be said without exaggeration that Heidegger was the true founder of German existentialism.

In 1927, the philosopher’s main book, “Being and Time,” was published, which soon became widely known not only in Germany, but also in other European countries. Its appearance marked the emergence of a new direction and the identification of its specific program.

The leitmotif of "Being and Time" follows from the statement of the deep inner tragedy of "questioning about being." According to Heidegger, it can be easily detected in any era, but it resounds with new and special force in our age. Indeed. Which honest thinker today could deny the tragedy of human existence, which not only has not been removed, but has also been aggravated? Which of them did not stop before the enormous difficulty of finding and offering a way out? If there were proposals, didn’t they turn out, upon closer examination, to be only an illusion in best case scenario?

In “Being and Time,” Heidegger defines his method—phenomenological (phenomenon—from the Greek “that which reveals itself,” “self-revealing,” “open,” “revealing itself in itself”)—as hermeneutic phenomenology. The definition of phenomenology as hermeneutics was a kind of attempt at “listening contemplation,” that is, contemplation of what is heard in the word, in the language. This philosophical method is much closer to the artistic way of viewing the world than to the scientific one. Heidegger constantly emphasizes that scientific thinking, going from the phenomenon to the essence hidden behind it, differs from the philosophical, which considers truth as “openness”, “unhiddenness” of being, that is, phenomenologically. If traditional rationalist philosophy saw the criterion of the truth of thinking in the evidence of the conceivable, then Heidegger insists that true thinking is not guided by the principle of evidence.

If traditional rationalist philosophy is characterized by an understanding of thinking as seeing, then Heidegger defines thinking as “listening”, “listening”. It is no coincidence that the subject of study of the late Heidegger becomes mainly poetry.

The main idea of ​​the philosopher's hermeneutic phenomenology is the thought of human existence as the starting point for understanding all things. This idea is developed in the doctrine of “human existence.”

Heidegger calls the concepts by which the structure of human existence is described “existentials,” thereby distinguishing them from the “categories” with the help of which more traditional philosophy, starting with Aristotle, described being. They are called “existentials” because Heidegger sees the “essence” of human existence in “existence.”

Heidegger designates the structure of human existence in its integrity as “care.” It represents the unity of three moments: “being-in-the-world”, “running-ahead” and “being-with-in-the-world-existence”.

That is, “care,” according to Heidegger, is a holistic structure that means: “to be-always-already-ahead-of-oneself-in-the-world-as-being-with-in-the-world-existence.”

Upon closer examination, it is revealed that each of the listed moments of care is also a certain mode of time: “being-in-the-world” is the mode of the past, “looking ahead” is the mode of the future, “being-with” is the mode of the present. These three modes, mutually penetrating each other, constitute a single phenomenon of “care”.

Depending on which mode of time comes to the fore, Heidegger distinguishes two modes of human existence: authentic and inauthentic.

According to Heidegger, inauthentic existence is characterized by the following features (preponderance of present moments):

- the “world of things” obscures man’s finitude;

Being is completely absorbed by its environment, objective or social;

Being tends to regard itself as a thing;

A so-called objective view of personality arises;

The phenomenon of averageness arises: the “average”, simple person takes the place of a real person and is accepted as such;

Individuals are completely "interchangeable".

True existence is characterized by:

By the preponderance of future moments;

Direction towards death;

A person’s awareness of his historicity, finitude and freedom;

The fact that existence is achievable only “in the face of death.”

According to Hadegger, a person breaks out of the limits of inauthentic existence by feeling “existential fear.” This fear is not a fear of something specific. “What man fears is being-in-the-world itself,” Heidegger emphasizes; fear is the “basic disposition” of human existence. Fear, fundamentally the fear of death, opens up a new perspective for a person - death. “Being toward death is essentially fear,” writes Heidegger.

Inauthentic existence also entails an inauthentic way of philosophizing. To designate this method, Heidegger uses the concept of metaphysics. This concept occupies a large place in the second period of Heidegger’s philosophical development, when he, by criticizing the metaphysical worldview, thereby shows what being is not.

Metaphysics for Heidegger is not just a philosophical concept or a way of thinking. He interprets metaphysics as the source of all modern European culture and modern way of life. It is metaphysics, according to Heidegger, that is the basis modern science and technology that aims to subjugate the world to man, it is also the basis contemporary art, which made its subject not being, but existence, modern irreligiosity (the deification of the world, the loss of everything “holy and sacred”) and, finally, the basis of the very lifestyle of man, urbanized and “massified”, considering everything that exists as a means for the realization of purely practical purposes and “forgotten existence.”

Metaphysics is a perception of the surrounding world in which any reality appears in the form of an “object” and is perceived as something objective.

The fact that all reality appears for a person in the form of objectivity is, according to Heidegger, the result of a certain relationship of a person to the surrounding nature, other people and himself, namely, the subject-object relationship.

But the subject-object relationship is not the only possible one. It arises in a certain historical - metaphysical era.

The question of overcoming metaphysics for Heidegger is a question of the possibility of returning to the original, but unrealized possibilities of European culture, to return to its cradle - pre-Socratic and pre-Parmenidean Greece, when being had not yet been consigned to oblivion. Such a return, according to Heidegger, is possible because although modernity has “forgotten being,” it still lives in the bosom of this culture. The “abode of being” is language. The modern attitude towards language as a “tool” turns it into a simple “object”. Language becomes technical, becomes a means of transmitting information and thereby finally dies as “speech”, “utterance”, “story”. The death of language is the greatest danger that metaphysics brings with it, since the last thread that connected man with being is lost.

Language, according to Heidegger, continues to live primarily in the works of great poets who listen to the “voice of being.” Therefore, to hear what language says through these “messengers of being” means “to stand in the clearing of the truth of being.”

A number of his articles and reports recent years Heidegger devotes himself to analyzing the works of his favorite poets.

Heidegger does not consider it possible to conduct this analysis in the language of discursive, expressed in concepts, philosophical thinking.

Discursive thinking is the language of metaphysics. And in this language it is impossible to say what being is, since the very essence of metaphysics lies in the inability to think being. Therefore, Heidegger seeks to destroy the conceptual way of thinking, to revive pre-logical, undivided language.

On scientific thinking, not the logic of concepts, but poetic symbols, according to Heidegger, can open access to being.

Speaking about M. Heidegger, they usually remember his “fall,” which began when the philosopher, largely contrary to his thoughts expressed in “Being and Time,” began to flirt with the ideas of the Nazis, believing (another question is how deeply) A. Hitler.

Existentialism and Nazi ideology are far from the same thing. But whether we want to admit it directly or not, they have common ground. What if not a feeling of abandonment and fear in the conditions of a global and deep national crisis, if not generated, then clearly strengthened both?

In the 50s, Heidegger returned to serious research work, deepening and strengthening the previously expressed existentialist ideas. Like K. Jaspers, M. Heidegger is now seriously concerned about technology, which becomes openly hostile to man, tears him away from the earth, and deprives him of his natural roots. Anxiety is growing. In an interview with Der Spiegel magazine (1966), the philosopher notes with alarm: “I don’t know if you were scared - in any case, I was scared when I recently looked at photographs of the Earth taken from the Moon. We don’t even need an atomic bomb, the eradication "We now have only purely technical relations. Where man lives now is no longer the Earth."

Introduction

1 Semantic and philosophical meaning of the category Dasein

2 Dasein in the hermeneutical understanding as a representation of being

1 Existence according to Heidegger

2 Being and man through Dasein

Conclusion

Introduction

Relevance of the research topic. The problem of existence occupies one of the leading places in modern philosophy. Its study allows a person to better understand his essence, interpersonal communication and the transformations that occur in social reality at the end of the 20th - beginning of the 21st century. A person is thrown into the world, he is not rooted in his own foundations, which allows him to unify his individual existence. The tendency of recent decades has been the desire of a person to be like everyone else and not be himself. In this regard, studies that address the issues of the “existing individual”, capable of engaging in genuine communication, within the framework of which he is able to preserve his own selfhood, are promising. Therefore, modern Western philosophy is aimed at finding a way to discover singularity and otherness, which was impossible to achieve with the help of “objective reflection”, but became possible through “subjective reflection”. One of the reasons for the relevance of the problem of existence is its individual practical significance: each of us is a unique and inimitable being with its own place in existence.

As part of the historical and philosophical process, the problem of being was explicitly posed in the 19th century by the Danish thinker, the “father of existentialism” - Søren Kierkegaard, who proposed his own solution. Analyzing the ways of human existence, he mainly talks about the individual alone before God, which took him away from the problems of communication in society. The study of being as a fundamental and indefinable, but all-participating element of the universe was designated as a direction by the founder of existentialism as a philosophical movement - M. Heidegger.

Kierkegaard laid the foundation for such a movement as existentialism (later developed by Heidegger - although Heidegger himself denied belonging to this direction), where there is a problem of personality, choice, the position that a person in any situation is always free; there is no situation where he has no choice; You always have to blame yourself and take full responsibility on yourself.

Martin Heidegger, who borrowed some ideas from Kierkegaard (in particular, the concept of “fear”), created a more schematic concept of death and less correlated with the tenets of faith. Just like Kierkegaard, Heidegger considers the experience of emotions about death as a given and also considers them a constant component of being, which structures being.

Heidegger also replaces religious fear with existential, which acts as the internal state of human existence itself. The inner being of a person does not correspond to the outer; existence is not being.

Heidegger's philosophy offers an original interpretation of the philosophical problems of human existence in the world as a paradigmatic, universal way of reproducing social activity, associated with the permanent possibility of self-constitution of man in culture and society in nature, taking into account the fact that this kind of interpretation is itself becoming an increasingly diverse and multifaceted technique. At the same time, as M. Heidegger proclaimed in “Being and Time,” existential analytics had to break away from the very beginning from the orientation towards the accepted, but ontologically not clarified and fundamentally problematic support offered by the traditional definition of man.

The object of this study is the main work of M. Heidegger - “Being and Time”.

The subject of the study is the processes occurring in Western philosophy in the twentieth century. after the first world war.

The purpose of the work is to analyze philosophical views Heidegger

The purpose of the work involves solving the following problems:

.Identification of the main paths of Heidegger’s ideological quest.

.Definition of the content of Dasien as the main category of Heidegger's philosophy.

.Analysis of the relationship of being in various manifestations Heidegger's philosophy through ideas about existence

.Establishing the ways in which Heidegger influenced Western philosophy.

Heidegger's understanding of the specificity of human existence is not without foundation. Not a single living creature known to us, except humans, is capable of thinking, asking questions about existence as such - about the universe and its integrity, about its place in the world. Here, by the way, one can see a certain difference in the understanding of “existence” by Heidegger and Sartre. Sartre, using this concept, emphasizes individual choice, responsibility, and the search for one’s own Self, although, of course, he connects the world as a whole with existence. In Heidegger, the emphasis is nevertheless shifted to being - for the “questioning” person, being itself is revealed, “illuminates” through everything that people know and do. We just need to recover from the most dangerous disease that has struck modern humanity - “oblivion of being.” People suffering from it, exploiting the riches of nature, “forget” about its integral independent existence, seeing in other people only means, “forget” about the high purpose of human existence. So, the first step of Heidegger’s existentialist ontology is the statement of the “originality” of human existence as being-questioning, being-establishment, as being that “is myself.” The next ontological step that existentialists - Heidegger and others - invite their readers to take is to introduce the concept and theme of being-in-the-world. After all, the essence of human existence, indeed, lies in the fact that it is being-in-the-world, connected with the being of the world. Being-in-the-world, on the one hand, is revealed in Heidegger through the “concerned doing” inherent in a person - and this is reminiscent of German classical philosophy, in particular the concept of “deed-action” in Fichte. Being-in-the-world “illuminates,” according to Heidegger, through “doing,” and “doing” is revealed through “caring.”

Chapter 1. Existentialism and its interpretation in Heidegger’s philosophical system

1 Development of existentialism as an independent direction in Western philosophy

The problem of the essence of man belongs to the category of eternal philosophical problems. Each philosophical movement gives its own answers to this traditional question for philosophy. This is due to the fact that at all times, one or another understanding of the essence of man influences the development of all components of humanitarian knowledge. Psychological, sociological, economic, linguistic and other theories are always based on a certain philosophical approach to the interpretation of the essence of man, and at the same time the development of specific scientific fields knowledge contributes to the further development and multiplication of modifications and ideas about what the essence of man is.

Existentialism, which presented its understanding of the essence of man, an understanding that was largely formed and developed in the process of searching for opportunities to comprehend man, adequate to the subject of research and significantly changed social realities.

Existentialism (from Late Latin existentia - existence) is a movement in European philosophy and literature, based on the affirmation of the value of human existence in a world hostile or indifferent to man and exploring its possibilities in a given coordinate system. This direction is international and very heterogeneous in its specifics, but united in the complex of ideas, which in itself general view can be defined as the tragic humanism of the 20th century.

Existentialism, which arose in the 20s of the 20th century, as one of the options for answering the questions posed by the development of society, over the course of the century has become one of the most influential and widespread, especially in Germany, France and Spanish-speaking countries, philosophical trends, characterized by an increasing diversity of forms of existential philosophizing , perhaps not least related to the social, geographical, ethnic, mental characteristics of the “host countries”. In addition, we can say that the ideas of existentialism are shared not only by representatives of different countries and continents, but also by people of very different ideological orientations: these are atheists (J. Sartre, A. Camus, M. Heidegger, etc.), and representatives of various faiths - Catholic G. Marcel, who tried to reconcile Judaism and Christianity L.I. Shestov, A. Men and M. Buber, Orthodox N.A. Berdyaev.

Existentialism never took shape as an integral doctrine and instead we are dealing with a number of philosophical, literary and moral motives that make up a special intellectual formation called existentialism, and as if for greater persuasiveness, it once again emphasizes that existentialism as a direction of modern thought is not a system of specific philosophical views, but a conglomerate of various philosophical and literary motives, which creates the possibility of different interpretations of its very essence, for the motives are scattered throughout the works of existentialist philosophers.

