Early Greek Thinking: The Dawn of Western Philosophy

by Martin Heidegger, David Farrell Krell (Translator), Frank A. Capuzzi (Translator)

Heidegger's key essays on the pre-Socratic philosophers; an unexcelled look at the roots of Western philosophy.

Genres: Philosophy, History, Nonfiction, German Literature, Essays, Metaphysics, Greece

144 pages, Paperback

First published January 1, 1975

About the author

Martin Heidegger (1889-1976) was a German philosopher whose work is perhaps most readily associated with phenomenology and existentialism, although his thinking should be identified as part of such philosophical movements only with extreme care and qualification. His ideas have exerted a seminal influence on the development of contemporary European philosophy. They have also had an impact far beyond philosophy, for example in architectural theory (see e.g., Sharr 2007), literary criticism (see e.g., Ziarek 1989), theology (see e.g., Caputo 1993), psychotherapy (see e.g., Binswanger 1943/1964, Guignon 1993) and cognitive science (see e.g., Dreyfus 1992, 2008; Wheeler 2005; Kiverstein and Wheeler forthcoming).

Reviews

[Dan · Rating 5 out of 5]

Unless we understand Ancient Greek, the modern translations of Heraclitus, Parmenides, and Anaximander seem trivial or pointless. Confirming this for some time now, all mainstream and official philosophers present the Ancient Greeks as the ones who slightly glimpsed our modern sciences and technology, but could not grasp them adequately because of their primitiveness and muddled magical thinking.

By translating them and by going against the entire modern worldview, Heidegger presents them as the genuine beginning from where everything went downhill in subsequent history. At this very beginning – the Ancient Greeks sighted, grappled, and indirectly expressed in their sayings/writings the distinction between presencing/Being and presented/beings. Eventually, the distinction fell into oblivion along with the presencing/Being side of it. For us moderns, only beings are and there is nothing more to add or justify here. According to Heidegger, our modern representational thinking simply does not allow us to see anything that is too close/near us; and as such divides everything into non-existing or trivial/obvious beings. In this book, Heidegger enlists the Early Greeks thinkers to support his project; and in doing so he turns the boring and senile mainstream understanding of them into a lively, relevant, original, and radical dialogue – assuming one can follow him on this path...

[Cameron · Rating 4 out of 5]

Four short essays chock-full of Heidegger's radical and fascinating interpretations of pre-Socratic Greek philosophy. Each essay offers some uncharacteristically clear passages on the major themes that dominate his later works. Those handful of sentences alone were worth the several months I spent searching for a readable edition. A great read but probably not a good place for a Heidegger novice to start his journey. Then again, what is?

[c · Rating 2 out of 5]

Largely mindnumbing, and not in a good way. The most forthcoming Heidegger is here is when he says, in "Moira", that his conception of Being (ostensibly drawn from Heraclitus and Anaximander, but not really) is constituted by the "participially-presencing duality" of Being and beings within the λόγος derived from λέγειν [it is highly unlikely this is an accurate derivation] which is "properly" translated as a laying-together-under-shelter before a storm (include whatever ludditic, modern contrivance you want for "storm").

However, it was interesting to see Heidegger, ostensibly a high prince if not royalty proper of the ~Continental Tradition~ using pretty much the same approach early analytic philosophers use (cf. Gilbert Ryle and other Behaviorists with relation to philosophy of mind)—i.e. following the word-use, essentially. This was an amusing byline in an otherwise disappointingly ho-hum collection. Hope to get back to Being and Time sometime soon; that seems to be where the action is.

[Truls Ljungström · Rating 5 out of 5]

En bred genomgång som behandlar ett par kända försokratiker, och hur de har tolkats i tysk idétradition. Boken är både rolig och läsvärd, vilket inte är jättevanligt, och innehåller ett par observationer som tvingar en att tänka om kring Anaximander och hur kontexten kring begreppet Apeiron - det gränslösa (i ordets alla bemärkelser) fungerar.

[Kelly Head · Rating 3 out of 5]

Every time I read something by Heidegger I question my decision-making abilities. The guy was a Nazi rector of Freiburg University during the early rise of Hitler, 1933-1934, and he never really apologized for his behavior or felt remorse. Still, he is frequently considered the greatest philosopher of the twentieth century next to Wittgenstein, so I feel I have to at least give him a chance. There were a number of philosophers who ended up aiding dictators, Plato and Aristotle no less. He even had an affair with a young Hannah Arendt, an early student of his, who ended up rekindling a friendship with Heidegger later in life. I keep hoping that I will get a better understanding of why people continue to think he is brilliant, but instead I just get a firmer conviction that the continental tradition is nihilistic and solipsistic going back to Hegel. He perpetuates a tradition in German philosophy of writing in this obscure, gnomic style that frequently uses the etymology of words to build elaborate theories of Being. For this reason, half of the sentences in this book are unintelligible, and not only because of all the Greek characters. Those that are intelligible are fairly interesting, but only if you have some appreciation for what the phenomenological project hopes to accomplish. In short, phenomenology seeks to describe the phenomena of consciousness. To be is to be perceived. Or, as Heidegger says in one of the few comprehensible passages in the book, "Mortals are irrevocably bound to the revealing-concealing gathering which lights everything present in its presencing. But they run from the lighting, and turn only toward what is present, which is what immediately concerns them in their everyday commerce with each other. They believe that this trafficking in what is present by itself creates for them a sufficient familiarity with it. But it nonetheless remains foreign to them. For they have no inkling of what they have been entrusted with: presencing, which in its lighting first allows what is present to come to appearance. LOGOS, in whose lighting they come and go, remains concealed from them, and forgotten" (122). Heidegger writes essays on two fragments from Heraclitus, one by Anaximander, and one by Parmenides—some of the greatest of the great pre-Socratics, in my opinion. I found his essay on Parmenides to be the most engaging, even though I think his non-traditional interpretation totally misses the mark.

