Abstract

All of these studies attempt to give some insight into the basic thrusts of Heidegger's thinking, and one can learn a great deal from each of them. I propose to approach this diverse set of studies somewhat indirectly by considering Heidegger's methodological reflections in some detail and trying to assess the works under discussion in terms of the light they shed upon these considerations. A partial justification for this procedure can be found in Heidegger's insistence that a proper understanding of method, a "learning how to think," is what is most crucial to his enterprise. For purposes of order and clarity my remarks will be divided into three major sections. In the first I want to consider in some detail the phenomenological method as practiced at least by the Heidegger of Sein und Zeit. On the basis of this it will be possible to reflect in the second section upon a few of the problems surrounding the controversial Kehre in Heidegger's thought. In the third section I want to discuss some of the distinctive virtues and vices of the various studies, their points of agreement and disagreement and their convincingness as accounts of Heidegger's thought. A fourth and final section will reflect ever so briefly on Heidegger interpretation, authenticity, and the problems of rapprochment.