《海德格尔导论》读后感：这本书深入剖析了海德格尔的哲学思想，探讨了存在主义的核心概念。海德格尔认为，存在是人类最根本的特征，而人的存在意味着不断地面对自己的存在，以及追求真理和自由。通过对存在的思考和研究，我们可以更好地理解自己的存在意义，以及如何在这个世界中找到自己的位置和价值。
《海德格尔导论》读后感(篇一)
不加掩饰的，不管你是黑人牢狱犯，还是基金投资人得加以赞美与批判的书评才是最好的。
最近一篇采访则并不如此 描述了陈直的生活境况与人生态度。尽管陈直更关心他的本质性生存，而非一些生活上的窘境。这种窘境是历练的一部分，是本质性生存必定相遇有待克服的一部分。而非是陈直思考的核心，只是一些障碍，有待清理或者忽略的杂物。 尽管记者们不这样想。或许陈直逐渐意识到，他无法跟那些同样关切本质性生存的人联系在一起，而反而不断的被短工捆绑，被困境捆绑。这对他来讲是可以克服的不重要的。却被看作是最根本的比他的本质性生存或者海德格尔哲学研究更值得讨论。 这才是最讽刺的，连带着我在内的人们，更关心这么一个走到台前的明星本身的情况，而不是他演的作品。 换句话说，在我看来，从营销和话语权的考量，假使陈直是一个公司财会，或者有稳定长期工作的办公室文员。那他的翻译或许永无出版的可能
迟早有一天，我们不在乎，也不顺口一提好似无意得说，这是一个保洁工的自传，这是一个怀孕妈妈孕期时的翻译，这是一个画纵横中心线的工人写下的，翻译的，研究的成果。它就是关乎于海德格尔的翻译成果，关乎于犬类饲养的试验报告，关乎于权力的观点，关乎于井盖传感器设置的方案、关乎于特定的吊顶布置下的自动喷水灭火系统溅水盘与顶板距离设置的建议、关乎于节约钱财下更省时省力的老年人护理安排
《海德格尔导论》读后感(篇二)
说明：纸质版的书中没有这个序言的英语原文，为了大家核对中译文的情况，这里我把英语原文附在后面。这个“中文版序言”作者写于2022年4月，然后在2023年12月添加了一处。
非常感谢有机会向中国的读者分享这本书，也感谢陈直的翻译工作。
自从本书英文版在1999年出版以来，又有更多海德格尔的文本问世，其中包括讲座课程、海德格尔的私人论 文与笔记，以及被称为《黑色笔记本》（Black Notebooks）的哲学日记。我们对他的个人生活与政治活动也有了更多的了解。尽管如此，出版于1927年的《存在与时间》依然是海德格尔最重要的文本，也是开始严肃研究他思想的最好文本。《海德格尔导论》对《存在与时间》这本书提 供了一个整体的概述，并且为海德格尔后期的一些最重要 的著作提供了初步的定向。在此中译本中，我主要根据《黑色笔记本》对海德格尔的政治行为添加了一些新的评论。
后期海德格尔对技术的反思对于21世纪来说尤其有价值，因为越来越明显的是，技术对自然的开发利用已经 导致了一种非常危险的不平衡。现代技术基于一种特别类 型的科学，这种科学开始于西方的笛卡尔等哲学家，他们敦促我们成为“自然的主人和所有者”。现在，现代技术已经被地球上的大部分国家采纳与发展，它影响到这颗星 球上的所有生物。根据海德格尔，技术的危害不仅仅在于它对环境造成了无意的但却明显的危害；技术还威胁着我们作为“此在”（Dasein）——对存在的意义有所操心的 存在者——而生存的能力。这样一种危险是不能仅仅通过更有效率的发明或者对资源更好的管理来解决的。我们还必须学会再次提出存在问题（如海德格尔在《存在与时间》 所做的那样），并且向传统西方中的存在概念发起挑战。
海德格尔意识到，质疑西方对存在的理解，将使与非西方文化中对存在的理解的对话成为可能。海德格尔的中国读者处于一个有利地位来发展这种对人类和地球的未来非常重要的对话。中国是现代科学与技术的领导者，现代科技改变了这个国家的许多传统面貌，但人们对中国古代思想的记忆仍然强烈而鲜活。通过与海德格尔一起探索西方思想的局限性，并创造性地化用自己的哲学遗产，21世纪的中国思想家将有可能为人类在地球上的栖居找到一种新的且充满希望的方式。
理查德·波尔特 [Richard Polt]
2022年
原文：
Preface to the Chinese edition of Heidegger: An Introduction
I am grateful for the opportunity to share this book with Chinese readers, and to Chen Zhi for his translation work.
Since this book was published in English in 1999, many more texts by Heidegger have become available, including lecture courses, private essays and notes, and the philosophical journals known as the Black Notebooks. We have also learned more about his personal life and his political activities. Nevertheless, Being and Time(published in 1927) is still the most important text by Heidegger and the best place to begin a serious study of his thought. Heidegger: An Introductionoffers a survey of Being and Timeand an initial orientation to some of his most significant later works.For this Chinese edition, I have added some new comments on Heidegger’s politics, based primarily on the Black Notebooks.
Heidegger’s later reflections on technology are especially significant for the twenty-first century, when it is clearer than ever that the technological exploitation of nature has led to a very dangerous imbalance. Modern technology is based on a particular kind of science that began in the West with philosophers such as Descartes, who urged us to become “masters and possessors of nature.” Today, modern technology has been adopted and developed by most nations on Earth, and affects every organism on the planet. According to Heidegger, the danger of technology is not only that it leads to unintended but obvious harm to the environment; it also endangers our ability to exist as “Dasein,” the entity that cares about the meaning of Being. Such a danger cannot be addressed only by more efficient inventions or better management of resources. We must also learn to raise the question of Being once again, as he did in Being and Time, and challenge the traditional Western conception of what it means to be.
