Please wait a minute...

Frontiers of Philosophy in China

Front. Philos. China    2016, Vol. 11 Issue (3) : 415-429
Orginal Article
Heidegger’s Conception of Being-with (Mitsein ) and His Simple Designation of Social and Political Reality in the Black Notebooks
JIN Xiping()
Department of Philosophy, Peking Univeristy, Beijing 100871, China
Download: PDF(333 KB)  
Export: BibTeX | EndNote | Reference Manager | ProCite | RefWorks

Despite Heidegger insists that Being and Time cannot be read as a kind of existential philosophy, such interpretation still holds in some aspect, for in it, the main content is a special kind of phenomenology of life, even be called repeatedly as the foundation of the ontology of Being in general. The project of establishing an ontology of Being in general was ultimately never carried out. What Heidegger provides in Being and time is nothing but a phenomenology of life. It is peculiar that love and friendship as an important element of life is deliberately ignored. Such a deficiency of Heidegger, namely lacking love and friendship in fundamental ontology of Dasein, is probably the reason for his political fallacy during the II-World-War, notorious political mistake in his recent published Black Notebooks.

Keywords phenomenology of life      I and we      Mitsein (Being-with)      simple designation      love      Heidegger’s political fallacy      Binswanger’s idea of love     
Issue Date: 19 September 2016
 Cite this article:   
JIN Xiping. Heidegger’s Conception of Being-with (Mitsein ) and His Simple Designation of Social and Political Reality in the Black Notebooks[J]. Front. Philos. China, 2016, 11(3): 415-429.
E-mail this article
E-mail Alert
Articles by authors
JIN Xiping
Related articles from Frontiers Journals
[1] Michael Nylan, Allyson Tang, Zhijian Wang. Patriotism in Early China[J]. Front. Philos. China, 2019, 14(1): 47-74.
[2] Cockburn David. Love and Identity: Unconditional Concern and Particularity[J]. Front Phil Chin, 2013, 8(4): 655-669.
[3] GUO Qiyong, CUI Tao. The Values of Confucian Benevolence and the Universality of the Confucian Way of Extending Love[J]. Front Phil Chin, 2012, 7(1): 20-54.
[4] CHEN Hongxing. Reproduction, Familiarity, Love, and Humaneness: How Did Confucius Reveal “Humaneness”?[J]. Front Phil Chin, 2010, 5(4): 506-522.
[5] LI Jinglin, . Mencius’ Refutation of Yang Zhu and Mozi and the Theoretical Implication of Confucian Benevolence and Love[J]. Front. Philos. China, 2010, 5(2): 155-178.
[6] CHEN Shaoming. Endurance and non-endurance: From the perspective of virtue ethics[J]. Front. Philos. China, 2008, 3(3): 335-351.
[7] Hao Changchi. Is Mozi a utilitarian philosopher?[J]. Front. Philos. China, 2006, 1(3): 382-400.
Full text