What do you think?
Rate this book
Ser-en-el-Mundo. Comentario a la División I de Ser y Tiempo de Martin Heidegger
Ser-en-el-Mundo es una guía a una de las obras filosóficas más influyentes de este siglo: la División I de Ser y Tiempo donde Martin Heidegger expone su original y poderosa descripción de ser-en-el-mundo, la que luego utiliza para basar su profunda crítica a la ontología y la epistemología tradicionales. Esta obra abre el camino para una nueva apreciación de este filósofo, revelando un vocabulario riguroso e iluminador, indispensable para hablar y reflexionar sobre el fenómeno del mundo.
"En 1889, año en que Nietzsche cae en la locura en la plaza de Turín, nacen Wittgenstein en Viena, capital cultural, y Heidegger en un pueblito del Sur de Alemania. A Heidegger sus padres -él, tonelero y sacristán- lo ponen por el cielo al decir de Gadamer; a Wittgenstein, hijo de un magnate del acero, por los infiernos (tres de sus cuatro hermanos se suicidan, él bordea el suicidio). En este siglo que acaba, Wittgenstein es EL filósofo en el mundo de habla inglesa, Heidegger en el resto del mundo. Ambos ni se conocieron ni reconocieron. En la presente interpretación, estas vidas paralelas se aproximan: un mérito de esta obra. Otro mérito, el último, es ver en el 'estado de resuelto' a que llega Ser y Tiempo una secularización de la religiosidad de Kierkegaard." Fernando Zabala, Valparaíso.
"Nadie como Hubert Dreyfus puede explicar la filosofía de Heidegger sin distorsionarla. Si Heidegger hubiera sido tan claro para explicitarse a sí mismo como lo consigue Dreyfus, hace mucho que se hubiera establecido como uno de los más grandes filósofos en el mundo de habla inglesa." Bryan Magee, Londres.
398 pages, Paperback
First published December 14, 1990
About the author
Hubert L. Dreyfus
53 books199 followersHubert Lederer Dreyfus was professor of philosophy at the University of California, Berkeley, where his interests include phenomenology, existentialism, the philosophy of psychology and literature, and the philosophical implications of artificial intelligence.
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 30 of 53 reviews
Read
March 1, 2021خب من صفحهآرای این کتاب بودم و بهطبع خوندمش، اما ابدا معناش این نیست که فهمیدم چی به چیه :))
حالا حالا ها هایدگر برای سیر مطالعاتی من زوده.
لذا امتیازی هم بهش نمیدم
صرفا همینطوری اینجا باشه تا بعدا که وجود و زمان رو بخونم و برگردم به این.
حالا حالا ها هایدگر برای سیر مطالعاتی من زوده.
لذا امتیازی هم بهش نمیدم
صرفا همینطوری اینجا باشه تا بعدا که وجود و زمان رو بخونم و برگردم به این.
May 16, 2009
Didn't go into this book as a big Heidegger fan. Probably because my relationship with Heidegger was based on reading an old shoddy translation of Being and Time, which Dreyfus shows to be flawed. Again, I had just read Dreyfus' Foucault book, and was blown away by it. I had high expectations because Dreyfus is considered one of the pre-eminent Foucault/Heidegger scholars in America (even though he died almost a decade ago) and it lived up to my expectations. I now want to re-read Being and Time! Perhaps I'll teach Heidegger's Being and Time along with this book as a secondary text for a class... could be interesting. Probably better suited for an upper level existentialism/phenomenology course, or for graduate students.
October 29, 2019
A powerhouse. Like running a half-marathon for your brain. Of Heidegger's various commenters, Dreyfus is certainly the most advanced and the most comprehensive. He fearlessly wades down into the rushes and tubers; sifting every shell and shard. Dreyfus was apparently a correspondent with MH in his undergraduate days; and he has sublime mastery of the German language.
He's not always the most enjoyable to read; a few chapters drew from me a frown. But most of them were searingly, blazingly, good. WHEW. Exhausting.