[مسعود حسینی · Rating 3 out of 5]

فعلا فقط فصل آخر، درباره هراکلیتوس، رو خوندم. هایدگر توی این فصل روی یکی از پاره های هراکلیتوس تمرکز می کنه و ضمن تفسیر این پاره، چند پاره ی دیگه رو هم پیش میکشه. پاره ی اصلی میگه: چه کس می تواند از آنچه هرگز غروب نمی کند پنهان شود (τό μή δυνόν ποτε πώς αν τις λάθοι). حرف هایدگر اینه که با دنبال کردن معانی اصلی کلمات یونانی، میشه نشون داد که در این پاره سخن بر سر فوسیس (Φύσις) هست. یعنی آنچه هرگز غروب نمی کند فوسیسه. اما هایدگر سعی می کنه نشون بده که فوسیس و آنچه هرگز غروب نمی کنه Lichtung یا نورگاهه، و نورگاه ساحت حضور امر حاضره. در ضمن، نورگاه پوشنده - آشکارکننده است، نه صرفا آشکار کننده، و هایدگر سعی می کنه نشون بده که این واقعیت در این پاره بیان شده: فوسیس دوست دارد پنهان شود. فوسیس یعنی rising یا نورگاه یا ساحت حضور امر حاضر، با این حال دوست داره پنهان بشه. فوسیس هم نورگاهه هم تاریکی. هر دو با همه. یه پاره ی دیگه هم خیلی نظرمو جلب کرد: خرها کاه را به طلا ترجیح می دهند. از نظر هایدگر، هراکلیتوس می دونسته که انسان ها بیش از حضور به امر حاضر توجه می کنن، بنابراین به جای تفکر درباره نور طلا، Lichtung، به کاه یا امور پیش دست (Vorhanden) توجه نشون می دن.

[Brandt · Rating 3 out of 5]

Only read this book if you want an analysis of the root of ancient Greek philosophers. I would highly suggest that you become familiar first, with the writings, ideas, and history of the Pre-Socratic philosophers; specifically , Anaximander, Heraclitus, and Parmenides. Then, I suggest you use an index card to write down the ancient Greek words being discussed and their definition (both traditional and Heideggerian definitions). Keep this 3x5 card handy whilst you are reading so you can refer to it when the words come up. If you approach the reading in this way, you will find it far more rewarding (in my opinion, unless you are a "Classics" scholar or fluent in Latin and Greek).
Anyway, it is worth the read as a supplemental "side reading" to help understand the Heideggerian approach to thinking.

[S · Rating 4 out of 5]

Bit of a bitch to read, with lots of Greek and no transliterations, but also poetic, profound, and transcendent.

[Will Spohn · Rating 3 out of 5]

Heidegger’s concern with Being here is for the most part never really put out into the open, at least from what I could gather. By reinterpreting several pre-socratics, he seems to be pursuing the “destiny of Being” that ostensibly was given to the “West,” at that time. What exactly that destiny is, I am not sure. Despite my confusion, there was still a lot to get out of this slim volume. Being a student of the Greek language myself, the principle of translation in which you must cast aside your presumptions and attachment to your own language (as much as possible) is something practically useful. A lot of time in each essay is spent in an attempt to properly translate words in Greek which, ordinarily translated, can be misleading. So in relation to three words—Λογος, Μοιρα, and Αληθεια—Heidegger seeks to define Being and being (which seem to be two different things). There were hints about more modern issues, like the fracturing of the sciences and the inability to define what “is,” but these for the most part are in the background. If you want a short read dissecting pre-socratic fragments, this books is worth a shot. Although Heidegger employe his typical method of using unphilosophical words, they aren’t too difficult to grasp.

One side thing that kind of bugged me was when he cited Nietzsche I was reminded how he is (according to Kaufmann) notoriously incorrect in his interpretation of him. The cameos Nietzsche made seemed fairly tame, but I wonder how accurate they really are.

[Attay Kremer · Rating 4 out of 5]

One of Heidegger's peaks. Heidegger is at his best reading other writers, and the pre-Socratic philosophers bring the best out of him, rivalled only by the magic that happens when he encounters Hölderlin. A master-class in hermeneutics, and a masterful philosophical treatise both as a contribution to the secondary literature on pre-Socratic thinkers, and an original contribution to the history of thought.

[Quiver · Rating 5 out of 5]

Delightfully mind-bending-expansion of what is possible to do with language.

[Adam Dalva · Rating 4 out of 5]

Sometimes fascinating, occasionally troubling, and frustratingly difficult.

[Ian · Rating 5 out of 5]

This is another pretty good addition to your Heidegger collection. I would recommend it as a collection of essays that all relate to each other and build on key ideas of these early thinkers, centered on a few Greek terms and translating them, and the consequence of hermeneutical understanding.
If you have read a lot of Heidegger there will not be anything particularly new, but if you have not read much Heidegger this is a great way to see Heidegger's method and thought, related to some of the thinkers that he credits most for his philosophy, Heraclitus and Parmenides.

[Edward Moran · Rating 3 out of 5]

A lot of Greek terms make this book difficult to understand. Heidegger refers in the first part to the seer in homer to show what he means by presencing.

[Matthew Giobbi · Rating 5 out of 5]

The most accessible work by Heidegger that I have found. Excellent experience.