Heidegger intended to replace metaphysics by a new kind of thought about that which he called Sein, but in his works this noun is very far from meaning the act of being such as it has been traditionally conceived by Western philosophy. His explanations as to what he does mean by Sein underline his departure from traditional metaphysics. Sein is no longer to be understood as the act of the things that exist in the eternal world, but as something revealed to the human mind in an esoteric way. The association of this esoteric revelation of Sein with Hölderlin's theosophy led Heidegger to put forward a new gnosis organized as a substitute of metaphysics and of Christian theology as well.
Book Description
Editorial Reviews
Language Notes
Text: English (translation)
Original Language: Spanish
Original Language: Spanish
About the Author
Mario Enrique Sacchi is a member of the Pontifical Roman Academy of St. Thomas Aquinas and of the Catholic Religion and editor of Sapientia, Buenos Aires, Argentina.
Product Details
Would you like to update product info or give feedback on images?
|
More About the Author
Discover books, learn about writers, read author blogs, and more.
Customer Reviews
|
Share your thoughts with other customers:
|
||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Most Helpful Customer Reviews
6 of 6 people found the following review helpful:
5.0 out of 5 stars
Heidegger's Esoteric Gnosis: Sein Revealed in Being.,
By New Age of Barbarism "zosimos" (EVROPA.) - See all my reviews
Amazon Verified Purchase(What's this?)
This review is from: The Apocalypse of Being : The Esoteric Gnosis of Martin Heidegger (Hardcover)
_The Apocalypse of Being_ by Thomist philosopher Mario Enrique Sacchi is an attempt to come to terms with Martin Heidegger's thinking on being and his revilement of classical Western metaphysics and to provide a critique of that thinking in terms of Scholastic philosophy. Heidegger regarded himself as a thinker on being, and made use of the term Sein (a German word translated roughly as "the act of Being") which he believed was concealed in being. To Heidegger, the Western metaphysical tradition had forgotten about Sein and it was to this forgetting that he turned his attention, in for example his greatest work _Sein und Zeit_. According to Sacchi, this revilement of classical metaphysics and first philosophy in fact rests upon a misunderstanding of Heidegger's. Thus, much of this work is spent defending the classical tradition from the light of Thomistic philosophy against Heidegger's radical critique. Sacchi argues that Heidegger's understanding of Sein degrades reason (calling to mind Luther's remark that reason is "the devil's prostitute" - recall that Luther was an important influence on Heidegger) as a means for ascertaining truth and turns towards a revelation in the thinking of Martin Heidegger himself. Heidegger rejects metaphysics as onto-theology (echoing the critique of Kant in his _Critique of Pure Reason_); however, Heidegger's thinking itself would come to reembrace metaphysics. Sacchi argues that Heidegger attempted to revise the paganism of Parmenedes against the Christian understanding of classical metaphysics in the form of Thomism and that Heidegger's insistence that his Sein is not to be understood as God, makes his thinking fundamentally atheistic. Here, the idealist/realist divide comes into play, and Sacchi will argue that Heidegger's thinking turns invariably towards idealism (e.g. Hegelianism) as against the realism of classical metaphysics and first philosophy. Heidegger's later thinking under the influence of poetics (ranging from Rilke to Holderlin's pantheistic neopaganism) becomes increasingly convoluted, and Heidegger himself will begin to emerge as an esoteric gnostic proclaiming a special revelation and un-concealment of Sein within history. Sacchi makes some interesting parallels between Heidegger's particular formulations of language and those of apocalyptic (apocalypsis: meaning "to reveal") writers of the first and second centuries AD and BC. This book is interesting in that it provides a fascinating critique at a figure who has remained problematic for many. Sacchi maintains a Thomistic outlook and thus shows that although Heidegger's thinking must ultimately be rejected (as possibly incoherent as well) it does contain some interesting insights into the un-concealment of Sein.
6 of 8 people found the following review helpful:
3.0 out of 5 stars
I was quite disappointed.,
By A Customer
Amazon Verified Purchase(What's this?)