If you don't know Heidegger yet and you despair that human life seems hopelessly muddled and inchoate, stick your toe in these waters. You may find in him, the clarity you seek.
He's not always the most enjoyable to read; a few chapters drew from me a frown. But most of them were searingly, blazingly, good. WHEW. Exhausting.
If you don't know Heidegger yet and you despair that human life seems hopelessly muddled and inchoate, stick your toe in these waters. You may find in him, the clarity you seek.
April 9, 2024
Hubert Dreyfus is one of the more celebrated, as well as controversial, commentators on Heidegger. He was a legendary lecturer at UC Berkeley, particularly for his class on Heidegger, and his ground-breaking philosophical ruminations on artificial intelligence would alone give him a high place in late-twentieth century American philosophy. But as attractive as Dreyfus’s Heidegger has been it has also been divisive, with many finding it so detached from the Heidegger that they have read as to label the subject of this work “Dreydegger”.
I think this is a great book, beautifully presented and written. For Dreyfus, Dasein (Heidegger’s “being-in-the-world”) is not a solitary, psychologizable consciousness making individual decisions, as most older readers of Heidegger had interpreted. Rather, Dasein is the condition for universal, generic human being. This being is, obviously, social and linguistic. It is determined by the meanings given to certain practices in different societies. Heideggerean “chat” is that speech that simply takes social norms as given, as “common sense”. Authentic speech, and being, is that which consciously acknowledges and embraces this social determination that is, ultimately, arbitrary and groundless.
To me, this sounds very much like an articulation of what Heidegger set out to accomplish when writing “Being and Time”. The German thinker claimed at the time to be writing a wholly original work that split with all philosophy that had come before it. He would, he proclaimed, reject all psychologization and valuation so as to come to an understanding of the broadest sense of what made the world possible for the particularly human category of being. I have arrived at the understanding, however, that while Heidegger set out to achieve something like Dreyfus’s interpretation of “Being and Time”, the actual text is something less unique for its time.
Heidegger, understandably, fell short of his preposterous ambitions for his magnum opus. Not only does he psychologize and promote values in his famous book, he does so quite blatantly and, at times, tritely. The notion of anxiety (the original name for “existential angst”), conveniently marginalized by Dreyfus, is too central to the text of “Being and Time” to not read the work in proto-existential terms. In trying to identify the most generic and universal conditions for being, Heidegger falls back on ruminating on the death-obsessed musings of bourgeoisie European intellectuals and their attempts to “live authentically”. (It was these most reactionary impulses in “Being and Time” that most influenced Sartre and, to a lesser extend, Merleau-Ponty.)
Again, I do not think one should be too harsh on Heidegger for this. It was through the influence of Heidegger’s writings, including those written after “Being and Time”, that later thinkers began a critique and rejection of the “subject”. Heidegger prepared the ground for, but did not himself complete the leap away from a transcendental subject, even if he sought to do so.
Dreyfus’s work, “Dreydegger” if you will, has come to seem to me not so much an interpretation, as a correction and updating of “Being and Time” in relation to its authors ambitions. Dreyfus is, from the standpoint of someone writing several decades after Heidegger and having read Heidegger’s more radical disciples, such as Derrida and Foucault, presenting what Heidegger strove but fell short of achieving in “Being and Time”.
I think this is a great book, beautifully presented and written. For Dreyfus, Dasein (Heidegger’s “being-in-the-world”) is not a solitary, psychologizable consciousness making individual decisions, as most older readers of Heidegger had interpreted. Rather, Dasein is the condition for universal, generic human being. This being is, obviously, social and linguistic. It is determined by the meanings given to certain practices in different societies. Heideggerean “chat” is that speech that simply takes social norms as given, as “common sense”. Authentic speech, and being, is that which consciously acknowledges and embraces this social determination that is, ultimately, arbitrary and groundless.