Existentialists considered Kierkegaard to be their predecessors, and to a lesser extent Dostoevsky, Nietzsche, and Husserl. Existentialists resolutely placed the focus on individual life-sense issues (guilt and responsibility, decisions and choices, a person’s attitude to his calling and to death). Problems of science, morality, and religion interested them primarily in connection with these issues and to a much lesser extent.

They abandon rationalistic, theoretically developed knowledge and discover a desire to listen, to penetrate into the changing historical experiences of a person, a personality existing here and now. This is a kind of criticism of rationalism: rationalism cannot be present for every person. Rationalism also cannot be objective, therefore the most reliable witness to the truth is individual consciousness.

Existence - the main category of the philosophy of existence - can be defined as that being that becomes subjectivity, acquiring the status of the subject of one’s own thoughts and actions. “Becoming subjective” is the highest and most difficult task for a person. Its implementation must take place throughout life, because “to finish our affairs in life before life finishes us ourselves means to not cope with the task at all.” Becoming subjective has the following stages. Firstly, a person needs to separate his own existence from the eventuality. Secondly, to pose the question of what/who I am. Third, make yourself “the point of reference and the governing authority.” This is how the individual comes to a true awareness of his own essence. The whole point of becoming subjectivity lies in its fatality: the reverse path is impossible - from knowing oneself not to become ignorant, from subjectivity not to turn into non-subjectivity, because it is impossible to forget what is consciously understood and put into practice. This awareness of oneself is imperishable, because it is rooted in the very essence of the conscious and is its absolute dimension, and only something transitory can be forgotten.

Between various and very numerous philosophical schools and directions of the 20th century, existentialism is a phenomenon so noticeable that even certain disagreements between its individual representatives, for example, between M. Heidegger and J.-P. Sartre, or the evolution of the views of its specific representatives, or the emergence of variability existentialism in connection with the attempts of M. Heidegger, K. Jaspers, J. P. Sartre, A. Camus to concretize the concepts fundamental to their teaching, in particular, the concept of “existence”, or, for example, the problem of early and late J.-P. .Sartre, in fact, add popularity and influence.

The problem of existence occupies one of the leading places in modern philosophy. Its study allows a person to better understand his essence, interpersonal communication and the transformations that occur in social reality at the end of the 20th - beginning of the 21st century. A person is thrown into the world, he is not rooted in his own foundations, which allows him to unify his individual existence. The tendency of recent decades has been the desire of a person to be like everyone else and not be himself. In this regard, studies that address the issues of the “existing individual”, capable of engaging in genuine communication, within the framework of which he is able to preserve his own selfhood, are promising. Therefore, modern Western philosophy is aimed at finding a way to discover singularity and otherness, which was impossible to achieve with the help of “objective reflection”, but became possible through “subjective reflection”. One of the reasons for the relevance of the problem of existence is its individual practical significance: each of us is a unique and inimitable being with its own place in existence.

The study of being as a fundamental and indefinable, but all-participating element of the universe was designated as a direction by the founder of existentialism as a philosophical movement - M. Heidegger.

The philosophical system of Kierkegaard, and then Heidegger, offers an original interpretation of the philosophical problems of human existence in the world as a paradigmatic, universal way of reproducing social activity, associated with the permanent possibility of self-constitution of man in culture and society in nature, taking into account the fact that such interpretations themselves are becoming more and more diverse and versatile technology. At the same time, as M. Heidegger proclaimed in “Being and Time,” existential analytics had to break away from the very beginning from the orientation towards the accepted, but ontologically not clarified and fundamentally problematic support offered by the traditional definition of man.

The main reason for the emergence of this movement on the forefront of philosophical thought is seen in its close connection, first of all, with the dramatic and tragic events of the last century. Among them are the first and second world wars, revolutionary upheavals in many countries, the scientific and technological revolution, global problems modernity, affecting the vital interests of all humanity and each individual, regardless of the degree of awareness about them.

In its attitude to the interpretation of the human problem in the general that unites them, and in the different that separates them, while keeping it within the boundaries of one philosophical direction, existentialism forms an attractive unity with many seemingly incompatible components. This is a kind of “mutually exclusive understanding” aimed at always keeping in view the enduring relevance of the judgment that of “all the creations of nature there is no greater mystery for man than himself” (M. Heidegger).

Existentialism is based on an acute experience of the deepest crisis of all the traditional foundations of human life in everyday life. modern civilization, loss of humanity, loss of a sense of value, the uniqueness of human existence, the dominance of mass culture and mass consciousness, the priority of technocracy over human interests. This leads to an acute sense of the hostility of the world and the meaninglessness of human existence, which inevitably ends in death. A person striving to overcome his own mortality, one way or another, ends up with a loss of social connections, a feeling of loneliness and abandonment.

The real existence of man is tragic. This leads to interest in the topic of fate. Fate is absurd, non-existence. The fate of man is doomed to death, which, according to Malraux, is associated with the loss of God, with existence in a soulless civilization with its false, empty values, devoid of human content. But a person must exist in spite of this tragedy.

The main quality of the individual becomes personal freedom, despising all existing norms that cover up the absurd. Being deprived of a moral basis, destroying eternal laws that do not tolerate criticism in the modern world, freedom turns into permissiveness.

In a sense, in such individual rebellion one can see a connection with the idea of ​​the superman. But individualism here is of an ethical nature: life is a rebellion, but not destructive, but creative, coexistence with the absurd while being true to one’s own ethical absolutes. Even in an absurd world, a person exists according to his own personal laws.

The set of problems outlined above inevitably leads to the actualization of the problem of choice and personal responsibility, what should be and what should not be. A true life-affirming choice is always tragic for a person and is associated with the awareness of the need to recognize the life values ​​of others when choosing one step or another. But despite all the tragedy, it is this choice that allows the existentialist hero to affirm his values ​​in spite of the absurd world and not increase evil. Freedom turns out to be directly related to responsibility.

Obviously, like any philosophical movement, existentialism, despite some of its declarations, uses a certain categorical apparatus, and its categories such as fear, anxiety, etc., are ontological in nature as philosophical characteristics of human existence. However, existentialism insists that philosophy must study man using its own methods; the existence of a person can only be comprehended by historical experience and life experience as part of it, since a person is not a thing among other things, not an object among other objects. In this regard, existentialism, without denying objective truth, is still not inclined to identify it with human, “existential” truth, because the truth by which a person lives exists and can only exist in such a way that a person becomes identical with it and responsible for it with your very life.

Since the essence of a person is a freely chosen action, he enters the outer world as a self-sufficient essence along with his self, but not the one he had before, but modified according to those that have become preferred patterns that were formed in his inner spiritual world. Existence always includes a person’s desire to get rid of something that does not satisfy him in the content of his inner world in order to find something different, more perfect, and this process is inevitably accompanied by the experience of a conflict between what is available and what acts as desired.

In these processes, life appears as a direct experience in which the experienced content and the experiencing subject are fused together: life is always open to the living person, for it, in fact, is the living person himself. Existence is something that can never become an object. It cannot be found among the objective world; only a person understands that the fundamental characteristic of being is finitude. And if a person wants to become what he is, then he should not be deceived about the fragility, the finitude of his existence in the world.

From the point of view of existentialists, ideals, programs, norms themselves are valid only because the individual has an internal preparation for their recognition that cannot be derived from anything else. “To desire the unconditional, to strive, to devote oneself to the unconditional” - this is the transcendental structure of the human Self. Realizing his frailty, a person strives for the eternal, but not for endless activity (not for the immortality of the soul and not for the immortality of the human race), but for transtemporal activity. the significance of the unconditional principle. Absolute conviction is the direction in which our inner time flows.

Among the various and very numerous philosophical trends of our time, existentialism is becoming an increasingly noticeable phenomenon as an interpretation of man in the world and the world of man, associated with a certain understanding of the tasks of philosophy itself, among which the most important is the study of the inner world of man, the essence of his life and its meaning.

This circumstance is primarily due to the fact that: firstly, the very appearance of existentialism as a significant and maximally capable of modifications phenomenon was generated by the most complex realities of all dynamically developing spheres of social life that arose in the 20th century; secondly, with the desire of existentialism it is possible to adequately link social realities with the processes occurring in social and individual consciousness.

The last decades of the development of both atheistic and religious existentialism are marked not only by a significant evolution of the views of individual representatives of this direction and of existentialism as a whole, but also by very significant shifts in the assessment of its significance in the development of modern philosophical thought, its potential in solving the most pressing philosophical problems , which, in particular, is due to the fact that a person is never able to remain neutral in relation to his descriptions.

Existentialism presupposes the most optimistic solution to the problem of a person living in conditions of increasing dynamism in the development of the modern world. Despite the fact that under the banner of existentialism it is more difficult for a person than under any other, the existential approach to man, which includes an orientation towards practicality, is imbued with a deep faith in the creative, constructive possibilities and abilities of man as a being that overcomes itself, creates itself, he himself creates the story of his life and for everything, including the world in which he lives, and for himself, bears all the fullness of responsibility that is immanently inherent in him as an initially free being, and this very circumstance gives a person weight and significance unknown to past centuries.

2 Features of Heidegger’s existential philosophy

existentialism heidegger philosophical being

In Germany, existentialism took shape in the 1920s. Heidegger's philosophy is based on the combination of two fundamental observations of the thinker. First, according to his observation, philosophy for more than 2000 years of history has paid attention to everything that has the characteristic of “being” in this world, including the world itself, but has forgotten what it means. This is Heidegger’s “question of being,” which runs like a red thread through all of his work. Heidegger demands that all Western philosophy trace all stages of the formation of this concept from the very beginning, which the thinker called “destruction” of the history of philosophy.

Secondly, philosophy was strongly influenced by Heidegger’s acquaintance with the philosophy of E. Husserl, who was not very interested in issues of the history of philosophy. For example, Husserl believed that philosophy should fulfill its purpose as a description of experience (hence the famous slogan “back to the things themselves”). But Heidegger understood that experience always “already” takes place in the world and being. Heidegger was an original and original thinker who created not only his own philosophical system, but also his own method, his own language, his own way of posing problems. He became famous very early as a historian of philosophy, but his historical and philosophical research reveals not only an original approach and non-trivial interpretations, but also a great desire to destroy the prevailing stereotypes in this field of knowledge, to see something completely different, radically changing established retrospections.

At the same time, Heidegger did not immediately find his own path and did not immediately overcome the tradition originating from Aristotle and continued by his followers - a philosophical tradition that influenced even Kant and the development of philosophical thought after Kant. Let us consider some further stages of Heidegger’s work in order to understand why he considered “substantial ontology” so harmful and how he approached the solution to the problem. Heidegger's own admissions of persistent difficulties with the question of being help explain the surprising features of his philosophical biography. Contemporaries of the young Heidegger, who assessed his early published works (before Being and Time), could not even imagine that over time their author would become one of the most prominent and influential philosophers of the 20th century. His early work was, if not downright boring, then quite traditional, and, perhaps, at first glance it might seem that it is at best of historical interest. Neither his doctoral dissertation “The Doctrine of Judgment in Psychologism” (1913) nor his habilitation dissertation “The Doctrine of Duns Scotus on Categories and Meaning” (1915) foreshadowed further originality in the development of thought, not to mention revolutionary ideas. If Heidegger had not written anything more, he would have rightly been consigned to oblivion, and no memories of him would have been preserved even in the archives.

From these reflections on the subject of philosophy, which he considered fundamentally erroneous, Heidegger drew valuable conclusions regarding the question of being, Seinsfrage. His reflections on the explanation by philosophers of the psychological direction of how psychological processes undergird our thinking prompted Heidegger to more deeply comprehend the connection that exists between the act of thinking, opposed to the knowledge of thought, on the one hand, and, on the other hand, the relation of this act to the language in which thought finds its expression. We find the preliminary results of these reflections of Heidegger in his marginalia, indicating that the philosopher was moving towards a characterization of “being” that was significantly different from its characterization in Aristotelian ontology.

The task of the theory of knowledge in the future, Heidegger believes, should be “the division of the entire sphere of “being” into various modes of reality (Wirklichkeitsweisen)”, and epistemology plays an important role in such a division: “The characteristics of the various forms of reality, including the corresponding method, should be clearly drawn and defined their knowledge (Art ihrer Erkenntnis) with its limitations.” However, such a “division of being” into the areas of the physical, mental, metaphysical and logical does not pretend to be exhaustive; on the contrary, it is very preliminary and moves traditional ways. Heidegger clearly still does not find a way that would make it possible to reveal the unified meaning of being. But, defending a strict division between the sphere of the mental and the sphere of the logical, Heidegger considers it especially important to ask the question of how meaning as a whole enters into the actual life of a thinking person; the distinction between these “spheres” is not as rigid as it may seem due to Heidegger’s strict use of terms.

In the philosophical tradition, there is an opinion that the “new Heidegger,” who had not published a single work for twelve years before the publication of his fundamental work “Being and Time,” owed the impetus for the creation of his new philosophy to the influence of Edmund Husserl, whom Heidegger personally met after writing his early works. This is true only with very serious reservations. Firstly, Husserl’s phenomenology has always been a very clear background for Heidegger’s critique of psychologism, and Heidegger himself repeatedly mentions this. It was precisely this that was the conceptual framework necessary to consider Duns Scotus’s teaching on language and meaning. Heidegger notes that during his student years he was extremely interested in Husserl's Logical Investigations, but at that time he did not yet know how this work would one day prove useful for solving the problem of being. Only after personally meeting Husserl and becoming more familiar with the practice of the phenomenological method did Heidegger begin to more clearly imagine the possibilities of phenomenology, and after a few years he also saw its shortcomings. It will be shown further that it was precisely the shortcomings of phenomenology that led Heidegger down the path that then led to the ideas developed in Being and Time.

