discursive living • gary e. davis • berkeley: being with better translation

August 2, 2025

This supplements a discussion of Heidegger’s sense of clearing, relative to a passage from his notebooks discussed by Richard Capobianco, mid-page at “RC interprets the Heidegger passage (RC: 26) as expressing…”

The Ponderings translation, by a translator specializing in Heidegger’s texts, is better. [Click the text image below, but after reading click the upper right 'x', not back-page clicking, which returns you to my main discussion, not to this page]:

There is no good reason to capitalize ‘being’ there, which RC does for his translation, serving his exalted reading. It’s a scholastic ruse. Translators stopped capitalizing the translation of ‘Sein’ long ago because it’s misleading. Capitalization in-sentence connotes the transcendentalism which Heidegger seeks to undo. RC rationalizes his choice about “orthography” in another essay conversely, as if he’s addressing that exact issue by capitalizing. But he’s concealing Heidegger’s existential, in-world, de-transcendentalizing interest.

Heidegger’s use of quote marks instances his common reliance on the so-to-speak function (framing words and phrases as in question), either framing common sense for a critical stance, which is integral to his deconstructive interest in conceptual ideology (“Zeitlichkeit” above). Or phrases important to him in a technical, mis-understood sense may be placed in quote marks (“Temporalität” above).

’Temporality’ in quote marks should be regarded with ‘humans’ in quote marks, too. He is objecting to stereotypical mentality, which pertains to both, not rejecting the notion of human being. This is the case due to the function of ‘Dasein’ in his paths of thinking.

Clearly, Heidegger uses quote marks freely, as a phenomenologist would be expected to want, since framing phenomenality is integral to phenomenological interest. But that same attitude doesn’t disappear when quote marks are absent. For a phenomenologist, every word may be considered to be in quote marks.

Proximally, ‘Dasein’ means human being or existence. But primordially, ’Dasein’ is immanent phenomenality: there being phenomenality. ‘Dasein’ serves Heidegger’s integral interest in transitioning thought about being (proximal attention) to primordial (potentially originary) attention: being thought. Likewise with “Es gibt” in later work: commonly undersstood as “There is,” but Heidegger turns attention to its “hidden” literalness as “It gives.” The hidden literalness of ‘Dasein’ is therebeing—there being presence. To understand human being relative to there being presence is integral to Heidegger’s project.

“The guideline is a leap in advance,“ to advance. But the leap is from proximal understanding into a path, “the exposition of the ground” over time (Zeitlich-
keit) which brings thinking into primordial engagement (Temporalität). The leap is a path. To regard the leap as if it’s sudden would be contrary to Heid-
egger’s key point there: distinguishing re-presentation (about) and “way toward.”

And “occur together” is very different from RC’s “essencing.” Belonging together in the same understanding is not about essencing.

Back to the discussion, mid-page.