To me, this sounds very much like an articulation of what Heidegger set out to accomplish when writing “Being and Time”. The German thinker claimed at the time to be writing a wholly original work that split with all philosophy that had come before it. He would, he proclaimed, reject all psychologization and valuation so as to come to an understanding of the broadest sense of what made the world possible for the particularly human category of being. I have arrived at the understanding, however, that while Heidegger set out to achieve something like Dreyfus’s interpretation of “Being and Time”, the actual text is something less unique for its time.
Heidegger, understandably, fell short of his preposterous ambitions for his magnum opus. Not only does he psychologize and promote values in his famous book, he does so quite blatantly and, at times, tritely. The notion of anxiety (the original name for “existential angst”), conveniently marginalized by Dreyfus, is too central to the text of “Being and Time” to not read the work in proto-existential terms. In trying to identify the most generic and universal conditions for being, Heidegger falls back on ruminating on the death-obsessed musings of bourgeoisie European intellectuals and their attempts to “live authentically”. (It was these most reactionary impulses in “Being and Time” that most influenced Sartre and, to a lesser extend, Merleau-Ponty.)
Again, I do not think one should be too harsh on Heidegger for this. It was through the influence of Heidegger’s writings, including those written after “Being and Time”, that later thinkers began a critique and rejection of the “subject”. Heidegger prepared the ground for, but did not himself complete the leap away from a transcendental subject, even if he sought to do so.
Dreyfus’s work, “Dreydegger” if you will, has come to seem to me not so much an interpretation, as a correction and updating of “Being and Time” in relation to its authors ambitions. Dreyfus is, from the standpoint of someone writing several decades after Heidegger and having read Heidegger’s more radical disciples, such as Derrida and Foucault, presenting what Heidegger strove but fell short of achieving in “Being and Time”.
June 2, 2025
I hesitate to mark this "read" because I'm never quite done with it. Each time I read Being and Time -- or a piece of it -- I end up reaching for Hubert Dreyfus for some light. I started with his lectures, which I hope are still online somewhere, and found my way to most of the major ancillary guides. This is one of the better ones. Accurate analogies and practical examples are crucial for fleshing out the abstractions in Heidegger, and Dreyfus is good at providing these in a cautious and measured way. This doesn't mean he has all the anwers; he admits as much, which is one of the main reasons I trust him. He was both a humble teacher and opinionated authority, and I wish there were more like him.
August 17, 2021
It's fine, it does a good job bringing Heidegger into contact with 20th century 'analytic' philosophy. However, I think Dreyfus shoehorning Heidegger into talking about AI makes the book age slightly poorly. As well, I think he underestimates the continuity between classical German philosophy (Kant, Hegel) and Heidegger.
March 13, 2024
خواستم اینو بخونم که بعد بتونم هستی و زمان رو بخونم ولی اینو خوندم و فهمیدم هستی و زمان رو نمیتونم بخونم:))))))
Read
October 2, 2025Really did not enjoy this one - Dreyfus keeps bringing in issues about AI in his discussion of Heidegger, when I would have just prefer a straightforward discussion of Sein und Zeit. Maybe I should just bite the bullet and go to the book itself instead of skirting around it with these commentaries.
Read
June 18, 2024UPDATED REVIEW: Sunday, June 9, 2024 (no rating)
This is philosopher Hubert Dreyfus's account of Martin Heidegger's Being and Time. Dreyfus would have you believe Heidegger is a kind of philosophical sociologist. He's not. But by making him this kind of philosopher, Dreyfus is able to put Heidegger in conversation with more recent analytic philosophy. For what it's worth.
If you can't make heads or tails of Heidegger, I'd suggest reading this book. Dreyfus's prejudices aside, the reader can at least get a handle on how Heidegger conceives of some of the elements of everyday human existence, especially in terms of how we mainly run on autopilot in our daily activities.
ORIGINAL REVIEW: July 19, 2016 (four stars)
Hubert Dreyfus' Being-In-The-World is one of the best secondary sources on Martin Heidegger's great philosophical works Being and Time. For readers who find Heidegger's book a challenge (and it is), Dreyfus' book makes the experience a whole lot easier. The only reason why I can't give Dreyfus' book five stars, however, is because sometimes I wonder if Dreyfus correctly interprets Heidegger in some areas.