Heidegger agreed with Husserl that the “being” of all entities lies in the meanings that we derive from them in our understanding. He shared even more the transcendental subjectivism of Husserl and modern anthropocentrism. But what is very problematic in Husserl’s approach (besides the fact that his phenomenology constantly passes over in silence and does not analyze the multiplicity of meanings of being) is that Heidegger sees positions that can be summarized in three interrelated points.

) Heidegger sharply objects to Husserl's interpretation of the subject. According to Husserl, the impersonal and “transparent” ego should be placed at the center of all ontology, cognizing the activity and content of its consciousness with the help of unmistakable intuition. However, the fact that “I” is closest in meaning to “I” does not mean that “I” understands this “I”: we are often very, very far from a complete and correct understanding of ourselves. Heidegger argues with particular zeal that our self-understanding very often in fact has nothing to do with the truth.

) Heidegger doubts the feasibility and expediency of exclusion from research, “bracketing” the world. He considers Husserl’s “immanentism” to be erroneous, since with this approach there is a risk that objects of consciousness will turn into objects that exist only in consciousness itself, and this raises the question of the existence of connections with the real world that lies outside consciousness.

) Contrary to Husserl's attempt to embrace the phenomenological study of all consciousness, including emotional relationships, for Heidegger the very fact that the objects of consciousness are considered as simply given in the stream of consciousness and must be studied by their isolated "examination" or with the help of "intuition" says that Husserl’s ontology remained tied to the traditional theoretical way of studying and to the ontology of the “present.” These three points seemed strongly controversial to Heidegger, so we can use them as a kind of key to understanding the characteristic features of Heidegger's ontology in Being and Time.

Heidegger's awareness that our own image, which is formed by us, can be influenced (and even distorted) by our personal interests and inclinations, and these are determined by the general historical situation, calls into question whether there really is such a neutral, transcendental “I” that underlies all acts of consciousness. Therefore, Heidegger develops a method that can be called “systemic suspicion” (it should not be confused with Descartes’ “systemic doubt”), in other words, it takes into account the fact that we cannot be “transparent” to ourselves, that in the intentional act of “I ” may turn out to be very far from any true self-understanding. Phenomena may be well known to us, but this does not guarantee true understanding - having arrived at this thought, Heidegger develops a special approach that he uses in Being and Time, namely, he begins his reasoning with the characteristics of human beings in their everyday life. This approach has two advantages. Firstly, with this formulation of the question, it is impossible not to “not notice” the personal nature of the connections that we have with the world, but for some reason disappear as soon as we sit down in the philosopher’s chair and begin to consider everything from a purely theoretical point of view. Secondly, this approach allows us to make even those distortions that we tend to introduce into our “ordinary everyday life” the subject of phenomenological research.

Husserl believes that Dasein is the transfer of the Ego into anthropology, while Heidegger takes the opposite position: the pure I is an illegitimate abstraction from Dasein living-in-the-world. The phenomenon of Dasein is distinguished primarily by the fact that, not being a product of constitution and reflection, Dasein, as an existing entity, makes itself, goes beyond the limits of the material and present in itself, and thereby distinguishes itself from any other entity. Since Heidegger did not accept Husserl's position that there is an impersonal transcendental ego that provides us with undeniable truths, it was necessary to find out who exactly this essence is, which in its very nature is connected with the question of being. Not wanting to impose another artificial construction on this essence, this time in his own Heideggerian interpretation, he began his phenomenological research by studying a phenomenon that his predecessor philosophers “did not notice,” considering it something trivial and not worthy of the attention of theorists. Heidegger explores everyday existence. The terminology he introduced to describe the various features of everyday existence and its structure was designed to avoid any association with conventional philosophical terminology; according to Heidegger, it should not have turned his concept into some kind of secret teaching, accessible only to the initiated. Most of Heidegger’s terms did not take root in Germany, but they are much easier to understand than their English counterparts - the fact is that Heidegger plays with quite transparent etymological connections of words that often have no correspondence in other languages

The method of systemic suspicion explains the features of the methodological turns made by Heidegger in phenomenology. In expressing his doubts (painstaking research into his teacher's writings seems to have sharpened Heidegger's sensitivity to the precision of the formulations used in phenomenological description), he expresses the sense that phenomena cannot simply be identified on the basis of the way in which they are given in acts of cognition. On the contrary, phenomena must be discovered - as what can only be the implicit content of our thinking. Thus, Heidegger sees in phenomena not something visible to us on the surface, but what is hidden in depth, under what we consider familiar and consider as completely natural “to a first approximation and for the most part,” to use Heidegger’s expression . The method of suspicion also explains Heidegger’s widespread use of terms from the field of archeology in phenomenological descriptions: the task of analysis is to “reveal” phenomena, since they are “buried”, “hidden”; they must be “released” or “exposed.”

According to Heidegger, Phenomenon is that which “shows itself, that which brings to light and leads to clarity.” Existence can show itself in different ways. There is also the possibility that a being will show itself as something that it actually is not, such a state is an appearance. The phenomenon - showing oneself in oneself - means a special kind of encounter of something. Concealment is the antonym of phenomenon... Self-seeming-in-itself is the phenomena of phenomenology.

The second part of phenomenology as the science of phenomena is Logos. Logos makes something appear to those speaking to each other. In the assumption to heed the existing, Logos appears as the basis, relation and proportion. Heidegger's Logos is truth - revelation, that which brings things out of concealment - into manifestation. The logos of the phenomenology of being, which is ourselves (Dasein) has the character of hermeneutics, through which this being itself is informed of its meaning and its fundamental structures. Phenomenology taken in terms of its content and content is the science of the existence of things, i.e. ontology. Thus we can see that in the slogan “To the things themselves” Heidegger goes even further than Husserl

The same concept forms the background of his widely known teaching about truth - “unconcealment” and about understanding - a form of “unconcealment” in general. “Disclosure” occurs on two levels. Heidegger differentiates

a) the ontic level of the factual, observable, the level of field research of phenomenologists (for existence, Heidegger introduces a special term “existentie” - existential). The ontic dimension is the direct grasp by the mind of the surrounding world with its differences and diversity, despite the fact that here the mind does not yet pose the question of what is the being of a being or the essence of a being and is limited to the simple statement that a being is a being. Thinking as such in its most natural and in simple form unfolds precisely in this dimension. To think of a being as a being means to compare one being with another being, to build rows of beings, to compare them with each other.

The ontic field is characteristic of both the positive sciences and everyday thinking, both highly developed systems of counting and classification, and the most banal mental reactions of the average person of the most diverse cultures;

b) the “ontological” level, i.e. a phenomenological description of deep structures; this level serves as the basis of the ontic level and explains it. For the structure of human existence, the term “existential” is used here. Although Heidegger gives only a few examples related to one or another level, he constantly emphasizes that all ontological positions must be substantiated by “ontic confirmations.”

The most important consequence of including one’s own understanding of “being” in the ontology of the present was the cessation further development what can be called dynamic ontology as opposed to static ontology. The latter cannot lead to a genuine development of the concept of time in the sense in which Heidegger understood it. The development of this concept was the ultimate goal of “Being and Time.” For Heidegger, the human being is not an isolated, wordless subject; on the contrary, it is a being that is constituted in a different essence by the world.

Undoubtedly, Heidegger's ever-increasing skepticism about the possibility of a transcendental discussion of this problem in general and the conviction that being is limited to the “executable end of being” represent the main turn of Heidegger’s thought after Being and Time. However, that this turn was a decisive departure from the original intention of Being and Time can be questioned, and with good reason. Indeed, in his preface to the 1953 edition, Heidegger reiterated: “Her path remains, however, still necessary today if the question of being is to move our presence (Dasein).”

So, Heidegger's philosophy is based on the combination of two fundamental observations of the thinker. First, according to his observation, philosophy for more than 2000 years of history has paid attention to everything that has the characteristic of “being” in this world, including the world itself, but has forgotten what it means. This is Heidegger’s “question of being,” which runs like a red thread through all of his work. Heidegger demands that all Western philosophy trace all stages of the formation of this concept from the very beginning, which the thinker called “destruction” of the history of philosophy.

Secondly, philosophy was strongly influenced by Heidegger’s acquaintance with the philosophy of E. Husserl, who was not very interested in issues of the history of philosophy. For example, Husserl believed that philosophy should fulfill its purpose as a description of experience (hence the famous slogan “back to the things themselves”). But Heidegger understood that experience always “already” takes place in the world and being.

2.1 Semantic and philosophical meaning of the category Dasein

Heidegger's existentialism is aimed at clarifying the essence of man and the situation of his presence in the world in the conditions of modern society using the methods and techniques inherent in it, thereby opening hitherto unknown lands in the methodology of knowledge, while at the same time, in new conditions, clarifying in a new way the meaning of human presence as being. here, designated as Dasein. This is the main category of Heidegger's philosophical system.

In the simplest way, human existence is understood as a certain place in which the world and existence itself is realized, manifested, and “illuminated.” “Dasein” - “being-here”, “here-being” - is such being in the world, which, being in being, is associated with being - is preoccupied with it, cares about it, wonders about it and questions it.” This interpretation demonstrates that “Dasein” is not a random component of the whole, it acquires its meaning in existence, it is integral to the whole, and is in unity with the world - the environment. But being also finds integrity and its meaning in it.

Since Dasein is defined in each case as my being, then the appearance of death as the holistically comprehensive completion of my life must appear within my own being. But this requirement seems impossible to fulfill, since while the I represents things from my own point of view, I have not yet achieved my complete integrity, and on the other hand, when I achieve it, my being will no longer exist, which precisely allows me to gain experience of this wholeness. To clearly express such a contradiction, it should be noted that if my identity consists in the principle of incompleteness, existing while I am alive, then I cannot say what it will mean, i.e. I cannot say what his life has been all this time , unless he constructs his death as an event seen, witnessed and considered by other people. But in doing so, he abandons his own personal view of his death.

Understanding "Dasein" only as a place in the world that gives every human existence its specialness does not fully reveal the concept of "Dasein". If we consider this concept, taking as a basis “sein” as a possessive adjective “his, his,” we can say that this single integral world is also divided into “his, his” world. Those. the world of specific human interests, needs, concerns, as well as his specific self-identifications. Thus, in this case, "Dasein" is considered and is the unity of subject and object. It should be noted that Heidegger tries to exclude from Dasein consciousness isolated from the world. He avoids a separate fixation of consciousness and the world, but still distinguishes “Dasein” from other living beings. Heidegger “still assumes the special position of a conscious human being, without essentially proving in any way the absence of “Dasein” in animals, and adheres to the most traditional views on this matter.”

The most successful semantic translation of “Dasein” is “here-being.” The main point is the emphasis on the prefix da, which measures and defines meaning. Firstly, the prefix da is an integral part of “Dasein”, its semantic content and factuality. Heidegger speaks of the abandonment (Geworfenheit) of “Dasein” in his Da. Secondly, da is like a guide to the world around us: "Where?" - “Here, here.” Heidegger calls the unity of these two moments openness (Erschlossenheit). He sees the source of the openness of existence in its temporality, which he calls the “ecstatic temporality of existence.” This temporality is reflected in the species-temporal changes of the verb “sein” and is not a sequence of moments, but the integrity of three dimensions (ecstasies) - existentially understood past, present and future. “The ontological structure of “Dasein” is the unity of three “ecstasies” of time: being-always-already-in-the-world (mode of the past); being-with-in-the-world-existence (mode of the present) and aspiration forward, or “project” (mode of the future).”

It is important to note that, taken in isolation, the lexical unit “Dasein” is characterized as “empty” and denotes a whole complex of concepts, since it relates to the most diverse areas of scientific knowledge: history, physiology, psychology, etc.

In Heidegger's philosophy, the concept of "Dasein" acquired a new meaning. Human existence, since it is the most accessible and closest to our consciousness, is used through hermeneutic analysis to reveal the essence and meaning of being present in human existence. Self-existence, to which “Dasein” can in one way or another relate, is called existence. Since there is no unambiguous interpretation of “Dasein”, it is always determined contextually. Those. the lexical environment denotes this concept, coloring it in appropriate tones. By tracing the entry of “Dasein” into various contexts, one can identify the dynamics of the movement of the philosopher’s thought from problem to problem, from one subject of interpretation to another. “Through the creation of a new context, the context of existential characteristics, existentials, the meaning of “Dasein” itself changes, which increasingly disintegrates into “da”, emphasizing its concreteness, this-worldliness, “embeddedness” in the world, and “Sein” - being in every being, filling the world of the “natural attitude” with ontological weight and significance.” This ontology in its method and principle is the hermeneutics and existentials of “Dasein”.

When characterizing and explaining the category “Dasein”, one should pay attention to another important point. As mentioned above, Heidegger distances “Dasein” from all living beings, attributing to this category only the concept of human existence. "Dasein" differs from the being of other beings in that in its being it can say about this very being. One can judge a person: “he is” - and this only by the fact that his human essence lies in language. "Dasein" is a person insofar as he is placed at the disposal of language and is used by it (the language) in order to speak it.

Heidegger comes close to solving the question of the meaning of being, which he defines through “Dasein”, i.e. through that unique and distinct being that is capable of itself raising the question of being. Being itself, to which “Dasein” can relate in one way or another and always relates in one way or another, is called, as was said above, “existence”. Being always understands itself from its existence, from the possibility for itself to be or not to be itself. Language as a phenomenon has a connection with the existential constitution of the identification of “Dasein”. The foundation of language is speech, which is initially associated with feeling and understanding, i.e. with the meaning of the statement. Another type of speech has an existential foundation - silence. The one who is silent in a mutual conversation can make one understand more than the one who continuously speaks. Lengthy speech leads to unclear understanding. To be able to remain silent, “Dasein” must be able to say something, i.e. have your own rich revelation of yourself. "Dasein" has a language and manifests itself as a being that has speech. “Dasein” uses speech to explain the essence of things, thereby allowing us to see and understand this essence by describing the formal structures of the existence of being as a stream of consciousness. “Dasein” gives a picture of its existence through the prism of the inner world.

