CENTER FOR THE STUDY OF THE PLATONIC TRADITION

*****

Trinity College Dublin

HEIDEGGER AND THE GREEKS:

HERMENEUTICAL-PHILOSOPHICAL SKETCHES OF

IGNORANCE, BLINDNESS AND NOT-BEING

IN HEIDEGGER'S BEITRÄGE

PLATO, PLOTINUS AND PROCLUS

by

ALBERT PETER DURIGON

submitted in partial fulfilment of the requirements

for the degree of

Doctor of Philosophy

June, 1998

© 2001 Albert Peter Durigon

DECLARATION

I hereby declare that this dissertation has not been submitted as an exercise for a degree at any other university, that it is entirely my own work, and that it may be lent or copied by the Library upon request.

By:

_______________________

Albert Peter Durigon

Date: 21 June 1998

SUMMARY

Concealed in Ignorance, Blindness and Not-Being lie our real themes of knowledge, truth and Being. The condition of possibility for such a thing is a positive role for negation. Plato was the first to take up such a problematic in the Sophist, and it forms the core common to the philosophical research of Heidegger and the Neoplatonists, receiving, in all of Heidegger's works, its fullest development in the Beiträge, which, to that extent, present Heidegger's own brand of Platonism (chapter 1). Working on the same problematic always only following the lead of the Beiträge, we seek to see Plato through Heidgegger's eyes. The link between virtue and the divine (daimn) of the problematic of Socratic ignorance is projected in outline as homologous to the inner movement of the Beiträge as a whole (chapter 3). What Plato left unsaid in the "flight to the logoi" (Phaedo 99d), the negative relation to the origin seen preserved in the fear of being blinded of the eclipse-analogy, is projected in outline as homologous to the Lichtung für das Sichverbergen of the fifth part of the Beiträge (chapter 4). The One in Us of the Neoplatonists, grasped via the negations of Not-Being, is projected in outline as homologous to the Ultimate God of the seventh part of the Beiträge (chapter 5). In each case the sketches presented are believed to be pioneering as to analytical method if not result and the most closely related Platonic, Heideggerian and other authorities are considered (chapter 2).

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS

Not in every city may one benefit from a Heidegger club of interested persons, not specialists, which, from the years 1982 to 1988, renewed and amplified my interest in Heidegger that began my senior year in 1973. I was initially inspired to build on this interest and begin a serious study of Heidegger's dialogue with Platonism in 1985, in a course at Boston College given by Professor H. G. Gadamer. I am also in his debt for the many visits in Heidelberg over the years. Professor Charles Rowan Beye first suggested the study of ancient Greek and of German. Professor G. C. Rota was good enough to introduce me to the North American Heidegger Circle and to the methods of phenomenology. Over time, Professor William J. Richardson, S.J. taught me the vast complexities of Heidegger, including those of the Beiträge, and I learned from him the questions that I should ask. Professor John N. Findlay allowed my first appreciation of the intricacies of Plotinus at Boston University during the last seminar he gave on the Enneads before his death. In 1987 I had the singular good fortune to meet Professor John M. Dillon who was gracious enough to take me on despite my limited background in the academic study of philosophy. His wide learning has been a constant inspiration for me. I would like to record an extraordinary gesture by my former law partners of the firm of Weingarten, Schurgin, Gagnebin & Hayes. At a time when they very definitely needed my services, they were kind enough and interested enough in me to allow a leave of absence to study in Dublin.

This dissertation has been a labor of love, and throughout the course of writing it I was able to talk through the subtleties of Neoplatonism with Professor Greg Shaw. My parents have given me all the moral support conceivable through a long process. I am grateful for the use of the O'Neil library at Boston University, the Mugar library at Boston College, and the Andover-Theological, Houghten, Pusey and Widener libraries at Harvard. And finally, I was lucky enough to have had the benefit of countless hours of philosophical conversation with personal friends.

TABLE OF CONTENTS

SUMMARY........................................................................................................................................................................................ ................................. 3

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS............................................................................................................................................... ...................................................... 4

CHAPTER ONE: INTRODUCTION TO THE PROBLEMATIC OF HEIDEGGER AND THE GREEKS........................................................................ 9

§1. Heidegger and the Greeks

§2. How Heidegger Understood What Plato Thought by Being

§3. How Heidegger Understood the Relation of What He Thought by Being to the Thinking of Being of Plato

§4. How Heidegger Understood the Relation of His Concept of Being to the Philosophical Research of the Neoplatonists

§5. The Beiträge zur Philosophie (Vom Ereignis)

§6. Heideggerian-Platonism/Platonic-Heideggerianism

§7. Preview of Chapters 3, 4 and 5

§8. Chapter 3: Productivity of Negation as Ignorance Giving Knowledge

§9. Chapter 4: Productivity of Negation as Blindness Giving Realm of Truth

§10. Chapter 5: Productivity of Negation as Not-Being Giving the One in Us

CHAPTER TWO: RELATION TO OTHER WORKS IN THE SAME FIELD .................................................................................................................. 47

§2.1 Productivity of Negation as Ignorance--General Orientation to Works in the Same Field

§2.1.1 Productivity of Negation as Ignorance Giving Knowledge (Daimn)--Tradition as Embracing the Divine and Some Influential Modern Views

§2.1.2 Heideggerian Homologue of Socratic Ignorance

§2.2 Productivity of Negation as Blindness Giving Realm of Truth--General Orientation to Works in the Same Field

§2.2.1 Productivity of Negation of Blindness Giving Realm of Truth of the Eclipse-Analogy--Platonic Scholarship

§2.2.2 Heideggerian Homologue of Blindness

§2.3 Productivity of Negation as Not-Being Giving One in Us--General Orientation

§2.3.1 Productivity of Negation of Being Giving One in Us--Platonic Scholarship

§2.3.2 Heideggerian Homologue of One in Us

CHAPTER THREE: HERMENEUTICAL-PHILOSOPHICAL SKETCH OF SOCRATIC IGNORANCE....................................................................... 83

§1. En Panta: Einai?

§2. Paideia and Knowledge of the Ereignis

§3. Aret and Verhaltenheit

§4. Eudaimonia and Geschichte

§5. The Daimonion and die Zukünftigen

§6. The "Ascending and Descending ErwV" und die Erschweigung

§7. GenesiV and Entscheidung

§8. ErwV and das Unseiende

CHAPTER FOUR: HERMENEUTICAL-PHILOSOPHICAL SKETCH OF BLINDNESS............................................................................................... 119

CHAPTER FIVE: HERMENEUTICAL-PHILOSOPHICAL SKETCH OF NOT-BEING................................................................................................. 145

CONCLUSION....................................................................................................................................................................................................................... 166

LIST OF REFERENCES........................................................................................................................................................................... ................ ........... 169

INDEX OF PASSAGES......................................................................................................................................................................................................... 176