Here's a concrete example. Dreyfus says that one of the great things that Heidegger showed is that for human beings, practical activity precedes reasoning about something. So according to Heidegger, we go through most of our day not consciously thinking about what it is we're doing. We open the door, walk outside, go to work, and don't even (have to) stop to think about what it is we're doing. Our normal functioning mode is a kind of auto-pilot.
Now, I think this all is true so far as it goes but then Dreyfus takes this practical attitude that human beings have as evidence for the fact that there's nothing going on in the brain that allows for such practical processing. So neither are there computational/algorithmic processes going on in the head nor are there Intentional processes (like we're acting from wants and thoughts about the world). Aside from looking on the face of it false, this seems like an unnecessary axe to grind, and perhaps an issue that Heidegger wouldn't have been concerned with. Other than that, it's a fantastic, fantastic, fantastic book.
This is philosopher Hubert Dreyfus's account of Martin Heidegger's Being and Time. Dreyfus would have you believe Heidegger is a kind of philosophical sociologist. He's not. But by making him this kind of philosopher, Dreyfus is able to put Heidegger in conversation with more recent analytic philosophy. For what it's worth.
If you can't make heads or tails of Heidegger, I'd suggest reading this book. Dreyfus's prejudices aside, the reader can at least get a handle on how Heidegger conceives of some of the elements of everyday human existence, especially in terms of how we mainly run on autopilot in our daily activities.
ORIGINAL REVIEW: July 19, 2016 (four stars)
Hubert Dreyfus' Being-In-The-World is one of the best secondary sources on Martin Heidegger's great philosophical works Being and Time. For readers who find Heidegger's book a challenge (and it is), Dreyfus' book makes the experience a whole lot easier. The only reason why I can't give Dreyfus' book five stars, however, is because sometimes I wonder if Dreyfus correctly interprets Heidegger in some areas.
Here's a concrete example. Dreyfus says that one of the great things that Heidegger showed is that for human beings, practical activity precedes reasoning about something. So according to Heidegger, we go through most of our day not consciously thinking about what it is we're doing. We open the door, walk outside, go to work, and don't even (have to) stop to think about what it is we're doing. Our normal functioning mode is a kind of auto-pilot.
Now, I think this all is true so far as it goes but then Dreyfus takes this practical attitude that human beings have as evidence for the fact that there's nothing going on in the brain that allows for such practical processing. So neither are there computational/algorithmic processes going on in the head nor are there Intentional processes (like we're acting from wants and thoughts about the world). Aside from looking on the face of it false, this seems like an unnecessary axe to grind, and perhaps an issue that Heidegger wouldn't have been concerned with. Other than that, it's a fantastic, fantastic, fantastic book.
January 19, 2026
"Being-in-the-World" is a philosophical concept developed by the philosopher Hubert Dreyfus. Hubert Dreyfus was a prominent American philosopher known for his work on existentialism and phenomenology.
In his book "Being-in-the-World: A Commentary on Heidegger's Being and Time, Division I," Dreyfus provides an interpretation and analysis of Martin Heidegger's seminal work "Being and Time." Heidegger's "Being and Time" is considered one of the most influential philosophical works of the 20th century.
Dreyfus's interpretation focuses on Heidegger's concept of "being-in-the-world." According to Heidegger, human beings do not exist as isolated individuals, but rather, they exist in a meaningful and inseparable relationship with the world around them. Heidegger argues that our existence is fundamentally intertwined with our understanding and interpretation of the world.
Dreyfus builds upon Heidegger's ideas and expands on the concept of "being-in-the-world." He argues that our existence is characterized by our engagement and involvement with the world. Our everyday activities, skills, and practices shape our understanding and give meaning to our existence. Dreyfus emphasizes the embodied nature of our existence and the importance of practical knowledge gained through our experiences.
