This post is part of a series. Go to the Introduction
What is the meaning of being? In philosophy “being” is the main question in metaphysics, or more specifically ontology. This is also the question that drives Heidegger’s project. He sets the scene in his preface with a quote from Plato’s Sophist. The visitor from Elea has been in dialogue with the young Theaetetus. They’ve been going back and forth about such things as what we mean when we use expressions like is and is not. In the spirit of inquiry, Theaetetus goes along and acts as a foil to the visitor’s line of questioning. But the more they talk about the expression “being,” the more tangled things seem to get. Finally, the visitor asks:
“What do you want to signify when you say being? Obviously, you’ve known for a long time. We thought we did, but now we’re confused about it” (Plato 244a).
Heidegger quotes this line right at the start of his book. He says we’re still waiting for the answer. To make matters worse, we are no longer “perplexed at our inability to understand the expression ‘being.'” We’ve forgotten to ask the question altogether. His task is to “reawaken an understanding for the meaning of this question.” Heidegger lists three prejudices or objections that come up when questions about being are raised:
1. Being is universal. For example, we can talk about individuals but at the end of the day we’re all human beings.
2. Even if we wanted to ask, the question makes no sense. We know what it means to be human, to be a dog, or a cat, but we can’t talk about being in the abstract. So don’t ask.
3. Isn’t it obvious? Everyone already knows what it means to say, “the dress is green” or “the girl has pigtails”. If we want to understand being, all we have to do is just look at the person or object.
Heidegger addresses each in turn. To assert that being is universal doesn’t make the question any clearer. Do we know what we mean when we say that being is a universal concept? Since “being” is obscure, this is all the more reason to discuss it.
As for the second one, just because the question makes no sense that’s no reason to continue to ignore it. Quite the reverse, Heidegger thinks. The question “forces it upon us.”
As for the last prejudice, Heidegger is skeptical that being is self-evident. Like the visitor from Elea, we get confused easily just talking about it. This talk of self-evidence and confusion presents an interesting enigma. We think the question of being is obvious to everyone and yet being remains “shrouded in darkness.” He muses at another point that the question “is the most universal and the emptiest” (40).
The whole book is Heidegger’s attempt to answer the question of the meaning of being. Before diving into it, I need to present a very brief survey of the history of philosophy with respect to being. Heidegger calls this “the tradition” since it’s a view that has shaped Western philosophical thinking for over 2,500 years.
Next Post in Series: The Ontological Tradition