One of Heidegger’s central concepts “Dasein” is a multifaceted category. It is likened to a "floating mark". Analyzing the use of “Dasein” in various contexts, using the example of the philosophical works of M. Heidegger, we can identify the dynamics of the movement of the scientist’s thought in search of the truth of being. This search for truth is carried out through language, which clarifies the essence of "Dasein", as it has roots in its existential structure. According to M. Heidegger, “Dasein” is constantly on the way to language, to the essence of being.

Heidegger attributes to death the powerful ability to give Dasein both integrity and uniqueness. Death unites me, through death my identity becomes complete. Death individualizes me, introducing me to a unique experience that is inseparable from me and only me. Therefore, “if, however, the integrity of presence is constituted by the “end” as dying, then its being is integral and must be understood as an existential phenomenon of always its presence.” But although these two functions of death - the completion of identity and the formation of my uniqueness - are inseparable from each other, they still need to be distinguished. Since everyone can replace me in the world, and it is from the possibility of such a situation that my life is created, then we can come to the conclusion that personal experiences embody the uniqueness of my Self only because life as a whole is individualized independently of them through their final determination - death. About this situation we can say that “death, in so far as it “is,” is essentially always mine.” Therefore, our personal encounter with the threat of death requires the denial of the principle of indistinguishable identities: I am a special unique personality not due to the unity of certain characteristic features, but thanks to the inevitability of death, which makes a person irreplaceable, allowing him to perceive the world through precisely this uniqueness, and not through any introduced properties.

Heidegger's analysis of death reduces the feeling that “the fundamental structure of presence turns out to be care.” For if death is permanent and all-encompassing, which is assumed by its function of individualizing the human Self, then the very status of death must be determined within the boundaries of the fundamental position of Dasein. This is the path that Heidegger decided to follow. He's already on early stages in his analytic of human finitude, he defined care as a constituent part of “existence,” “factuality,” and “fall,” and he will seek to show how these three aspects of care reveal the persistence and omnipresence of death’s openness to human existence.

But the essential connection between death and care can also be understood at a more general level. Dasein is concern, since Dasein is always concerned with its being. My life in one or another of its specific manifestations is not something indistinguishable, something indifferent to me; on the contrary, life is precisely what touches me the most, has the greatest relevance for me. My life has meaning to me only because I know that I do not possess it “once and for all”; because at any moment it can be taken away from me by the power of death. And care is the foundation of Dasein precisely because Dasein is a mortal being, and it understands itself as such: “I am - it is I who can die at any moment - I myself am this constant, ultimate possibility of myself, namely, the possibility of no longer being . In its deepest inner essence, care, which is essentially directed towards the being of Dasein, is nothing other than this being-before-itself in the ultimate possibility of its own possibility of being.” And vice versa, care as the basis of Dasein depends on the meaning of being of the side of its ontological Dasein, revealed in the mortal way of existence: “Dying is based on the side of its ontological possibility in care.” In other words, the very concept of finite being is not logically contradictory. If death motivates us to be preoccupied with our lives, then we must regard concern as the true foundation of human existence, and not some kind of general forgetfulness of our own finitude. Summarizing all of the above, we can say: if we were not concerned, death, the foundation of our existence would not be concern; but even if our fundamental principle of existence were not care, and death would not be perceived as a threat. Care and the meaning of mortality, being Heidegger's favorite concepts, are therefore of equal priority.

So, since care is the main foundation of Dasein (i.e., the state that underlies all of its life experience) and reveals the threat of death, then this identification must be constant and all-encompassing, like care itself. After all, if we assume that the Self can avoid the threat of death at a certain period of its life, then this means that, at least during this period, the Self will not be concerned about its life, being cut off from itself (we can say that the Self will think about crossing the bridge only when it comes to it - when you are tired, sick, old, etc.), and therefore care will not fund the entire life experience. If care is the foundation of human existence, then the threat of death in Dasein must be constant.

The persistence of the threat of death of Dasein reveals itself with particular clarity in the first and most fundamental aspect of care - in the being of Dasein as existing “ahead-of-itself”, in the direction towards the region of its possibilities. Death is the constant manifestation of the pure possibility of Dasein, that is, a possibility free from any involvement of actuality (and necessity). Typically, as Heidegger shows, we lack an understanding of such pure possibility - including the possibility of our own death - in our perception of a world tending towards a reduction in predictable and controllable events and processes. As a result, the opportunity loses its status as a possibility as such and begins to be it only “relatively” to certain circumstances and conditions. Such a possibility becomes dependent on the relevance of certain conditions, and such a connection with relevance is incompatible with the very essence of possibility.

Heidegger points to the a priori, originally, in the sense of “what was before.” At the same time, he emphasizes the “universal significance of a priori,” in which his interpretation, coming from etymology and showing a priori as something preceding, is essentially preserved, but a priori is taken here no longer in the sense of prior in knowledge, just as not in the sense of precedence in the order of being, but in the sense of the originality and constancy of the basic characteristics of existence, taken in itself.

2.2 Dasein in the hermeneutical understanding as a representation of being

If we follow the above, “Being and Time” is not just a thematic study of M. Heidegger, but represents “a search for the meaning of Being,” and “a special kind of being.” The mode of existence of the specified being is existence, which, by the nature of its rapprochement with the openness of Being, acts as existential openness.

In our daily lives, we think through those possibilities in which our original orientation towards the world around us can be traced, where among other people these opportunities will matter in terms of their implementation. Understanding such possibilities does not require any revelation, but they cannot have anything to do with a person’s self-awareness. How the total structure of prepersonal relationships in the world and with the world of other people appears to such an understanding is illustrated by the work of interpreting the essential definition of personality given by the author of “Being and Time.” M. Heidegger gives a short name befitting this definition - Dasein. Regarding the actual concept of Dasein, it should be noted that in its full sense the definition should include:

· firstly, being (“Dasein”) in its inauthentic form, drowning in the intraworldly space of impersonal relationships;

· secondly, (“Dasein”) in its determined quality of self-existence;

· thirdly, the very call to originality, showing him (“Dasein”) the path in terms of self-realization of oneself as a person. is defined “as a being always from the possibility that it itself is and in its being somehow understands.” Dasein and the world are an inseparable whole, the world is open only for him alone; other people only meet in this world, but precisely as Others. The character of openness (Erschlossenheit), represented by such an understanding, is entirely contained in this “Yes-(here),” which, according to M. Heidegger, reveals the existential structure of being Dasein. Such openness has the fundamental character of being attuned to the world as a whole, and understanding, being intentional understanding, is initially already placed in Being. The conclusion to be drawn from this is that understanding as presented in Dasein must be existential understanding. Understanding-revelation is considered in “Being and Time” as a special quality that Genesis takes on in order for its meaning to emerge. The resolving dynamics of meaning belong to the existential of “care.”

The role of care is clearly defined; it brings Dasein to the fact of the unreality of evading the existential possibility at all, when it reveals death as Dasein’s “own, irrespective, inevitable and as such indefinite, non-anticipating” possibility in the mode of fear. Guilt extracts “myself” from the indecision to act in one way or another. For M. Heidegger, it is essential that fear is prepared by the desire to have a conscience in order to be able to accept death as the result of the self-essential implementation of one’s own project of being. “The voice of conscience serves the essential disclosure of “being-Here,” which receives the opportunity for self-disclosure in the direction of its own original existence. This self-disclosure we call determination (Entschlossenheit).”

The exclusive role of determination in M. Heidegger lies in the fact that a person manifests himself in an original way with all his actions, initially finding himself in those situations in which he can realize himself. Being
in his “Here”, choosing being through guilt, wanting to have a conscience, the determination to act was initially placed in a situation in which the originality of the existential establishment of “being-Here”, Dasein, is read in the content-semantic plan of the committed act. Temporal analysis of transcendence as a strategic plan of M. Heidegger's hermeneutics is a topic that serves as the basis for revealing the philosophical position of M. Heidegger. In itself, it already aims at the reconstruction of the original intuitive plan that permeates the content-semantic side of the holistic philosophical program, which has received the name fundamental ontology.

His fascination with the historiosophical ideas of Hegel, with whom M. Heidegger conducts an active polemic in “Being and Time,” was reflected
in posing the problem of correlating historical experience, and then in rejecting the objectivist understanding of history with predicates of universality and immutability. The personal aspect of experiencing the individual experience of history opened the way for the German philosopher to radically pose the problem: to think of being as an event. M. Heidegger himself later says that we cease to think of man as a rational animal; the transformation of animal rationale into Dasein becomes the starting point for the rejection of anthropological characteristics when trying to explain and substantiate the human phenomenon. The separation of logos from the specifics of personalitas psychologica helps to reveal its supra-individual nature. This separation opens up the possibility of an adequate formulation of the problem of historicism, which is inevitably distorted for the view from the temporality of Dasein. The historical aspect of understanding experience, including understanding what it brings with it, what the opportunity to hear the voice of conscience, awakening the determination to responsibly perform a one-of-a-kind act, leads to thinking through the basic situation of the interaction of those forms in which care is initially revealed as a universal structural whole "being-Here." In the true sense, care points to the existential future as the primary mode of discovering the qualities that constitute its existential aspiration to the originality of the foundation. M. Heidegger specifically notes that only insofar as care is based in the past, “Being-Here” can exist as the abandoned being that it is. The presentation of the phenomenon of “formerness” immediately finds itself at the point of deducing the main characteristic of oblivion, guilty being. Determination, through the understanding of guilt and fear, appeared in the mode of care, acquired its own basis of authenticity when “being - towards - one’s - death” became absolutely transparent for “being-Here”. M. Heidegger shows that it is possible to have a meaningful conversation about any model of historicity only from the position of how “Being-Here” appears in the existential mode of care. The historical aspect of understanding what was revealed in reality with the call of conscience to be oneself, it turns out, is derived from the three main modes of detecting care: past, present and future, and moreover, consists in the interrelation of these three moments of historicity, and the very phenomenon of the present - the future going into the past, or the future paving the way from the past in the present, can be called, at the point of its discovery, primordial temporality.

According to M. Heidegger, the world and man form a unity (das Eins), a special communication: the word “man” is replaced by the word Dasein corresponding to the “fundamental ontology”, meaning existence, existence. Here, being has a philosophical meaning of great importance, since hermeneutic analysis is used by the German philosopher to reveal the essence present in human existence and discover the meaning of being. M. Heidegger comes to the conclusion that self-disclosure, the direct discovery of one’s essence, is a form of existence of a living, self-conscious person, and understanding does not act as one of the features of human cognition, but as a defining characteristic of existence itself, as a way of being. At M.M. Bakhtin, there are “two poles of a text” that are in unity: firstly, behind each text there is a system of language, secondly, each text is something individual, unique and inimitable, and this is its whole meaning (its intention, why was it created?) Active-dialogical understanding (dispute - agreement), inclusion in the “dialogical context” is especially important for the Russian thinker. There are three interacting parts in the process of understanding: that which is being understood; the recipient himself, who
is the subject of the process of understanding; and something third, which includes everything read, heard, seen, and done by the recipient person before. When these three parts interact, the final
understanding the meaning, communicative understanding occurs. Heidegger builds his philosophy, and this is one of its most fundamental provisions, based on a special kind of interrelationship between being and existence. Being is not reducible to being, but at the same time “being is always the being of being.” This means that being cannot be considered as abiding in itself, autonomous from being (and being itself as an emanation of being), a perfectly completed and embodied beginning, as transcendence in the classical Platonic sense, since in this case being itself would appear as some kind of being lying outside the ordinary world, and this approach is precisely what the “metaphysical attitudes” that Heidegger seeks to overcome are guilty of. However, Heidegger also understands being as a transcendence, to which one can break through only by overcoming the existing, through it, but not “directly,” for then one could talk about at least two levels of being - the imperfect being of the existing and the perfect being “as such.” ", appearing as a being (and Neoplatonism, for example, speaks, in addition to being itself as the One, also about the levels of mind, soul and matter). In Heidegger’s understanding, transcendence does not reside beyond any boundaries, it is nearby, it is hidden in everything that exists and is always open, but in order to appear to it - and this is only available in a person’s life experience - one must overcome the connectedness of existing things and be able to see more in it. that it directly exists. It may even seem that it would be more accurate to define being not as transcendence, but as transcendental immanence, thereby emphasizing the inevitable connection of being with being. But being is one, and existing is plural, and therefore this connectedness cannot be considered as the attachment of the entire fullness of being to a specific finite existing; Moreover, transcendental immanence is founded precisely on absolute transcendence. And yet, precisely because of the fundamental correlation of being with beings, the concept of transcendental immanence, not used by Heidegger, has the right to be invoked. Being is understood here in itself and at the same time inseparably from the connection with existence, similar to how in ancient Platonism and especially Neoplatonism the One appears as a self-sufficient transcendence, but at the same time, albeit at the highest level, being in an integral connection with the lower steps of this ladder - Mind , Soul and Matter, that is, presenting themselves as part of the general order of this ladder. Man as the clearing of transcendence can be understood as transcendental immanence, the rest of existence, waiting for manifestation in him through the human intentionality of hidden being, can be considered as immanent transcendence, and being itself as transcendence appearing in its elusive mystery. Since being does not “is” and it does not exist separately in itself from being, then “ontology does not allow itself to be substantiated purely ontologically”; This means that philosophy itself as a fundamental ontology can only exist when the condition of its possibility is existence, whose activity will be carried out precisely in unlocking and revealing being. This being is Dasein. Being a being, Dasein not only “is”, like all other existing things, but creates with itself, with its existence (after all, the essence of Dasein is in its existence) a clearing in which both the being of Dasein itself and the being of existing things appear. Dasein is not being because it is being; but it is a special being because it is a voice, a window, a manifestation of being. And being (and here Heidegger accepts Hegel’s thesis) and nothing belong to each other, but not because of their uncertainty and immediacy (Heidegger considered such points of view on being to be the main errors in the history of Western philosophy), “but because being itself in its essence is finite and is revealed only in the transcendence of human existence pushed into Nothingness.” This involvement in Nothing is a condition of negation, or reduction, or overcoming, or detachment of existence on the path of unlocking being, which Heidegger calls transcendence and in which he sees the guarantee of freedom. Let us note in passing that Heidegger calls transcendence either being itself or the activity of Dasein in speaking out for beings as a whole; this can only mean that being and Dasein are connected in a very special way, i.e. that Dasein is capable of manifesting being in an open, or unconcealed, form, and this means that transcendence is the very nature of the interrelatedness of man and being (by the way, This is also how Sartre understands transcendence, who took a lot from Heidegger for his understanding of the relationship between man, being and Nothing; however, one cannot ignore the explanation of this fact that in the late 1920s - early 1930s Heidegger largely identified with his constructions. being as such and Dasein; moreover, “Being and Time” was built on this identification, which is why later difficulties arose in writing the second volume of this work). But to do this, one must renounce what exists. It turns out that Dasein, being a representative of the ontic sphere, realizes itself in overcoming this sphere, thereby creating in it the possibility of enlightenment to being precisely as a certain being.

