This article is within the scope of WikiProject Philosophy, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of content related to philosophy on Wikipedia. If you would like to support the project, please visit the project page, where you can get more details on how you can help, and where you can join the general discussion about philosophy content on Wikipedia.PhilosophyWikipedia:WikiProject PhilosophyTemplate:WikiProject PhilosophyPhilosophy articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Requested articles, because it is used for the administration of the Requested articles process or it was formerly listed at Requested articles.Requested articlesWikipedia:WikiProject Requested articlesTemplate:WikiProject Requested articlesRequested articles
It suggests here that Heidegger considers aphophantic statements to be something good/desirable (best way to get to 'truth') but Heidegger was very cricial about such statements because they actually cover up a much more basic way of making statements that lead to an understanding of the world, which are grounded in circumspective understanding through skilled action (working with hammers in the workshop and so on). What is said here is not wrong - apophantic statements get you to 'truth' but 'truth' itself does not get you to the most basic way of being, you already need to understand in that more basic way in order to make a truth-statement in the first place. So Heidegger posits apophantic statements as something uncritical that needs to be set aside in order to first analyse the kind of stuff that comes before language starts to 'declare' things in a proposition that can be true or false. That primordial kind of 'statement' (understanding something as something in dealing with it) he calls Ermeneia (Hermeneutics, existential-hermeneutic). (Heidegger, Sein und Zeit, page 158). 82.217.92.254 (talk) 09:22, 10 January 2015 (UTC)Reply