Furthermore, Dreyfus criticizes the traditional view of knowledge as a representation of the world, asserting that our understanding of the world is more embedded in our practical skills and know-how rather than abstract theories or mental representations.
Dreyfus's work has had a significant impact on various fields, including philosophy, cognitive science, and artificial intelligence. His ideas have been influential in shaping discussions on the nature of human existence, skill acquisition, and the implications of technology on human experience.
GPT
In his book "Being-in-the-World: A Commentary on Heidegger's Being and Time, Division I," Dreyfus provides an interpretation and analysis of Martin Heidegger's seminal work "Being and Time." Heidegger's "Being and Time" is considered one of the most influential philosophical works of the 20th century.
Dreyfus's interpretation focuses on Heidegger's concept of "being-in-the-world." According to Heidegger, human beings do not exist as isolated individuals, but rather, they exist in a meaningful and inseparable relationship with the world around them. Heidegger argues that our existence is fundamentally intertwined with our understanding and interpretation of the world.
Dreyfus builds upon Heidegger's ideas and expands on the concept of "being-in-the-world." He argues that our existence is characterized by our engagement and involvement with the world. Our everyday activities, skills, and practices shape our understanding and give meaning to our existence. Dreyfus emphasizes the embodied nature of our existence and the importance of practical knowledge gained through our experiences.
Furthermore, Dreyfus criticizes the traditional view of knowledge as a representation of the world, asserting that our understanding of the world is more embedded in our practical skills and know-how rather than abstract theories or mental representations.
Dreyfus's work has had a significant impact on various fields, including philosophy, cognitive science, and artificial intelligence. His ideas have been influential in shaping discussions on the nature of human existence, skill acquisition, and the implications of technology on human experience.
GPT
December 10, 2014
The reason this review comes out so late is because I read the "Being and Time" together with some other introductions simultaneously with this and did not finish the appendix until last night, which is something I would recommend instead of only reading this book and just glimpsing trough BT.
Even though I have read some pretty harsh critiques of this book I must say that besides from Dreyfus own comments on the application of Heideggerian philosophy on AI (something I am not going to talk about here about which Rlotz has covered up pretty much in his review, the book is pretty useful. Although the book has some simplified charts and a couple of "this is what Heidegger REALLY means", but besides that it do not fail to give a good description and Heideggers thought and terminology. I would recommend it to someone interested in Heideggers early philosophy that is willing to read other secondary literature.
When it comes to the appendix I am glad I read it. It has a great overview of the Heidegger Kirkegaard relation and gave a little intro to Heideggers later thought.
Even though I have read some pretty harsh critiques of this book I must say that besides from Dreyfus own comments on the application of Heideggerian philosophy on AI (something I am not going to talk about here about which Rlotz has covered up pretty much in his review, the book is pretty useful. Although the book has some simplified charts and a couple of "this is what Heidegger REALLY means", but besides that it do not fail to give a good description and Heideggers thought and terminology. I would recommend it to someone interested in Heideggers early philosophy that is willing to read other secondary literature.
When it comes to the appendix I am glad I read it. It has a great overview of the Heidegger Kirkegaard relation and gave a little intro to Heideggers later thought.
April 30, 2023
Best book I've read in 2023 so far. Most of Being and Time seemed like word salad to me. I didn't get it at all and was getting frustrated. I finished the first division and was totally lost. I didn't want to start the second division without some help because it was supposed to be even more difficult. I read other supplementary books and listened to podcasts before I read this, but they didn't help much. When I started reading this, it all started to come together. I understand Heidegger! How many people can say that, really? I'm obsessed with Hubert Dreyfus. Everything this man says is gold. I listen to his lectures on YouTube, which help me along even more. Since I finished this I got back into reading Being and Time (second division) and I totally get it! If I sound excited, it's because I am. I've put a lot of work into trying to understand this, and it's finally paying off. You can do it too.
July 14, 2023
“Human beings, it will turn out, are special kinds of beings in that their way of being embodies an understanding of what it is to be.”