But the antinomy of this situation lies not only in the fact that Dasein as a being realizes itself in detachment from the sphere of existence (to which it itself, under special conditions, belongs) for the breath of being, but also in the fact that the achievement of detachment, the achievement of the opening of being is carried out through the focus of Dasein on the very essence that it overcomes for the sake of the manifestation of being and with which it is inextricably linked in the phenomenon of intentionality. The intentions of Dasein make the beings to which they are directed to reside not “in themselves,” but in inextricable connection with Dasein, and through it with being as such. At the same time, intentions do not foundation the being of a being, since, firstly, they themselves are the intentions of a being, and secondly, Heidegger clearly distinguishes between being itself (“thingness”) and “being from the side of the method of its intention,” i.e. intentionally perceived Dasein being. In the first case, beings are mute in relation to their being and self-given; in the second, it reveals itself in its being, revealing itself as the “living presence” of the given. But the self-givenness and the givenness of beings are not separated from each other, as happens, for example, in Kant with the noumenon abiding in itself and the phenomenon constituted by the subject: “The living givenness is a special mode of the self-givenness of beings.”

This means that the being hidden in the self-givenness of being turns out to be manifested in its givenness, and this becomes possible thanks to the ontological evidence of enlightenment that the intentionality of Dasein brings into the world. This intentionality, as it were, “saves” being from absolute oblivion (or, as Hegel would say, from the constant existence of being as a pure possibility); but since in intentions the being reveals itself not only of the being to which they are directed, but also of that being called Dasein, then we can say that it is not the being that “saves,” reveals or opens being, but being itself realizes itself in the intentional interconnectedness of Dasein and the being intended by it. The intentional “game” of being is the only road on which being can exist, and in this very being, being dissolves.

It is not for nothing that Heidegger emphasizes that such an opening occurs through “horror” (Angst), in which our initial, but often suppressed openness of Nothing reveals itself: after all, being, which Dasein never ceases to be (it is very important here to emphasize the fundamental difference: if Dasein exists, then everything else that exists only “is”), finds itself in a situation of being cut off from the world of existence, the dimensions of which have become an integral part of everyday existence, in a situation where transcendence erupts from you in an enveloping way, not allowing you to stop and revealing new sides of itself every new moment. In horror, Dasein discovers in itself and by itself that which is greater than being, but integral to it - being; horror characterizes the irreducibility of being to being, but the clearing that emerges in horror encourages Dasein to see in itself simultaneously a transcending (that is, an existent that opens the transcendental being) being and an existing being opening wide in this being; horror is such a refusal of being in favor of being, when the very activity of refusal is the realization of such a being as Dasein.

Preparation for horror as a state in which Nothingness is revealed slightly are states of boredom (melancholy) and joy from the presence of a loved one, states in which existence as a whole is slightly revealed. If in Plato the philosopher only transcends to the inaccessibly abiding transcendence of the world of ideas, unable to achieve it due to the imperfection of his sensory beginning, but being initially involved in it with his soul, then Heidegger’s Dasein is a transcendence that does not strive for “somewhere.” "of abiding transcendence, and in which this transcendence unceasingly, relentlessly, in an integral relationship with him reveals itself. Being will never be fully embodied and realized (after all, this would make it “present”), since such a “state” would mean the cessation of its original connection with existence and would devalue, from an ontological point of view, the significance of this connection that is now being realized. And that is why being is always transcendental: it is always open to its new manifestation, which is revealed thanks to the finitude of Dasein, and is always elusive in it.

Chapter 3. Genesis. Existence through existentials

3.1 Existence according to Heidegger

In his research, Heidegger undertakes a rather extensive historical and philosophical explanation of the concept of “existence”.

Traditionally, essentia is distinguished, i.e. whatness (from “what”), Wassein, essence, and existentia, existence. For example, in relation to red, we can distinguish, firstly, that red is red (i.e. its whatness, qualitative certainty, essence) and, secondly, that it generally exists, exists (its existence or even in this context it can be called beingness). Existence means that something (an entity) exists or that something is real. Heidegger traces the following logical chain: whatness - existence - reality - activity (actualitas) - presence (Anwesung) - presence (Dasein in its usual meaning). Heidegger, speaking about existential philosophy, first of all has in mind the philosophy of Karl Jaspers, in which “existence” names a person in his self-existence: “Existence is self-existence, which relates to itself and in this to the transcendence, thanks to which it is given to itself and on which it is based." Analyzing Jaspers' concept of existence, Heidegger notes, firstly, that it is possible in a trinitarian context, which reflects the basic Kantian construction of the universe and philosophy: world - freedom - God (transcendence), and secondly, that it is an essential impulse for development Jaspersian existentialism and existentialism in general was the thinking of S. Kierkegaard. Heidegger protests against the fact that his position is often brought into kinship with the thoughts of Kierkegaard and with existential philosophy in general and wants to avoid these comparisons and for this he explains his own use of the concept of existence in the treatise “Being and Time”.

For this clarification, Heidegger answers two questions:

What reason exists for comprehending “Being and Time” as an existential philosophy?

What does “existence” mean in “Being and Time” (existence and Dasein)?

To the first of the questions he himself posed, to the question about the occasion, Heidegger answers this way: “This occasion strikes the eye everywhere.” So, the reason for including his treatise “Being and Time” in existential philosophy is the concept of existence used there, as well as the concept of “existential” introduced by Heidegger, the totality of which in the corresponding existential analysis constitutes the essence of existence. Thus, the analytics of existence occupies a large share in the treatise, which gave rise to classify it as existentialism.

In order to remove “Being and Time” from the field of existentialism, Heidegger tries to distinguish his own understanding of the concept of “existence,” namely its use in the treatise “Being and Time” from Kierkegaard’s. First of all, he draws attention to the “Kierkegaardian limitation in relation to the entire applied concept of existence.”

Kierkegaard uses this concept only in relation to human existence. Existence, in Kierkegaard's interpretation, is a designation for human originality. This limitation in Kierkegaard's application of the concept of "existence" is clearly evident, for example, in Kierkegaard's interpretation of fear and temporality. It should be noted that Heidegger expresses his attitude towards Kierkegaard back in “Being and Time” and takes a certain position towards Kierkegaard’s interpretation of temporality.

Heidegger formulates the differences between his own position in the use of “existence” and Kierkegaard’s, between the contexts in which this concept appears. They are as follows: first, a treatise

The answer to the second question posed clarifies Heidegger’s interpretation of the concept of existence in Being and Time.

Existence in the version of true existence is found only in communication, since only the latter makes it possible to realize self-understanding through understanding another. The structure inherent in Dasein always presupposes being in the world as determining all other forms of experience and parameters of existence. A person needs his radical choice of his life story to be confirmed by others, since he cannot realize his life plans alone.

All this affirms the uniqueness and originality of human life. At the same time, a person acts not only as the center of the Universe, but also as the center of its construction, as the creator of the history of his life and the history of the life of society. Here, existence precedes essence, that is, existence precedes essence: a person, being in the world, through multi-valued and responsible activities, defines himself, forming his essence in the process of solving his life tasks and aspirations. In the process of realizing his individual goals, he chooses himself among others, and this process is accompanied by a change in the person himself, his inner world, his views and ideas.

Heidegger analyzes man's fundamental capacity for creativity and interpretation and, therefore, for drawing up and implementing life plans, programs and projects in order to carry out all kinds of life practices: by being inventive in relation to himself and the world, man turns out to be capable of history.

Modern man needs his radical choice of his own destiny to be confirmed by others, since the success of the choice depends on the “yes” and “no” of other people, because existence is carried out within the boundaries of collectivity and collective beliefs.

Heidegger’s concept proceeds from the fact that not every existence is genuine: a person doomed to freedom makes the choice of his behavior as a variant of genuine or inauthentic existence and bears full responsibility for his choice, since a genuine person never seeks justification for his actions in external circumstances and does not can only be used as a means to anything, including morality itself. A person is responsible for everything that happens to himself and other realities peripheral to his central position, and a person’s responsibility is associated with the internal reliability of his understanding of his individual life situation. Before the need to choose, the measure of responsibility increases many times over due to the possible, determined by choice, destruction of the limits of manifestation of the individual.

Since existence itself is essentially freedom, it is precisely this circumstance that determines its possibilities, both actual and potential, and freedom does not exist outside of being, outside Dasein, but is valid only as a human presence here and now. Existence is something that can never become an object. It cannot be found among the objective world; it is inherent only in man, for only he understands that the fundamental characteristic of being is finitude. And if a person wants to become what he is, then he should not be deceived about the fragility, insecurity, finitude of his stay in the world - it is in this turning towards the end that the solitude of a person is accomplished to his unique presence.

Heidegger sees a connection between the concept of freedom and the inherent desire for philosophy in human nature. “Why is metaphysics inherent in human nature? At the first approximation, a person in the metaphysical concept is a being among other beings, equipped with abilities. This being is constituted in this way, its “nature”, “what” and “how” of its being are themselves metaphysical: animal (sensibility) and rationale (extrasensory). Delineated by such boundaries within metaphysics, man is bound to an incomprehensible distinction between being and being. The metaphysically coined method of human representation reveals everywhere only a metaphysically structured world. Metaphysics is inherent in human nature. But what is nature itself? What is metaphysics itself? Who is, within this natural metaphysics, man himself? Is he a simple I, which for the first time is truly affirmed in its I only through turning to You, because it exists in the relation of I to You? Heidegger's thesis “Being is always the being of beings” means the relation of beings to being in the sense of distinction. In connection with the issue concerning the distinction between being and existence, the issue of oblivion of being, which became quite acute in Heidegger’s thinking, is discussed here. So Heidegger says: “The oblivion of being indirectly makes itself felt by the fact that a person always considers and processes only existing things. Since he cannot do without some idea of ​​being, being is interpreted by him simply as “the most general” and therefore all-encompassing among beings, or as the creation of an infinite Being, or as the creation of some absolute subject. In addition, “being” has been called “being” since ancient times, and vice versa, “being” is being, both seem to be spinning in a mysterious and not yet comprehended substitution. For Heidegger, being and beings require that they be thought in difference.

Existence in Heidegger's philosophy is represented in its main modifications as present, available, and presence (Dasein), represented ontically and ontologically, in the degree of the relation of presence and non-presence of the dimensional to being, and can be fundamentally classified according to the principle of substantiality and existentiality. At the same time, Heidegger obviously asserts the ontological priority of existentia (existence), as an existential definition of presence, over essentia (essence), since the development and grasp of essence is generally possible from existence and on its basis. However, priority does not mean hierarchical superiority: the essence and existence in relation to the ontic determination of each thing are of equal origin. The meaning of a kind of “priority” can only appear in the sense of the “exemplaryness” of a specific being, capable of opening up to being and asking about being, which generally makes it possible to advance towards the meaning of being. This “priority” is also reflected in the structure of the existential question, which reveals the need to consider the moment of transition from being to being, which orients, first of all, to the moment of distinguishing being and being, with which, apparently, all the complexities of pre-Heidegger formulations of the question are associated about being.

The problem of distinction, therefore, has a characteristic meaning within the problematic concerning the actual being: if there is an ontological difference between being and being, then, appearing at the level of being, it must acquire an ontic character.

Heidegger points to the a priori, originally, in the sense of “what was before.” At the same time, he emphasizes the “universal significance of a priori,” in which his interpretation, coming from etymology and showing a priori as something preceding, is essentially preserved, but a priori is taken here no longer in the sense of prior in knowledge, just as not in the sense of precedence in the order of being, but in the sense of the originality and constancy of the basic characteristics of existence, taken in itself. Thus, Heidegger makes a kind of return to the Aristotelian to Ti nv sivai, which appears, indeed, in the form of a “genuine a priori”, due to the fact that it reveals “what a thing has always already been in advance.”

To move from an inauthentic existence to an authentic one, a person must endure the ordeal of despair and existential anxiety, that is, the anxiety of a person who is faced with the boundaries of his existence with all the ensuing consequences: death, nothingness. Similarly, Kierkegaard earlier called this “sickness to death” or “ fatal disease».

In the “analytics of here-being” (Daseinanalytik), the world is also inseparable from human consciousness. But, unlike phenomenology, Heidegger describes the world as it is given to human consciousness before any reflection (not to mention scientific experience). “Being here” is always someone else’s, it is always concrete and revealed with all its “existentials” to oneself.

