Marginalia to Being and Time - Religious Studies at Stanford ...

§ 10
Distinguishing the Analysis of Dasein
from Anthropology, Psychology, and Biology
45.26-29 45.25-28 71.22-25 43.1-3
Text in SZ:
“We have to show that, despite their material fruitfulness, all previous inquiries
and investigations focused on Dasein have missed the authentic philosophical
problem....”
In the right margin:
N.B.
46.1 46.1 71.39 43.16
Text in BT, underlined by Husserl:
“cogito sum”
In the left margin, in cursive:
Descartes
46.3-15 46.3-15 71.39S72.12 43.18S43.35
Text in SZ:
[From: “On the other hand, he leaves the sum entirely unexplained” to “a
notable failure to see the need for inquiring about the being of the entities thus
designated.”]
In the left margin, in cursive:
objections
47.2-5 47.2-4 73.1-3 44.15-18
Text in SZ:
“But these limitations of Dilthey and Bergson are the common property of all the
trends of “personalism” and all the tendencies towards philosophical anthropology
that they have determined.
Husserl underlines:
“‘personalism” and “philosophical anthropology”
In the right margin:
objections
47.5-7 47.5-7 73.46 44.18-20
Text in SZ:
“Even the fundamentally more radical and clear phenomenological interpretation
of personality does not broach the question of Dasein’s being.”
In the right margin:
N.B.