Talk:Gestell

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

I thought there needed to be an article here on Gestell, at least as conceived of by Heidegger. I am no expert on Heidegger, but I added in a few sentances so as to get this going. I have never created an article before (only edited), and am not completely familiar with wiki etiquette, so I apologize if I might have gone off format.

I feel that the notion of gestell is sufficiently important in Heidegger's work so as to merit the creation of a wikipedia article on it. Kevin L. 06:06, 12 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I have added a link to this page from the page on The Question Concerning Technology. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 128.12.71.156 (talk) 04:28, 10 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Re ETYMOLOGY[edit]

An excellent article, Kevin! Do not let anybody discourage you by labelling it a "stub". Your endeavor is all the more laudable as no article on Gestell (OHG gistelli, collect. of OHG stal, a position or site, esp., a place for animals) can be found as yet in the German WP, and even the French, who after all brought Heidegger back from oblivion, have in their own WP failed so far to give the great philosopher his due on this important point. If, therefore, you could find some good translators, it would not be a bad idea to branch out, so to say.
I hope you do not find it too presumptious if I take this opportunity to make a suggestion as to the text itself: You know, of course, that the term Gestell, in the sense (far removed from the German Umgangssprache) used in Heidegger's writings, entered the Professor's vocabulary only at a very late date. And you will no doubt be familiar with the delightful story that goes with this fact. But as I cannot imagine that everybody is so well versed in the intricacies of the German language and the Professor's biography, I think it would only be fair on your part to share your knowledge also with the less privileged of your readers. I shall, of course, always be at your disposal if you have any questions on this subject. --BZ(Bruno Zollinger) 13:04, 22 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I ascertain that you are very well acquainted with Heidegger's work, as well as his notion of Gestell. I, unfortunately, cannot say the same of myself. As a student I have come across the term and have written some on it, but my knowledge of Heidegger and Gestell is very limited. As such, I think it would be great if you wanted to contribute to this article, or "stub". If you wanted to go into more depth as to the meaning and use of the term both in and out of Heidegger, as well as Heidegger's acquisition of the term.
Technology, from what I have come to understand, became a "major" aspect of Heidegger's later work. Thence it seems appropriate that Gestell be noted as important, as it is a central concept within Heidegger's writings regarding knowledge. I found it strange that Gestell barely be noted in the main article of Heidegger, but felt that it was innappropriate to ammend the article with a substantial section regarding the term, and felt that it would do as a standalone article.
Once again, I welcome you to contribute any of your knowledge regarding Gestell and its usage in Heidegger and philosophy in general. --Kevin L. 06:17, 26 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]


Re CONTRIBUTION. Thank you for your kind invitation, Kevin. If by "contribute" you mean that I should participate in literally writing the article, I'd have to decline the offer. But if you are interested in advice and hints on how to procede I shall always be glad to help. You could then expect something like this:
Think of Marburg an der Lahn, 1924! or
Think of how conversation was enframed where Heidegger grew up. Upon meeting someone, say a Mr Pfleiderer, Heidegger would have said very slowly: "Ah, der Pfleiderer, so so". To which Mr Pfleiderer would have replied in the same tone: "Ja, der Herr Professor Heidegger, ja ja, so so." In other parts of Germany however, let's say in Königsberg, a woman might have said to her daughter "Schau Dir an das Gestell!" every time they would meet somebody.
You'd have to take it from there, Kevin. Yes, I call this a contribution. And yes, I am serious. Have a nice weekend! --BZ(Bruno Zollinger) 09:19, 27 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

My problem with this article is that it defines gestell by invoking gestell. It really says nothing of the essence of technology, or what enframing is. -A F J

I have a problem with the second paragraph. Does Heidegger think that ALL presentations or coming-forth-into-presences must be enframed - what about poiesis? Recall that Enframing specifically refers to that way of revealing which order-reveals the real as standing-reserve. Wouldn't Heidegger say that I can take or experience a blooming flower or the Rhine River poietically, letting it come forth into presence "naturally" or in its ownmost way - i.e., without transforming its *being* into a *being-for*, or without making its being a function of its potential use?
I very much want to agree with the second paragraph - indeed, am adopting much the same position in a paper I am currently writing - but I am not sure if it accurately reflects the text. 70.196.131.169 (talk) 23:33, 25 October 2012 (UTC) Allen Porter[reply]

References[edit]

I'm just putting some references here that might be useful for improving the main article. --RichardVeryard (talk) 02:22, 25 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

  • Felix, Edith; Mielnik, Jean-Christophe, Web 2.0 and Martin Heidegger's Gestell, retrieved 2008-08-25
  • Wittman, Alain (2005-06-29), Only a god can save us?, retrieved 2008-08-25 {{citation}}: Check date values in: |date= (help)CS1 maint: date and year (link)
  • Robbins, Brent Dean; Cowan-Barbetti, Claire; Barbetti, Victor (Fall 1999), "Scientia Media", Janus Head, 2 (2), retrieved 2008-08-25

Here's another one 82.4.227.128 (talk) 12:01, 17 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Later uses of the concept[edit]

Someone has added a note about Claudio Ciborra, but this needs expanding. I added a couple of others, Giorgio Agamben, Albert Borgmann, obviously needs more work here. And I need to find time to put in the references I found last time I looked at this article. --RichardVeryard (talk) 18:21, 11 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified (January 2018)[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Gestell. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 10:53, 20 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Gestell&oldid=1221162959"