The first of the existentials is “being-in-the-world” (In-der-Welt-sein). It means that Dasein is always concrete and cannot be reduced to pure thought or subjectivity. A person is unthinkable without the world with which he relates, therefore his “being-in-the-world” is significantly different from the existence of a stone or an animal (they exist in the world differently than a person). The relationship between a person and the world is, first of all, practical, interested, and instrumental. Everyday “being-in-the-world” is initially “handy.”

“Handy” things, according to Heidegger, have meaning for a person, being his possible actions. The order of things that exists in the “inner world” of a person is a projection of his capabilities. The world is the field of activity of Dasein, which gives meaning to the objects of the “inner world”. Being in the world, Dasein is not in space, but structures the spatiality of the world. So, for example, the glasses through which a person looks at a star are located in the space of “care” much further from him than the star itself, which has meaning for him as a poet or astronomer. The experience of semantic distance, proximity or remoteness of an object from a person’s consciousness takes the place of the properties of objectively existing space. The consequence of this is that Dasein is incorporeal, for the body is only something handy, one of the tools of “here-being”, which in itself is not located, “has no place” in space.

Heidegger's philosophy is based on the opposition between existence as Vorhandensein (the characteristic of things) and as Dasein (for human beings). The untranslatable word Dasein denotes a mode of existence characteristic of people. Thus, Heidegger's philosophy is Daseinanalytik (analysis of the structure of Dasein). A person is not a ready-made being, a person becomes what he makes of himself, nothing more. A person creates himself by choosing this or that, because he has the freedom of vital choice, first of all, he is free to choose an authentic or inauthentic form of existence. Inauthentic existence is the mode of man who lives under the tyranny of the plebs (the crowd, the faceless mass). Authentic existence is a mode in which a person accepts responsibility for his existence.

“Being-here” is always open to others, since a person is born already placed in a world inhabited by other people. The next two existentials - “co-being” (Mitsein) and “co-being here” (Mitdasein) define the modes of “here-being”: “fall”, “abandonment” and “project”.

“The Fall” is an existential process of human self-alienation, loss of one’s own authenticity (authenticity), dissolution in the “public” world. Describing the impersonality of people immersed in everyday life, Heidegger uses the substantivized indefinite personal pronoun das Man. Authenticity and inauthenticity are the results of each person's choices. They are always present, in any civilization, only the forms of their manifestation change.

“Abandonment” is the process of consonance between the world and man. One day a person realizes that, regardless of his own desires or will, he finds himself placed in some kind of world where he has to live. This has important psychological significance, since a person’s sensations, feelings and moods turn out to be not just individual emotional manifestations, but also signs of what exists in the world itself. We are cheerful and sad not only because we are happy or sad, but also because we live in such worlds. Accordingly, experiencing “abandonment,” a person discovers that his existence is a set of possibilities and that he himself must choose among them.

A “project” is an existential process of “running ahead” of oneself, following the discovery of one’s capabilities. This is “true existence”, freely choosing itself regardless of any laws of the external world, since there is no external world as such for “here-being”.

Possibilities of choice always already have some meaning, are already understood, interpreted by a person. Objects devoid of meaning do not exist at all, and what is endowed with meaning is understood in terms of projects, goals of “here-being.”

“Fall,” “abandonment,” and “project” are, as it were, three faces of the same phenomenon, to which Heidegger gave the name “care” (Sorge). Let us note that “being-in-the-world”, “being-here” and “care” are actually different names for one reality - human existence. However, “care” characterizes his existence as a whole.

Three variants of “care” were associated by Heidegger with three dimensions of time. Thus, the future corresponds to a “project”, the past corresponds to being “thrown” into the world and left to oneself, and finally, authenticity is always concerned with the present.

True (authentic) existence begins with “anxiety.” The corresponding German word Angst means fear, but M. Heidegger distinguishes it as ontological fear from “ontic”, ordinary fear, denoted by the term Furcht. An ordinary, inauthentic person is afraid of something specific, known to him, most often threatening his health, social prestige, material wealth, family life etc. An authentic person begins with anxiety, when “here-being” begins to fear itself. When “here-being” is completely immersed in the world of everyday life, giving itself over to the “dictatorship of publicity,” it turns away from itself, runs away from its own possibilities. Therefore, the threat comes from nowhere, the “nothing” scares.

Due to this anxiety of “nothingness” the rest of the world loses its meaning. “Being-here” finds itself completely alone. The power of “publicity” disappears, all the usual foundations disintegrate, the world feels alien and unsafe. But at the same time, “here-being” awakens to true existence, to responsibility for its own actions. Based on this, “here-being” reveals itself in its uniqueness and incompleteness as freely designing itself.

Moreover, authentic existence is defined by Heidegger as “being-toward-death.” Completeness, the completeness of becoming, also means the loss of oneself. “Here-being” is always “not yet”, and with its completion - “no longer”. Therefore, it makes no sense to talk about death as a “cessation” (as in rain), “completion” (as in work) or “disappearance”. “Being-towards-death” means that mortality is inherent in “here-being” itself, this is its mode in which it is revealed in its authenticity.

The idea of ​​a being in its original characteristics generally shows the ability of this being to relate to its being. The identification of the structures that are presented in existence as a priori is intended to reveal the ontological certainty of existence and make being itself accessible. For Heidegger, in this sense, it is important to focus on the moment of exemplaryness: not every existing thing really has access to the experience of being, although every existing thing must have, and does have, a relationship to it.

3.2 Being and man through Dasein

According to the philosopher, what really exists (being) is Dasein. The starting point of Heidegger's philosophizing is the subjectivity of our sensations. The key point in it is the awareness of oneself as existing here and now, this is Dasein. Everything else exists only for Dasein, and therefore is, in essence, its state. Realities given to us as existing in Dasein (otherwise nothing can exist), Heidegger calls existentials. They characterize the existence of Dasein.

Heidegger takes detachment as a kind of means for bridging the gap with being. Presence, falling into an environment of inauthenticity and losing its connection with being in it, is capable of restoring it in genuine thinking. Such thinking is “the calm of meekness that does not change the whole of existence in its hiddenness,” awaiting the emergence of being in truth.

Heidegger's thesis “Being is always the being of beings” means the relation of beings to being in the sense of distinction. In connection with the issue concerning the distinction between being and existence, the issue of oblivion of being, which became quite acute in Heidegger’s thinking, is discussed here. So Heidegger says: “The oblivion of being indirectly makes itself felt by the fact that a person always considers and processes only existing things. Since he cannot do without some idea of ​​being, being is interpreted by him simply as “the most general” and therefore all-encompassing among beings, or as the creation of an infinite Being, or as the creation of some absolute subject. In addition, “being” has been called “being” since ancient times, and vice versa, “being” is being, both seem to be spinning in a mysterious and not yet comprehended substitution. For Heidegger, being and beings require that they be thought in difference.

The distinction itself can be understood in two main senses. Firstly, it is possible as a dilution, a division of the distinguished (indeed, we separate being and existing when we talk about their distinction: in this case, being is given as if without being, and existing - as if without being). But, since being is always the being of being, and being without being turns into nothing, distinguishing these categories is impossible to separate them irrevocably, which means: distinction acquires a meaning that presupposes a certain unity in it. Thus, distinction can, like identity, be interpreted in the sense of a connection or relationship, which determines the entrustment and belonging of being and existing to each other, speaks of their mutual belonging, which is designed to ensure their fulfillment and reality. And if identity produces a moment of self-concentration, and therefore isolation, then difference, on the contrary, turns out to be an indicator of their mutual orientation.

“The polysemy of being” in Heidegger’s interpretation is interpreted in the thesis of Heidegger’s philosophy, which states that being is not a certain kind of being, but being is always the being of a being, it necessarily consists of a connection, a relationship with a being, and is always comprehended from it and in it , and the question is discussed: what is the condition for the direction of existence towards being, which finds its resolution in the analysis of the differences and variations of existence itself.

From Heidegger's point of view, a person is a being who sacrifices life to his destiny. He simply cannot exist without devoting his life to something: this is his fundamental predisposition, primary in relation to the presence of any goal designation. Realizing his frailty, a person strives for the eternal, but not for infinite duration (not for the immortality of the soul and not for the immortality of the human race), but for the transtemporal significance of the unconditional principle. Absolute conviction is the direction in which internal time flows. This topic became the main subject of M. Heidegger’s thoughts. For Heidegger, history is the history of what man encounters in his striving for the unconditional.

Without transcendental support, a person cannot withstand the cruel adversities of the post-war period. He falls into everyday fear (Furcht). This fear cripples the fundamental principle of man: his original longing for the unconditional loses its purity and demandingness. The individual begins to mix the unconditional and its most vulgar surrogates: prophecies and recipes of social alchemists, comforting illusions, promises of demagogues. He seeks support in the standard definition of anonymous, conformist consciousness (Heidegger designates it with the category “Man” - an impersonal pronoun).

According to Heidegger, a person experiences ontological fear (Angst) of the endless demands of our longing for the unconditional, anxiety that we will never achieve ideals.

Everyday fear (Furcht) is the fear of losing life or certain life benefits. Ontological fear (Angst) is the fear of not finding a purpose for which I myself could sacrifice my life and my benefits. "Angst" and "Furcht" are thus two types of fear directed against each other. And the solidity, the originality of “Angst” is, according to Heidegger, the only remaining chance, the only guarantee that people will not finally fall under the power of historical and sociological superstitions.

In his striving for nothing, man, according to Heidegger, transcends history, destroys, discards or “brackets” all the relative certainties that it provides him.

In Being and Time, Heidegger makes two statements whose significance in the holistic philosophical project he develops in his opus magnum cannot be overestimated. First, given that the purpose of this project has been defined as the exploration of being as a whole and that this being is revealed through Dasein, the original clarification of the meaning of being requires an appropriate primordial interpretation of Dasein. In other words, we cannot be content with a relative, partial and approximate view of Dasein, since here it is necessary to achieve an understanding of it as a whole. Moreover (we will look at this issue in more detail later), from this point of view, “one thing has become certain: so far the existential analysis of presence (Dasein) cannot make a claim to originality. In prejudice there was always only the improper being of presence, and even then as a non-whole.” Based on this, the entire first section of “Being and Time” should be considered fundamentally incomplete, since it avoided giving us so much necessary consideration both integrity and authenticity of Dasein.

Even in this still preliminary and rather abstract part of Heidegger's analysis, the joint appearance of “integrity” and “authenticity” can find some justification. In authentic life (as opposed to inauthentic life) there are manifestations in which not this or that aspect of Dasein is revealed, but all of Dasein as a whole. And if (as will become obvious a little later) the authenticity of Dasein requires a clear and distinct acceptance of one's own death, then this is because the integrity and authenticity of Dasein manifests itself precisely in being-towards-death.

This provision can first of all be considered in its most obvious and least controversial sense. Throughout his entire life, especially conscious life, when a person asks the question: what does it mean to be, his identity is not constant and complete, it is open to constant changes and formations. At every stage of my life, the Self always regards this situation rather as a choice available to me; Thus, the human self is determined not only by the nature of its life in the present, on which the future depends, but also by what this life has been until now, for what the self is now and what choices it has depends on this. The ability to choose highlights all that was (and continues to be) important to me, emphasizing the long-term sustainability and strength of my commitments (or lack thereof or insufficiency). Returning to Heidegger's terminology, we can say: as long as Dasein exists, it can choose from its possibilities; therefore, as long as Dasein exists, it will be “ahead of itself,” and this is an integral feature of its existential-ontological structure, which allows Dasein to be characterized as “constant incompleteness.” And since death inevitably and finally stops the human ability to choose one’s own possibilities, then, accordingly, it interrupts the commission of actions and deeds that change and redefine the identity of human individuality. Everything that was in a person’s life, and everything that it was, becomes with the arrival of death a final, completed and unchangeable form.

Thanks to this fundamental position in the structure of human temporality, the human world itself acquires its own temporal structure. However, we need to take one more small step towards explaining the emergence of time chronology. For example, “that in the face of which Dasein appears abandoned” (the horizontal scheme of the past) does not yet mean “earlier” than the horizontal scheme of the present. But such an insurmountable gap seems irrelevant to the problem posed from within the context of the existential analytics of Dasein. After all, the temporality of Dasein is transferred to the world thanks to the practical, everyday involvement of Dasein in the world, and this situation imposes on Dasein the need to “calculate” time, to perceive it in the context of all our daily plans and projects.

Heidegger believes: whether reason is guided by nine or twelve categories is a secondary question; the entire triumphant history of the development of rational knowledge has shown that the seriousness of science with all its rigor of philosophy is still very far away, for man is aware of the temporary nature of his stay on Earth. This forces him to turn again and again to the problem of the meaning of life. Therefore, only in man does the event of philosophy arise, and only man is capable of inquiring about beings as being himself put into question. The problem of meaning is conflict, existential is an existential concept, not a religious one

Obviously, like any philosophical movement, existentialism, despite some of its declarations, uses a certain categorical apparatus, and its categories such as fear, anxiety, etc., are ontological in nature as philosophical characteristics of human existence. However, existentialism insists that philosophy must study man using its own methods; the existence of a person can only be comprehended by the historical mind and the vital mind as part of it, since a person is not a thing among other things, not an object among other objects. In this regard, existentialism, without denying objective truth, is still not inclined to identify it with human, “existential” truth, because the truth by which a person lives exists and can only exist in such a way that a person becomes identical with it and responsible for it with your very life.

This kind of assessment indicates the legitimacy and significance of the existential approach to the content, set and understanding of the essence of categories in the context of research work that can provide adequate answers to the demands of social practice. It is quite legitimate to conclude that, without denying the importance of scientific knowledge, existentialism seeks to complement it by considering knowledge itself as one of the aspects of being-in-the-world. The question of the possibility of comprehending the essence of man is, to a large extent, a question of paving new paths to the essential definition of truth in order to answer the question posed by A. Camus, according to which the challenge of the time has reached unprecedented severity and is manifested in the fact that it is necessary to decide whether life is worth working or not. to be lived means to answer the basic question of philosophy.