“…perhaps at adolescence, when its anxiety comes to be focused on the question, Who am I?, a particular Dasein can “get itself into” the public identities that are offered by its society as a way to flee its unsettledness. Instead of simply accepting passively the social role it grew up in, it actively identifies with some social role as lawyer, father, or lover or some socially sancioned identity such as victim or sacrificing mother, which allows it to disown, or cover up, its true self-interpreting structure.”
“Dasein’s way of being, however, is so unsettling that, just because it is constantly sensed, it is constantly covered up.”
“…perhaps at adolescence, when its anxiety comes to be focused on the question, Who am I?, a particular Dasein can “get itself into” the public identities that are offered by its society as a way to flee its unsettledness. Instead of simply accepting passively the social role it grew up in, it actively identifies with some social role as lawyer, father, or lover or some socially sancioned identity such as victim or sacrificing mother, which allows it to disown, or cover up, its true self-interpreting structure.”
“Dasein’s way of being, however, is so unsettling that, just because it is constantly sensed, it is constantly covered up.”
August 5, 2018
This book certainly cleared up some misconceptions about Heidegger and might give me a fighting chance with actually finishing BT.
2018 reread: I must say that this book is a fantastic primer for reading BT, however, if that being said it is not a replacement for the actual book. The book clears up some misconceptions that I've had but maybe that's just the Dreyfus take on Heidegger, nonetheless, it was a great read and will consult it in the future for my BT needs.
2018 reread: I must say that this book is a fantastic primer for reading BT, however, if that being said it is not a replacement for the actual book. The book clears up some misconceptions that I've had but maybe that's just the Dreyfus take on Heidegger, nonetheless, it was a great read and will consult it in the future for my BT needs.
May 21, 2007
A MUST-have if reading Being and Time
May 21, 2023
This rating is contingent upon whether Dreyfus’ interpretations are accurate, given the untruths that inevitably occur in translation. I will proceed under the assumption that they are.
A philosophy professor once told me to read Heidegger, because my arguments were, in some rudimentary, uninformed way, similar to his. After finishing this supplement and getting a better grasp on the language, etc. I understand why. I think my whole philosophical adventure thus far has been chasing after this, and I’m grateful I can now proceed with better understanding.
I must add that Heidegger’s philosophy almost necessitates eccentrism and extremism (one could clearly see how his philosophy could endorse gender transitioning, or encourage naziism. Essentially, the breadth of this ontology encompasses all conceivable forms of modesty and radicalism; but often only the latter would be interested in philosophy to begin with, let alone read from one shrouded in as much scandal as Heidegger) so fair ye well all who begin
A philosophy professor once told me to read Heidegger, because my arguments were, in some rudimentary, uninformed way, similar to his. After finishing this supplement and getting a better grasp on the language, etc. I understand why. I think my whole philosophical adventure thus far has been chasing after this, and I’m grateful I can now proceed with better understanding.
I must add that Heidegger’s philosophy almost necessitates eccentrism and extremism (one could clearly see how his philosophy could endorse gender transitioning, or encourage naziism. Essentially, the breadth of this ontology encompasses all conceivable forms of modesty and radicalism; but often only the latter would be interested in philosophy to begin with, let alone read from one shrouded in as much scandal as Heidegger) so fair ye well all who begin
January 21, 2020
Fantastic commentary and exposition. Played a crucial role in making the work itself more intelligible for me. Most of my uncertainties about the value of Heidegger's work itself carries over to this reading of the work, and so I wish Dreyfus pushed further at various points, but the points where he does critique Heidegger are valuable for making more concrete what avenues to critique are open. I would be curious where other readings of Being-and-Time differ from this one. There were a few points where the quotes Dreyfus used to support his reading didn't seem quite to fit together, but most of the time this was highly revealing. My biggest complaint is probably that the last section on Heidegger's account of how one should be given his "analytic of Dasein" doesn't really address the Nazism at all, even at points where it seemed highly relevant to me. Still, this is a valuable and helpful resource, that can be inspiring and fascinating in its own right.
