This little book is so wonderful on so many levels--and as you may know, such effusive praise is not always associated with Heidegger's later thought. To begin, the volume contains two small yet terribly important essays, "The Principle of Identity" and "The Onto-theological Constitution of Metaphysics." The latter essay has become the basis for much theological and philosophical discussion around the idea of "ontotheology," the recent best of which is Merold Westphal's new Overcoming Ontotheology (Fordham, 2001). This is the name Heidegger gives to a certain metaphysical concept of God which has found great purchase over the years in various forms: Aristotle's Mover, Spinoza's causa sui ("self-caused," the idea of God as a necessary first principle), Hegel's God qua Spirit, and even much recent conservative Christian thought which has categories in place to which the concept of "God" must correspond if "God" is to be countenanced as indeed being God. Ontotheology in a nutshell: thinking that God is a concept that is at one's beck and call, something one can pull out of one's pocket; or, to quote Rilke's Letters to a Young Poet (6), "Do you believe that anyone who really has him could lose him like a little stone, or do you not think rather that whoever had him could only be lost by him?" In other words, God is a conceptul stone, something we can see, know, look at, produce a taxonomy of, and teach in a classroom. That's ontotheology.

All my words are only ancillary to Heidegger's prose in the second essay, and his words are often quoted but their source (this little book) is seldom mentioned. He writes, "[ontotheology] is the right name for the god of philosophy. Man can neither pray nor sacrifice to this god. Before the causa sui, man can neither fall to his knees in awe nor can he play music and dance before this god. The god-less thinking which must abandon the god of philosophy, gad as casua sui, is thus perhaps closer to the divine God" (p. 72). Heidegger's essay is an attempt not so much to overcome the ontotheological problem, as to name it and allow it to become a subject of thinking. It is essential reading for an understanding of the later Heidegger.

In terms of the book, it is all one could want. Nicely bound (I'm not sure why Amazon doens't have a photo of it), it is small and the text is readable. Perhaps the best bonus of the book is that it is bilingual; the English translations come first, and then the German follows at the end. If nothing else, it is an opportunity for English-only readers of Heidegger to see his German text and appreciate the difficulty of adequately translating his philosophy. This Stambaugh has done almost as well as her new definitive translation of Sein und Zeit, and as far as I can see this is the only useful translation of these two essays. Heideggerians cannot be forgiven for not reading this small book, which is huge on ideas, and Stambaugh has provided the perfect venue for Heidegger's intricate and passionate thought. There is no index, which might cost it a star, but the excellent introduction makes up for it, and besides, the essays are only 20-30 pages each. An index is hardly needed. Just read the text.

This book is a translation of Stambaugh's doctoral dissertation written in Germany under the title _Untersuchungen zum Problem der Zeit bei Nietzsche_ in 1958. Much of what Stambaugh writes (which should be noted was in criticism of and opposition to contemporary Nietzsche scholarship at the time in Germany as represented by Lowith and Heidegger) would later become standard in Nietzsche studies through the publication of Deleuze's _Nietzsche et la philosophie_ in 1962: e.g., the resolution of the "conflict" of the so-called teleological character of the concept of will to power and the non-teleological eternal return by delineating Nietzsche's understanding of "will" as naturalistic and cosmological rather than anthropomorphic; the explication of Nietzshce's anti-Newtonian concept of space as relations of force rather than formal. Stambaugh provides a wealth of information and ingenious interpretation that cannot be touched upon in this limited space. The only issue I have is with her contention that Nietzsche's concept of time remains formal. I am not sure the agrument she presents throughout leads to this conclusion. But this is perhaps a mere semantic difference and need not contain the force of Nietzsche's thought of eternal return as such, which Stambaugh readily concedes.

If you are interested in understanding Nietzsche's ontological explications of will to power and eternal return this is the best book available in English.

Martin Heidegger in this decisive work takes a little known author and "confronts" his work with his own understanding of Being as finite. The result is an amazing understanding of the finite human condition as freedon. This is authentic thought that does not wallow in morbidity nor escape to mere rationality or the romanticism of idealism. Heidegger fresh from working out his "Contributions to Philosophy:From Enowing" is fully engaged and moving on. Heidegger, gives adequate cautions through out the work so that our initial enthusiasm is not lost but becomes transformed into a silent "yes" that can refresh us for some time to come. Stambaugh, thoroughly versed in translating for her readers and those that want to read Heidegger, also provides an extensive appendix that is a "gold mine" for rereading all of Heideggers works. This appendix is almost like "notes from the underground". Though Heidegger might not approve of such terms he would nevertheless understand. Make no mistake, Heidegger has not forgotten his own history (son of a sexton) nor the history of Western thought. This history is fully put to the task of working out his own thought, that of Schelling and the resulting transformations in both understand the translator and the reader. If you try to "figure" this work out you will miss the poetry. If you "simply love" this work you may too easily move on to the "next thing" that is exciting. Are you ready?

Reading Heidegger for the first time was a laborious chore, one that I disdained every minute of. However, I think it was the fact that I was not ready for this work when I first read it. After beginning more work in Theology and discovering the work of the great 20th century theologian Karl Rahner, I found myself more interested in the work of Heidegger. Rahner was a student of Heidegger's in Germany, and you can see his influence running deeply through Rahner's work.

Reading it a second time with a more open mind, I found it to be enlightening, though still immensely difficult. The translation is not bad, as everyone seems to have trouble with Heidegger as they do with Hegel. Heidegger's ideas on death and the angst man has when facing death are integral to my own work, and the entirety of Being and Time should be read by anyone thinking of delving into post-modern philosophy and existentialism.

An earlier reviewer suggested to read this without Sartre: I completely disagree. Heidegger and Sartre should be read together, as they have so much to share with one another that to ignore one is to miss the point of the 20th century movements in thought. They are, together, the two heavy-hitters of the 20th century, though thinkers like Camus and Merleau-Ponty may make a claim for space there as well.

Being and Time is Heidegger's magnum opus, and should be read with an open mind and a notebook to keep track of all the ideas.

Okay, reading these reviews, I am frustrated... but, of course that is to be expected. Heidegger, more than most philosophers, lends himself to a multiplicity of interpretations.

Rather than add my own semi-detailed interpretation of this work and its historical importance to this list [which would just further frustrate others, I am sure], I would just like to recommend to anyone approaching this book for the first time that they keep in mind the central inquiry that Heidegger is engaging in: the meaning of Being... and, as he explicitly states, this book is a preparation for further exploration, and not to be read as a completed "system" in itself. While the influence of Kierkegaard is obvious, relating this work to Dostoevsky (as another reviewer has) I think misses the point entirely. For all of the talk of "authenticity" and the "psychologizing" of this work that later commentators have engaged in, Heidegger is intersted in re-grounding all philosophical inquiry... not in explicating some mere existential-humanistic outlook. Whether he suceeds or not is, to say the least, debatable.

I would also recommend giving a _very_ close and thorough reading to his essay "What is Metaphysics" before approaching _Being and Time_.

A final note on this translation-- I had already wrestled with the previous translation from beginning to end before purchasing this one. This translation was more than worth the price of purchasing the book again. Stambaugh's translation is simply masterful.