Life is a person’s time, within the boundaries of which he has a certain set of opportunities for goal setting and implementation of intentions in the process of activity. This allows a person to become a subject as a historical person, a creator of material and spiritual culture, a keeper and creator of traditions and, accordingly, a creator of the history of his life.

This is possible because the essential characteristic of a person is the ability to interpret, allowing him to interpret his life and the lives of others and, on the basis of an interpretation recognized as correct, change it. Since a person is never satisfied with what has been achieved, interpretations continually replace each other. Any new interpretation as an attempt to streamline at least a certain part of the world of human life, even if it solves problems that were not previously subject to the previously dominant ideological paradigm, at the same time gives rise to new ones, the solution of which will become the lot of subsequent interpretation.

This suggests that at all times man has needed an explanation of the world, because only in a world that he understands is he able to live. For many centuries, he was obsessed with the desire to explain the world, creating one paradigm of social consciousness after another, thereby providing himself with sedatives for gaining confidence in relationships with the world and the meaning of life, because a world that can be explained, even if not completely satisfactorily, is this the world is familiar to man, creates opportunities for him to realize vitality and aspirations.

Since the essence of a person is a freely chosen action, he enters the outer world as a self-sufficient essence along with his self, but not the one he had before, but modified according to those that have become preferred patterns that were formed in his inner spiritual world. Existence always includes a person’s desire to get rid of something that does not satisfy him in the content of his inner world in order to find something different, more perfect, and this process is inevitably accompanied by the experience of a conflict between what is available and what acts as desired.

In these processes, life appears as a direct experience in which the experienced content and the experiencing subject are fused together: life is always open to the living person, for it, in fact, is the living person himself.

According to Heidegger, in every human life there are basic, fundamental, radical beliefs that determine the implementation of meaningful life choices as the only meaningful option for a person in the context of the situation. The role of collective faith is extremely important here, which, according to M. Heidegger, at any time in human history is associated with the fact that society imputes to a person the reality of collective faith and forces him to reckon with it. “Thrown into one’s “here” presence,” writes M. Heidegger in “Being and Time,” “in fact, every time it is left to its own specific “world.”

In this regard, existentialism seeks to adequately understand surrounding a person the world, first of all, as the world of life and human life as presence, as being, Dasein, explores a person in the context of his life situation with all its problems, unique properties, focusing on the fateful significance of choice in human life, taking into account the fact that human existence - it is always being that designs itself. At every moment in time, a person is characterized by a concern associated with the desire to become something other than what he is at the moment. At the same time, a person always knows who he does not want to be, but always strives to realize life’s opportunities in order to create the story of his life.

It is possible that the inherent ability of a person to freely, creatively create the history of himself includes the ability to explain other forms of his diverse activities and to include these forms in the form of forms - the history of human life.

Since a person always acts in a certain life context and creativity is a key characteristic of him as a free being, then, accordingly, only and exclusively freedom guarantees a person’s relationship with existence as a whole. At the same time, it is freedom that creates the conditions and possibilities for the existence of a changed present as a near or distant future. Since man exists as the property of freedom, it is precisely because of this that he is capable of history; as a creative being, creating itself, overcoming itself, designing itself, for which language is the house of being. A person snores his presence in language, which means that he is characterized by a deep respect-inspiring desire to go beyond the boundaries of language, which manifests itself, in particular, in the creation of various forms of theoretical knowledge with a pronounced tendency for its increment and the emergence of subsequent multiple variants of interpretation, enhancing responsibility to oneself, to other people, to nature and society.

Heidegger attributes responsibility to a person as immanently inherent in his very essence, for it is precisely this that allows a person to gain authentic being, gives strength to resist the oppressive processes of unification and standardization of all forms and aspects of human life, which continuously reproduce the most favorable conditions for the ever-increasing attractiveness of an impersonal, inauthentic, anonymous existence , which is greatly facilitated by the realization that freedom of choice is not only an immanent good for a person, but also a continuous risk. Freedom is an internal component of the existential, i.e. it enters into the being of the person himself.

A person’s reluctance to make efforts to find peace and his own selfhood leads to increased tension when interacting with the outside world. Behavior that does not correspond to the life situation, generally accepted values ​​and the world of other people leads to the fact that thinking is carried out in the language of aspirations, without taking into account situational logic and life realities determined by a specific situation, including, according to M. Heidegger, a person’s certain disposition towards the world And own life.

Mood is of fundamental importance for the concept under consideration, because the world is first of all and most accessible to man through mood and Dasein itself, as being-here, includes the concept of the world order, the world in the sense of the mode and way in which the continuously developing and modifying existence is accessible to the person living here and now. Based on this, the work thoroughly analyzes such variants of existence as genuine and inauthentic existence. A person’s choice of the option of inauthentic existence acts as a fall, which is characterized primarily by dissolution in people through the dominance of public interpretation through rumors, curiosity and ambiguity: the essentially falling presence turns out to be outside the truth.

By freeing a person from solving the problems of real understanding, the dominance of public interpretation gives him the opportunity to lose himself in the world, creating the illusion of a genuine living life. The fall has its own existential meaning, which consists primarily in the preservation of existence: we are talking about being able to be in the world, even in the mode of non-property, for the fall into people is always realized in the mode of indifference and alienation on the basis of groundlessness. Inauthenticity lies in personal conflict and projection onto the outside world. Fall is dissonance. Freedom is not an object and cannot become such, since it is an internal characteristic of being.

The life reward for those who have fallen into humanity is a calm, confident, safe existence. This kind of attraction life story manifests itself in the escape of modern man from meaningful reflection: the essence of truth is freedom as the assumption of existence, and since it is felt as a heavy burden, people tend to easily abandon it, although truth and only it allows a person to verify himself as a being. According to existentialism, existence precedes essence. At the same time, existence is always factual, and existentiality itself is essentially determined by facticity as abandonment, and this entails concern for being as the ability to be. This concern is always present only in a person’s practical attitude towards achieving his goal; in the context of care, a person shapes the being of his world and his own, and the change always concerns a person’s being here and now and occurs at the core of his being. This means that a person is characterized by sustainable behavior, which is a condition for the ability to be in the world.

Existence itself in the version of true existence is found only in communication, since only the latter makes it possible to realize self-understanding through understanding another. The structure inherent in Dasein always presupposes being in the world as determining all other forms of experience and parameters of existence. A person needs his radical choice of his life story to be confirmed by others, since he cannot realize his life plans alone.

Since existence itself is essentially freedom, it is precisely this circumstance that determines its possibilities, both actual and potential, and freedom does not exist outside of being, outside Dasein, but is valid only as a human presence here and now. Existence is something that can never become an object. It cannot be found among the objective world; it is inherent only in man, for only he understands that the fundamental characteristic of being is finitude. And if a person wants to become what he is, then he should not be deceived about the fragility, insecurity, finitude of his stay in the world - it is in this turning towards the end that the solitude of a person is accomplished to his unique presence.

So, the features of Heidegger’s interpretation of being as such in the book “Being and Time” can be in the best possible way described from the point of view of the opposition of being and essence that he finds there. He tells us that, at least for his purposes, being is always the being of essences, but it is not the essence itself. When he says that being is always the being of entities, and develops this statement by declaring that being is what determines entities as entities, it is natural to assume that being must be the defining and thus essential quality of entities - that which makes their essences. It seems quite clear, however, that when Heidegger denies that being itself is an essence, he also excludes the possibility of understanding being as what we usually mean by the concept of the property of essence

Conclusion

According to the research carried out, we came to the conclusion that the main attention in the philosophy of M. Heidegger is given to the analysis of the meaning of the category of being, which he fills with a unique content. In his opinion, “being from the early beginnings of Western European thought to this day means the same thing as presence. From presence, presence, the present sounds. The latter, according to popular belief, forms a characteristic of time with the past and future. Being as presence is determined by time.” In other words, being for Heidegger is the existence of things in time, or existence.

The main point of understanding all things is, according to Heidegger, human existence. The thinker denotes the existence of man with the term “dasein,” breaking with the philosophical tradition in which this term means “present being,” “existent.” In Heidegger, according to researchers of his work, “dasein” rather means the existence of consciousness. The founder of German existentialism emphasizes that only man knows about his mortality and only he knows the temporary nature of his existence. Thanks to this, he is able to realize his existence.

A person, entering the world and being present in it, experiences a state of care. It appears in the form of the unity of three moments: “being-in-the-world”, “running ahead” and “being-with-in-the-world-existence”. To be an existential being, Heidegger believed, means to be open to the knowledge of existence.

Considering “caring” as “running ahead,” the philosopher wants to emphasize the point of difference between human existence and any material existence that takes place in the world. Human existence constantly seems to “slip forward” and thus contains new possibilities that are recorded as a “project”. In other words, human existence is self-designing. The project of being realizes the awareness of the movement of human existence in time. This is the possibility of considering being as existing in history.

Understanding “care” as “being-with-in-the-world-existence” means a specific way of relating to things as human companions. The structure of care seems to unite the past, future and present. Moreover, Heidegger’s past appears as abandonment, the present as doom to be enslaved by things, and the future as a “project” influencing us. Depending on the priority of one of these elements, being can be authentic or inauthentic.

We deal with inauthentic being and the existence corresponding to it when the preponderance of the component of the present in the existence of things obscures his finitude from a person, that is, when being is completely absorbed by the objective and social environment. Inauthentic existence, according to Heidegger, cannot be eliminated by transforming the environment.

In conditions of inauthentic existence and philosophizing, a person “comes into a state of alienation.” Heidegger calls the inauthentic way of existence, in which a person is immersed in the world of things dictating his behavior, existence in “Man,” that is, in the impersonal “Nothing” that determines everyday human existence. The human being pushed into the Nothing, thanks to the openness of the Nothing, joins the elusive being, that is, gets the opportunity to comprehend the existing. Nothingness refers us to existence, being a condition for the possibility of revealing existence. Our curiosity in relation to Nothing gives rise to metaphysics, which for him ensures that the knowing subject goes beyond the limits of existence.

Heidegger's distinction between existence and existential is based on the more important Heideggerian distinction between being and being, on the ontological differentiation that permeates his entire philosophy.

The concept of “existence” used in this sense should not be confused with the non-classical interpretation of existence inherent in Kierkegaard, i.e. - in Heidegger's words - an existential interpretation, and also Heidegger's philosophizing should not be included in existentialism. Heidegger himself insists on this and emphasizes that the difference between the existential and existential understanding of existence is the difference in the formulation of the question. Heidegger asks the question of being, and it is he who tries to pose it anew, and not “to communicate what has long been known.” At the same time, questioning “at every step makes it difficult to choose the right word.”

Heidegger is concerned with being in general. The concept of “existence” is broader in Heidegger, since for him “existence precedes spirituality,” whereas for Kierkegaard, existence and spirituality are identified. But Heidegger continues to use quasi-religious terms, although he deprives them of all ethical content.

Heidegger's philosophy, being an attempt to comprehend the social upheavals that befell European civilization in the first half of the twentieth century, addresses the problem of crisis situations, critical circumstances in which a person finds himself. Being in this philosophy is presented as some immediate undifferentiated integrity of subject and object, man and the world. As genuine being, initial being, the experience itself stands out, namely, a person’s experience of his “being-in-the-world.”

In this case, being is understood as a directly given human existence, as existence, which is unknowable either by scientific or rationalistic-philosophical means.

Existence is not directed towards itself. And only in moments of the deepest upheavals, in conditions of a “borderline situation” (in the face of death), can a person begin to see clearly and comprehend existence as the core of his being.

List of used literature

1.“First” positivism // Anthology of world philosophy. T. 3. M., 1971

.Arendt H. Heidegger is eighty years old. // Questions of philosophy. 1998. No. 1.

.Berdyaev N. Philosophy of the Free Spirit M., 1994.

.Bogomolov A.S. Modern bourgeois philosophy and religion. M.: Politizdat, 1977.

.Being and time of Martin Heidegger in the philosophy of the twentieth century (discussion materials) // Questions of Philosophy. - 1998. - No. 1. - P. 32-46.

.Bykhovsky, B.E. Kierkegaard / B.E. Bykhovsky. - M.: Mysl, 1972

.Vodolagin, A.V. World history in the interpretation of Martin Heidegger / A.V. Vodolagin // Philosophical Sciences. - 1989. - No. 9. - From 12-20.

.Gabitova, R.M. Man and society in German existentialism (Heidegger and Jaspers) / R.M. Gabitova. - M., 1972

.Gaidenko P.P. From historical hermeneutics to “hermeneutics of being.” A critical analysis of the evolution of M. Heidegger // Questions of Philosophy. - 1987. - No. 10.

.Guseinov A. A., Irrlitz G. A brief history of ethics. - M.: Mysl, 1987. - 589 p.

.Guseinov A.A., Apresyan R.G. Ethics. M.: Gardariki, 2003. - 472 p.

12.Dolgov, K.M. From Kierkegaard to Camus: Essays on European philosophical and aesthetic thought of the twentieth century / K.M. Dolgov. - M., 1990. - P. 344-387.

.Zotov, A.F. Western philosophy of the twentieth century / A.F. Zotov, Yu.K. Melville. - M., 1997

.Ilyenkov E.V. Philosophy and culture. M.: Politizdat, 1991.

.History of philosophy. West - Russia - East. Book 1-2 / ed. N.V. Motroshilova. - M., 1997

.History of philosophy. Ed. Mapelmana V.M., Penkova E.M. M., "Prior", 1997.

.Camus A. The rebellious man. M., 1990.

.Kanke V.A. Philosophy. M., “Logos”, 1996.