July 22, 2025
Boy. I’m reading Being and Time for the first time. As best I can tell, this is a pretty excellent account of what is going on in Division I. (I assume it is not the only account on offer, but not knowing how it may have been controversial, I can rest for now in saying it was persuasive to me—as far as I understand it.)
The Appendix on Kierkegaard and Heidegger and Division II is hard going, but then I haven’t read a lot of SK—or Division II! :)
Sadly, I probably won’t get to keep reading. The demands of das Man in the workaday world are about to resume.
The Appendix on Kierkegaard and Heidegger and Division II is hard going, but then I haven’t read a lot of SK—or Division II! :)
Sadly, I probably won’t get to keep reading. The demands of das Man in the workaday world are about to resume.
Read
June 8, 2019Take notes. And try to read it every day. That's all I can say.
It's like trying to read an encyclopaedia backwards and upside down: It can be done, but retaining it is difficult. Still, having read Dreyfus' interpretation of Heidegger, I can understand now how existentialists like R.D. Laing could better treat their patients; how Camus created Meursault; how Beaudelaire was interpreted by Sartre.
It's like trying to read an encyclopaedia backwards and upside down: It can be done, but retaining it is difficult. Still, having read Dreyfus' interpretation of Heidegger, I can understand now how existentialists like R.D. Laing could better treat their patients; how Camus created Meursault; how Beaudelaire was interpreted by Sartre.
May 23, 2020
Absolutely indispensable for understanding Being and Time. Dreyfus is an incredible scholar and interpreter of Heidegger, making the strange topology of Heidegger’s magnum opus traversable and intelligible with a clearness of prose and depth of intellect that one cannot help but be awed at.
January 10, 2026
Excellent, extremely clear and illuminating interpretation and discussion of Heidegger's Being and Time Division 1 with a useful appendix on the contrast between the concepts of anxiety in Heidegger and Kierkegaard.
May 15, 2017
only read the passages useful to me
Read
June 19, 2019chapters 3/4 division I being and time
February 28, 2021
This was the clearest commentary of Being and Time I have read. The biggest disappointment is that Dreyfus didn't write a commentary for Division 2.
September 16, 2021
Probably not the most accurate reading of Heidegger (very pragmatist) but still a great read.
April 28, 2023
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fcCRm...
also related to "flow"
also related to "flow"
September 14, 2011
‘Being in the world’ by Hubert Dreyfus is probably the best starting point when trying to access the difficult and demanding work of Martin Heidegger (he maybe for some the only point worth taking in which to make contact with the ‘enigmatic’, or perhaps arid, Heidegger, depending upon your own open head turned towards the world, or attunement).
Dreyfus himself tends to play down the importance of this book, claiming aspects of it are wrong, short sighted or confusing. With the exception of Heidegger’s concept of ‘Death’ being a little vague and some of Dreyfus’ terminology can be misleading (according to him more so), I can’t really find much to fault it with. Although I may be slightly biased as I am a rather big fan of Dreyfus’ work via I-Tunes podcasts from UC Berkley ranging from Heidegger, Kierkegaard, Nietzsche, Existentialism, Greek Tragedy, etc.
Dreyfus writes clearly for such a minefield of a topic as Existential Phenomenology and Heidegger, the only reason for re-reading the text in general is because of the subject matter and not Dreyfus’ telling of Dasein taking a stance on itself, as existence, as being. The only real let down is Division 2 of this book, which is actually not Dreyfus’ fault as Heidegger handed in a rushed account of it to gain tenure, and the comparison with Kierkegaard does tend to make it a little less confused and gives some strong opposition to Heidegger’s thoughts on how to live an authentic life.
All in all, I would recommend this book to anybody with an ounce of curiosity and intelligence.
Dreyfus himself tends to play down the importance of this book, claiming aspects of it are wrong, short sighted or confusing. With the exception of Heidegger’s concept of ‘Death’ being a little vague and some of Dreyfus’ terminology can be misleading (according to him more so), I can’t really find much to fault it with. Although I may be slightly biased as I am a rather big fan of Dreyfus’ work via I-Tunes podcasts from UC Berkley ranging from Heidegger, Kierkegaard, Nietzsche, Existentialism, Greek Tragedy, etc.