This review is from: The Apocalypse of Being : The Esoteric Gnosis of Martin Heidegger (Hardcover)
I waited at least 6 months for this book to finally become available. My anticipation was magnified by the remarkably cogent and faithfully Thomistic essays written by Mario Enrique Sacchi and posted at the Jacques Maritain Center. I still consider him to be one of a handful of the sharpest Thomists out there.But, alas, the book fell far short of my expectations. The previous reviewer mentioned in a review of Caputo's Book on Aquinas and Heidegger that Thomists might prefer this more polemical work by Sacchi. Unfortunately, I think that the only people who will wade through this book at all are dyed-in-the-wool Thomists, which, given the capacities of the Argentine author, is a real disappointment. In fact, I now wish I had rated Caputo's book more highly, so that I would not equate the level of argumentation in the two by a common three-star rating. This book, short as it is, could have been a lot shorter still. It seems to circle about in the same polemical tracks without showing for this any significant gain in understanding. In fact, Dr. Sacchi really missed the point on which the debate between Aquinas and Heidegger turns. Using Heidegger's terminology of the "ontological difference" between "being" and beings and the "theological difference" between the First Being (God) and beings, the two thinkers give a different priority to them. Aquinas makes the "ontological difference" subordinate to the "theological difference"; Heidegger does the opposite. So the burden of refuting Heidegger is to show that the "ontological difference" is indeed subordinated to the "theological difference". And that would require a deep investigation of the meaning of the "analogy of being" in Saint Thomas. That really does not take place, and I do not recall so much as a single productive reference to Thomas' "analogy of being". Rather, there is too much circular reasoning of the sort which says that Heidegger's mistake was that he was not a Thomist and did not understand the centrality of the act-of-being ("esse"). I think that Caputo in his own work showed decisively that repeating this word like a mantra does not really get at Heidegger's critique, because act-of-being ("esse") and essence ("essentia") would be another pair of poles in which "being" reveals itself, but in no way capture "being" exhaustively. Esse/essentia would merely be a temporally conditioned revelation of "being", but "being" itself withdraws from us. Perhaps I will read the book again at some point to further sift his arguments. But I am far more inclined to reread Caputo at this point.
3 of 6 people found the following review helpful:
5.0 out of 5 stars
The Inadequacy of Heidegger's Thought on Being,
This review is from: The Apocalypse of Being : The Esoteric Gnosis of Martin Heidegger (Hardcover)
Sacchi competently shows how Heidegger's use of the term "Being" is so nebulous that it cannot function as a sufficiently refined notion for a truly penetrating "thinking on being". By contrast, Sacchi explains, Aquinas' doctrine of "esse" (the act of existence) serves well for deep metaphysical reflection on God and His creatures (angels, man, animals, plants, minerals). Heidegger erred in departing from the traditional Scholastic machinery of potency/act, essence/existence, matter/form, substance/accidents. Only with these concepts ready at hand can one lay a firm philosophical foundation for theology and apologetics. It seems to me that Heidegger's "critique" of the so-called "oblivion of being" by the Scholastics can be answered with a mere shoulder-shrug. I don't see how it is really a negative criticism (at least not anything devastating or monumental) to point out that they are "guilty" of promoting a congealed ontology of "sheer presence" rather than Heidegger's favored "emergence" or "unconcealment" or "presencing within absencing". It is doubtful whether this sort of "thinking about being" goes anywhere that is relevant for either philosophy or theology; it seems to lead to a dead-end, by contrast with the richly honed tools of Thomistic metaphysical analysis. From my perspective, the question of the "theological difference between God and creatures" versus the "ontological diff-erence between Being and beings" can be answered with Aquinas' doctrine on the analogy of being. "Ens commune" can be truly predicated of both God and creatures (all of whom are "beings"), but in radically diverse ways according to an analogy of proper proportionality (since creatures have an "essence" that is a limiting potency for their "act of existence", which is not the case for God who is "Ipsum Esse Subsistens"). There is no need to seek refuge in a notion of Being as "unconcealment" or "emergence into the clearing" or "presencing within absencing". These insights (whatever their value) do not seem anywhere near as helpful for philosophy and theology as Aquinas' Aristotelian-Platonic Scholastic machinery.
Share your thoughts with other customers: Create your own review
|
|
Tag this product(What's this?)Think of a tag as a keyword or label you consider is strongly related to this product.
Tags will help all customers organize and find favorite items. |
Sell a Digital Version of This Book in the Kindle Store
If you are a publisher or author and hold the digital rights to a book, you can sell a digital version of it in our Kindle Store.
Learn more
Customer Discussions
|
This product's forum
Active discussions in related forums
Search Customer Discussions
|
Related forums
|
