Araştırma Makalesi
BibTex RIS Kaynak Göster

Repetition and everydayness

Yıl 2016, Cilt: 2 Sayı: 3, 695 - 702, 01.07.2016
https://doi.org/10.24289/ijsser.279014

Öz

In this paper, I will point to the temporality of the everydayness in Zbigniew Rybcynski’s Tango in comparison to Heideggerian notion of temporality and handiness. Firstly, I will discuss the Heideggerian subjectivity as agency and show that subjectivity for the philosophy of life is in a temporal mood of intentionality, Sichbewegen as Heidegger says. I will point to the temporal functionality of objects as tools through which their extentional existence is negated and respond to our goal directedness as handy equipment. The availability of the handy tools is nothing but a temporal span in which objects are no longer meaningful for us as isolated extant beings but parts of an undifferentiated functional totality. The handy tools are available for us as parts of handiness in this temporal functionality. Heidegger sees this functionality as a possibility of proximity with the original temporality as a special coming to presence in repetition and says that, in repetition the meaning of life as a whole calls for our awareness.  

Subsequently, I will discuss the Tango characters in relation to the Heideggerian understanding of everydayness and repetition. I will state that in Tango, the inhabitants of the room are absolutely disentangled and ignorant of one other despite their apparent closeness. Even though they spatially share the small room, all the characters act as if the others do not exist. Tango characters are stuck in the repetition of the same moment and cannot let the temporalization of life flow in its spontaneity. I will refer to the Heideggerian understanding of the moment of vision in repetition out of which the meaning of life as a whole outstands and conclude that, unlike the Heideggerian interpretation of repetition, Tango characters remain in a Sisyphosian vein.


Repetition and everydayness

Yıl 2016, Cilt: 2 Sayı: 3, 695 - 702, 01.07.2016
https://doi.org/10.24289/ijsser.279014

Öz

In this paper, I will point to the temporality of the everydayness in Zbigniew Rybcynski’s Tango in comparison to Heideggerian notion of temporality and handiness. Firstly, I will discuss the Heideggerian subjectivity as agency and show that subjectivity for the philosophy of life is in a temporal mood of intentionality, Sichbewegen as Heidegger says. I will point to the temporal functionality of objects as tools through which their extentional existence is negated and respond to our goal directedness as handy equipment. The availability of the handy tools is nothing but a temporal span in which objects are no longer meaningful for us as isolated extant beings but parts of an undifferentiated functional totality. The handy tools are available for us as parts of handiness in this temporal functionality. Heidegger sees this functionality as a possibility of proximity with the original temporality as a special coming to presence in repetition and says that, in repetition the meaning of life as a whole calls for our awareness.  

Subsequently, I will discuss the Tango characters in relation to the Heideggerian understanding of everydayness and repetition. I will state that in Tango, the inhabitants of the room are absolutely disentangled and ignorant of one other despite their apparent closeness. Even though they spatially share the small room, all the characters act as if the others do not exist. Tango characters are stuck in the repetition of the same moment and cannot let the temporalization of life flow in its spontaneity. I will refer to the Heideggerian understanding of the moment of vision in repetition out of which the meaning of life as a whole outstands and conclude that, unlike the Heideggerian interpretation of repetition, Tango characters remain in a Sisyphosian vein.


Toplam 0 adet kaynakça vardır.

Ayrıntılar

Bölüm Makaleler
Yazarlar

Mustafa Cihan Camcı

Yayımlanma Tarihi 1 Temmuz 2016
Yayımlandığı Sayı Yıl 2016 Cilt: 2 Sayı: 3

Kaynak Göster

APA Camcı, M. C. (2016). Repetition and everydayness. International Journal of Social Sciences and Education Research, 2(3), 695-702. https://doi.org/10.24289/ijsser.279014
AMA Camcı MC. Repetition and everydayness. International Journal of Social Sciences and Education Research. Nisan 2016;2(3):695-702. doi:10.24289/ijsser.279014
Chicago Camcı, Mustafa Cihan. “Repetition and Everydayness”. International Journal of Social Sciences and Education Research 2, sy. 3 (Nisan 2016): 695-702. https://doi.org/10.24289/ijsser.279014.
EndNote Camcı MC (01 Nisan 2016) Repetition and everydayness. International Journal of Social Sciences and Education Research 2 3 695–702.
IEEE M. C. Camcı, “Repetition and everydayness”, International Journal of Social Sciences and Education Research, c. 2, sy. 3, ss. 695–702, 2016, doi: 10.24289/ijsser.279014.
ISNAD Camcı, Mustafa Cihan. “Repetition and Everydayness”. International Journal of Social Sciences and Education Research 2/3 (Nisan 2016), 695-702. https://doi.org/10.24289/ijsser.279014.
JAMA Camcı MC. Repetition and everydayness. International Journal of Social Sciences and Education Research. 2016;2:695–702.
MLA Camcı, Mustafa Cihan. “Repetition and Everydayness”. International Journal of Social Sciences and Education Research, c. 2, sy. 3, 2016, ss. 695-02, doi:10.24289/ijsser.279014.
Vancouver Camcı MC. Repetition and everydayness. International Journal of Social Sciences and Education Research. 2016;2(3):695-702.

88x31.png

Bu eser Creative Commons Atıf 4.0 Uluslararası Lisansı ile lisanslanmıştır.