Dreyfus writes clearly for such a minefield of a topic as Existential Phenomenology and Heidegger, the only reason for re-reading the text in general is because of the subject matter and not Dreyfus’ telling of Dasein taking a stance on itself, as existence, as being. The only real let down is Division 2 of this book, which is actually not Dreyfus’ fault as Heidegger handed in a rushed account of it to gain tenure, and the comparison with Kierkegaard does tend to make it a little less confused and gives some strong opposition to Heidegger’s thoughts on how to live an authentic life.
All in all, I would recommend this book to anybody with an ounce of curiosity and intelligence.
July 19, 2013
I found Dreyfus' insights to be very helpful in breaking down and explaining the complex language that Heidegger uses throughout Being and Time. Dreyfus also draws from many of Heiddeger's other works in order to make sense out of some of the ideas Heidegger introduces in Being and Time. In addition, Dreyfus uses concrete modern examples in order to provide greater clarity on some of Heidegger's more abstract ideas. Also, I found Dreyfus' command of the German language to be helpful in providing alternative choices in wording than some of the popular English translations of Being and Time. T
This helped me to have a better understanding of the work, overall. Dreyfus also provided valuable insight on Kiekergaard and Nietszche' influence on Heidegger's philosophy. Furthermore, Dreyfus explains how big of an influence Heidegger has had on his successors, such as Sartre; Dreyfus makes clear that Sartre misunderstood several important aspects of Heidegger's philosophy. These inaccuracies had a significant impact on recent philosophy (Existentialism, Being and Nothingness). However, I would argue that Heidegger's unnecessarily complex use of language led itself to such misunderstandings. That being said, this book is essential for anyone who is trying to make sense of Heidegger's philosophy, especially those interested in Being and Time. Also, its a critical piece pertaining to the origins of Existentialism and postmodern philosophy.
This helped me to have a better understanding of the work, overall. Dreyfus also provided valuable insight on Kiekergaard and Nietszche' influence on Heidegger's philosophy. Furthermore, Dreyfus explains how big of an influence Heidegger has had on his successors, such as Sartre; Dreyfus makes clear that Sartre misunderstood several important aspects of Heidegger's philosophy. These inaccuracies had a significant impact on recent philosophy (Existentialism, Being and Nothingness). However, I would argue that Heidegger's unnecessarily complex use of language led itself to such misunderstandings. That being said, this book is essential for anyone who is trying to make sense of Heidegger's philosophy, especially those interested in Being and Time. Also, its a critical piece pertaining to the origins of Existentialism and postmodern philosophy.
August 1, 2017
The author focuses on Division One (existential analysis). The foremost contributions of this commentary is 1) its regulation of the translation of certain terms; 2) its outline, with vivid examples and abundant textual evidences (some are from newly-published lecture courses of Heidegger), of Heidegger's breakthrough with the concepts of Vorhandenheit and Zuhandenheit, which exceeds the so-called "practical turn"; and 3) its dialogue with contemporary analytical philosophers such as John Searle. Generally, the book provides a starting point for those who cannot sufficiently grasp the meaning between the lines of the original text; yet its shortcoming lies precisely in the fact that this perspective is heavily influenced by the author's own theoretical concerns. On the one hand, his understanding of Husserl is not tenable at all, equating him to Descartes or Searle without grasping the genuine thrust of phenomenology. On the other hand, he mistakenly believes that Heidegger's doctrine on fallenness can be distinctly divided into the ontological and the psychological sense, and accordingly that he can preserve the former without the latter. However, for Heidegger, the avoidance of authenticity is not a psychological event, but rather an "always already so" that is discovered too late. This neglect of the temporality of Gewesenheit is also evident in Dreyfus' avoidance of Division Two.
Displaying 1 - 30 of 53 reviews