.Kuznetsov V.G. Preface to the publication of an excerpt from M. Heidegger’s work “Being and Time” // Bulletin of Moscow State University - series 7 philosophy. 1997. No. 4.

.Kuznetsov, V.G. Hermeneutics and humanitarian knowledge / V.G. Kuznetsov. - M., 1991.

.Kuzmenko G.N. Ethics. M.: INFRA-M, Publishing House “Ves Mir”, 2002. - 144 p.

.Culturology /ed. A.A. Radugina M.: Center, 2001 - 336 p.

.Kierkegaard S. Final unscientific afterword to “Philosophical crumbs”. Per. from Danish N. Isaeva and S. Isaeva - St. Petersburg. Publishing house St. Petersburg. Univ., 2005.

.Kierkegaard, S. Fear and Trembling: Trans. from date / S. Kierkegaard. - M.: Republic, 1993

.Mikhailov A.V. Martin Heidegger: a man in the world. - M.: Moscow Worker, 1990.

.Mikhailov I. Was Heidegger a phenomenologist? // Logos. M., 1994. No. 3.

.Mikhailov M. Notes on the translation of V.V. Bibikhin, Heidegger’s work “What is metaphysics” // Logos. M., 1997. No. 9.

.May R. Origins of the existential direction in psychology and its significance / In the book: Existential psychology. Existence / Transl. from English M. Zanadvorova, Y. Ovchinnikova. - M.: April Press, EKSMO-Press Publishing House, 2001.

.May R. Discovery of Genesis. - M.: Institute of General Humanitarian Research, 2004.

.Fundamentals of philosophy. Ed. E.V. Popova, M., “Vlados”, 1997.

.Road V. Expression and meaning. M.: Ad Marginem, 1995.

.Pozdnyakov M.V., About the event (Vom Ereigms) of M. Heidegger // Questions of Philosophy. - 1997. - No. 5.

.Russell B. History of Western Philosophy. M., 1959.

34.Russell, B. History of Western philosophy in 6 volumes. T. 5./ B. Russell. - M.: Science, 1961

.Reale D., Antiseri D. Western philosophy from its origins to the present day. Volume 4. From romanticism to the present day. St. Petersburg: TK Petropolis LLP 1997.

.Sartre J. Existentialism is humanism // Twilight of the Gods M., 1989.

.Sidorov A. N. Jean-Paul Sartre and libertarian socialism in France (50-70s of the twentieth century): Monograph. - Irkutsk: Irkutsk State Publishing House technical university, 2006.

.Stepin, V.S. Philosophy of Science. General problems / V.S. Stepin. - M., 2004

.Suvorova, A.N. Introduction to modern philosophy / A.N. Suvorov. - M., 2006

.Tavrizyan G.M. Art and life. M. Heidegger on the essence of a work of art // Philosophy. Religion. Culture. M.: Nauka, 1982.

.Tipsina A.N. German existentialism and religion. Leningrad State University: 1990.

.Falev E.V. Interpretation of reality in Heidegger's early hermeneutics. // Bulletin of Moscow State University - series 7 philosophy. 1997. No. 5.

.Filippov, L.I. Philosophical anthropology J.-P. Sartre / L.I. Filippov.- M., 1977

.Heidegger and Wittgenstein: criticism of metaphysics - criticism of technology - ethics // Questions of Philosophy. 1998. No. 5.

.Heidegger M. Letter on Humanism // Time and Being. M., 1993

.Heidegger M. Creative landscape // Works and reflections different years/ M. Heidegger; lane with him. A. V. Mikhailova. M., 1993.

.Heidegger, M. Being and time / M. Heidegger. - M., 1997

.Heidegger, M. Basic concepts of metaphysics // Time and Being / M. Heidegger. M., 1993.

49.Heidegger, M. Nietzsche’s words “God is dead” / M. Heidegger // Questions of Philosophy. - 1990. - No. 7. - P. 36-45

.Shestov L. Kierkegaard and existential philosophy. M., 1992.

Philosophy. Cheat sheets Malyshkina Maria Viktorovna

78. Philosophy of M. Heidegger

78. Philosophy of M. Heidegger

Existentialism (from German existieren and French exister - “to exist”) is addressed not to clarifying the essence of a person, but to his everyday existence.

Martin Heidegger (1889–1975) – philosopher, founder of existentialism.

Heidegger viewed being as a kind of non-objective principle that underlies the entire world of things. This is the "immanent transcendent". It is immanent because we know it from the inside of our own lives; being does not need to be sought far, it is closest to a person. Being is opposed to “existence” – objective reality. The world is a place where being and consciousness interact.

Heidegger believed that in the world of things there is a single entity from which the meaning of existence can be considered. This is human life. Therefore, it is necessary to describe the “worldliness of the world.”

Human existence is Dasein - “here-being”, finite, present existence. Its essence is existence - openness, aspiration to something else, access to Nothing (beyond the limits of all existence, all objectivity). Aspiration towards Nothing is an expression of our finitude, temporality, but at the same time it is an entry into the truth of being. Being, in essence, is Being unto death.

The existence of a person in the everyday world can be characterized as “own” and “non-own”. “Non-own being” is life “like others.” In “inauthentic being,” a person is completely immersed in existence, and he does not remember his own death, because his world is impersonal.

“One’s own being” is associated with the awareness of one’s mortality. In death, a person is not a function, not an object among objects. Here he is unique. He who has realized death exists, he is always ahead of himself.

The theme of nihilism occupies an important place in the work of M. Heidegger. Nihilism for Heidegger is the fate of modern European man; it is expressed in the aversion of the gaze from the supersensible world and full immersion into material interests and passionate goal achievement. Being on earth means for a person to build, live, think.

Heidegger paints an image of human existence “on earth.” This true existence is the patriarchal peasant life.

From the book Heidegger and Eastern Philosophy: The Search for the Complementarity of Cultures author Korneev Mikhail Yakovlevich

Part one The philosophy of Martin Heidegger in its “openness” to the East

From the book Philosophy of Science and Technology: Lecture Notes author Tonkonogov A V

§3. Heidegger and Latin American philosophy. Perceptions of Heidegger’s philosophy in Latin America Starting to consider this issue, which is important for understanding both the place and role of Heidegger’s philosophy in the panorama of world philosophy of the twentieth century, and for

From the book Steps Beyond the Horizon author Heisenberg Werner Karl

§3. Heidegger's philosophy and the Taoist teaching of xuan-xue First, a brief historical background on xuan-xue. This doctrine, the Doctrine of the Unseen, or mystology, was one of the most metaphysical systems in the history of traditional Chinese thought. Xuanxue arose in

From the book Two Images of Faith. Collection of works by Buber Martin

§1. Eastern thought and Heidegger's philosophy: possible approaches A comparative analysis of Heidegger's philosophy in comparison with the intellectual traditions of the East suggests the possibility of two approaches, or rather a two-sided approach: consideration of philosophy

From the book Western Philosophy of the 20th Century author Zotov Anatoly Fedorovich

§3. Indian existentialism of Guru Dutt and the existential philosophy of Heidegger Our reader is little familiar with the work of K. Guru Dutt, except from a critical analysis of some provisions of his book “Existentialism and Indian Philosophy”, carried out almost three times

From the book Personality and Eros author Yannaras Christ

Part three Nasr’s perception of Heidegger (analysis of some of his mentions of Heidegger’s name in the texts of some of his works) It was not by chance that we talked about mentions, because, polemicizing in absentia with Heidegger, he does not specifically indicate a single work of the German philosopher and does not

From the book Philosophy of Existentialism author Bolnow Otto Friedrich

§2 Existential philosophy of Leopold Sédar Senghor between the existentialism of Sartre and the phenomenology of Heidegger L.S. Senghor, an outstanding African poet, thinker and statesman (President of Senegal from 1960 to 1981), is also an original philosopher. He

From the book Dispute about Plato. Stefan George's Circle and the German University author Mayatsky Mikhail A.

8.2. Philosophy of Martin Heidegger German thinker who had a tremendous influence on the philosophy of the twentieth century. Martin Heidegger (1889–1976) began his career as an assistant to Edmund Husserl, a professor at the University of Freiburg. After the patron retired, he was in charge

From the book Phenomenological Psychiatry and Existential Analysis. History, thinkers, problems author Vlasova Olga Viktorovna

On the occasion of M. Heidegger's eightieth birthday Dear, dear Heidegger! Warmly congratulating you on your eightieth birthday and wishing you happiness, I take this favorable opportunity to write to you what are the most important thoughts in your writings.

From the author's book

From the author's book

§ 1. Existentialism of M. Heidegger Martin Heidegger was born on September 26, 1889 in Meskirch (Land of Baden) in Germany. Heidegger's father is a craftsman, a cooper and at the same time a cleric and bell ringer at a local Catholic church. Mother is a peasant woman. The future philosopher received

From the author's book

From the author's book

1. GENERALIZING FORMULAS OF JASPERS AND HEIDEGGER Only on the basis of ideas about existence that were still developed in free form will it now be possible to correctly understand those peculiar formulas with the help of which existential philosophers tried to capture in a concise form

From the author's book

5. The Case of Heidegger A special - and very problematic - page is the possible influence of Georgian Platonism on Heidegger's interpretation of Plato. Of course, Heidegger’s brilliant originality does not allow us to talk simply about “influences” (from George or

From the author's book

§ 5. Fundamental ontology of Martin Heidegger Martin Heidegger, developing the ideas of his teacher Edmund Husserl, simultaneously proposed several innovations that led to the emergence of a new direction in the interdisciplinary space of philosophy and psychiatry

From the author's book

§ 3. Zollikon seminars of Martin Heidegger Existential analysis not only developed as a result of the influence of Heidegger’s fundamental ontology, but was also interpreted and corrected by him. This fact of reverse influence is important for the development

Photographer Andrea Effulge

Heidegger's philosophy

Martin Heidegger is a prominent German philosopher who left us quite recently, leaving behind many works, including: “Being and Time”, “Kant and the Problem of Metaphysics”, “Introduction to Metaphysics”, “Plato’s Doctrine of Truth: “A Letter on “Humanism” ", "The Path to Language", "To the Matter of Thought" and others. Heidegger's philosophy is based both on neo-Kantianism and philosophy of life, and on Husserl's phenomenology. The thinker successfully adapted the latter to solve the problems of the philosophy of existentialism. Returning to the question of the meaning of being, the philosopher again asked himself the problem of existence, which he solved by forming a theory of the ontology of a particular person, precisely based on Husserl’s phenomenology. It is impossible not to note the influence of Jaspers, with whom Heidegger corresponded and debated for several decades.

Heidegger's philosophy, solving the problem of the meaning of existence, asserts that it is open only to the human mind, since, faced with various manifestations of Nothing, a person strives with his mind towards common essences, thanks to which he can cognize his existence. As stated in my article on the philosophy of existentialism, being is the mind's awareness and experience of its existence. Martin Heidegger, speaking about, for example, fear and horror, as well as about any other influential experiences, focused on the fact that for a person experiencing horror, everything that exists loses shades and details, and is also mixed into some general mass, and Anything that is not at all important loses all meaning.

That is, in the philosophy of existentialism, Heidegger’s being, observed even from the outside, proves the ability of the mind to experience and understand being itself, but only personal, personal. Although the latter theory does not interfere at all with the ontology of reason. In his first work, “Being and Time,” Heidegger draws attention to the important role in human existence of the fact of his finitude and the mind’s awareness of the inevitability of the end of existence, thus logically this role is transferred to time. Time acts as a criterion, a factor of influence, and an important noumenon in being, independent of being itself as such, that is, for example, the intensity of existence does not affect time itself as such, and this is important for existence according to Heidegger.

The philosophy of Martin Heidegger briefly criticized the classical European science of man in that the latter focuses on the vulgar present in human existence, dividing existence into moments of the present - “now”, ignoring the existential ontological value of the future and especially the past. The thinker’s main claim to European philosophy was that it identified or closely connected being with objective existence, with the material sensory world, despite the fact that the origins and foundations of being lie in consciousness - a subjective and immaterial phenomenon. According to Heidegger, existence is not identical to presence in existence - the world of things and physical phenomena. The thinker argued that rushing into the future in his thoughts, the mind experiences true existence, while concentrating on the present, and especially the world of things, it forgets about the finitude of existence, being in the illusions of the moment.

The importance of the nuance of the ontology of personality and its being Martin Heidegger emphasized not only finitude, but also the one-time nature and fundamental irrevocability of each moment. A person in his being and his awareness states his uniqueness; personal experience is reflected in individual fears, conscience, awareness of guilt and care, level of determination and much more. All this, according to Heidegger, is a spiritual experience of being, which is in no way a material being from the world of things. The philosophy of Martin Heidegger briefly and not entirely criticized the technogenic civilization of the thinker’s modernity and the myths in philosophy itself, which, according to the thinker, contained many far-fetched hypotheses.

Answering the question: What is philosophy? Heidegger derived thinking as a way of knowing from memory, including spiritual experience. And memory itself is etymologically associated with gratitude and, one might say, morality. Continuing the etymological research of the ancient Germanic language, the thinker derives the concept of thought as a phenomenon that gives rise to the inner world, the same individual spiritual experience, and he calls language the manifestation of being itself. That is, language is a verbal form of reflection of the awareness and experience of existence - being. The philosopher draws attention to the fact that even an unfamiliar language that a person does not understand is still not just chatter for him, but a conscious fact of transmitting information in words. Language is the tool with which a person is able to declare his existence, including explaining it to himself.

Martin Heidegger's philosophy focuses on both ontological existence and the morality of humanity as a whole. And the peculiarities of the relationship between the thinker and the German government during the Second World War only illustrate that the philosopher needs to avoid participation in politics. But in any case, it is not possible to cover all the research of this researcher in a short article, but it remains to advise turning directly to his work.