Heidegger recognized that questioning the Western understanding of Being would make it possible to begin a dialogue with non-Western understandings of Being. Chinese readers of Heidegger are in a good position to develop this dialogue that is so important to the future of humanity and the planet Earth. China is a leader in modern science and technology, which have changed so much of the country’s traditional landscape, but the memory of ancient Chinese thinking remains strong and alive. It is possible that, by exploring the limits of Western thought with Heidegger, and by creatively appropriating their own philosophical heritage, twenty-first-century Chinese thinkers will find a fresh and hopeful way for human beings to dwell on the Earth.
Richard Polt
2022
《海德格尔导论》读后感(篇三)
说明：这是作者波尔特在2022年发给我的对《海德格尔导论》原文的“补充与勘误”，中译版以“作者补注”的方式添加这些“补充与勘误”，比如第一个“补充”出现在中译版第33页的“作者补注”中。
Addenda & errata for Polt, Heidegger: An Introduction
p. 13: From Heidegger’s Letters to His Wife, trans. Rupert Glasgow (Polity, 2008), we have learned that Hermann Heidegger (who was to become a historian and the custodian of Martin Heidegger’s papers) was not Martin Heidegger’s biological son, but was conceived when Elfride Heidegger conducted an extramarital affair. The same volume makes it clear that Martin Heidegger had a number of affairs throughout his life.
p. 16, n. 35: Towards the Definition of Philosophy(originally announced for publication in 1998) was in fact published in 2000.
p. 20, n. 54: Ettinger’s book has now been superseded by the publication of Martin Heidegger and Hannah Arendt, Letters, 1925-1975, trans. Andrew Shields (Orlando: Harcourt, 2004).
p. 23: for criticisms of the Stambaugh translation, see Thomas Sheehan, “‘Let a Hundred Translations Bloom!’ A Modest Proposal about Being and Time,” Man and World30, no. 2 (April 1997): 227-238; Timothy O’Hagan and Giles Pearson, “The ‘Alarming Task’ of Understanding Being and Time,” International Studies in Philosophy33, no. 2 (2001): 131-137; Theodore Kisiel, “The New Translation of Sein und Zeit: A Grammatological Lexicographer’s Commentary,” in Kisiel, Heidegger’s Way of Thought, ed. Alfred Denker and Marion Heinz (New York: Continuum, 2002). A version of the Stambaugh translation revised by Dennis Schmidt was published by SUNY in 2010 and addresses many of the criticisms.
p. 79: of course, “care” also often means caring as love or emotional involvement. Heidegger’s “care” is manifest even in moments that we would ordinarily describe as “uncaring,” such as when I treat someone coldly.
p. 114: Heidegger never ceased teaching, even during his rectorate (see GA 36/37). The psychiatrist who treated Heidegger at the time (early 1946？) was not Medard Boss, but Victor Baron von Gebsattel (Safranski, Martin Heidegger, p. 351). Boss first made contact with Heidegger by mail in 1947, and met him personally in 1949 (Zollikon Seminars, Preface).
p. 115: Binswanger had developed his version of “Dasein analysis” earlier; in fact, Gebsattel (see above) was a follower of Binswanger’s approach. Heidegger eventually told Boss that Binswanger had badly misunderstood him (see Zollikon Seminars).
p. 126: “On the Essence of Truth” was not published until 1943, and was revised before publication. The three initial drafts of the essay, all dating from 1930, have been published in GA 80.1; the second and third drafts are close to the final version.
pp. 140-152: My extended interpretation of the Contributionsis now available as The Emergency of Being: On Heidegger’s “Contributions to Philosophy”(Cornell, 2006). My broader reading of Heidegger in the 1930s, particularly his politics, is available as Time and Trauma: Thinking Through Heidegger in the Thirties(Rowman & Littlefield International, 2019).
p. 154: The 1934 lectures were published in 1998 as GA 38, on the basis of student notes. Heidegger’s own notes were located after the publication of GA 38, and were published in 2020 as GA 38A.
p. 156, n. 89: The letter has been translated as “The Jewish Contamination of German Spiritual Life: Letter to Victor Schwoerer (1929),” in Martin Heidegger, Philosophical and Political Writings, ed. Manfred Stassen (New York: Continuum, 2003), p. 1.
p. 157, re: “the anti-Semitic cultural caricature of ‘the Jew’”: Volumes 95, 96, and 97 of the Gesamtausgabe, which consist of notebooks written 1938-1948, include several passages that show that Heidegger incorporated antisemitic stereotypes into his view of global politics at the time. These passages are heavily outnumbered by passages that represent Nazi ideology as the ultimate form of modern nihilism—while still affirming the Nazi movement as necessary for the catastrophic end of “the first inception,” which might make way for “the other inception.”
p. 159: What Gilbert Ryle supposedly said to James Thrower in 1960 was, “Heidegger. Can’t be a good philosopher. Wasn’t a good man”: James Thrower, letter to the editor, The Times Higher Education Supplement, February 17, 1989, p. 12. Ryle’s full views on Heidegger were presumably somewhat more complex; in 1929, he had written a review of Being and Timein the journal Mind.
p. 162: The ultimate example of position #6 is probably Johannes Fritsche, Historical Destiny and National Socialism in Heidegger’s “Being and Time”(Berkeley: University of California Press, 1999).
