Neuzeit, modernité, temps nouveaux, modernidade, modernidad, modern age, modern time, novos tempos

Neuzeit, a somewhat old-fashioned term for “modernity,” literally means “New Age.” Heidegger uses the term to contrast the stage of Western metaphysics that began “three centuries ago” (GA16 GA16
GA 16
GA XVI
GA16AS
GA16JVB
GA16Sereno
GA16AF
Spiegel
AssuntoPensar Reden und andere Zeugnisse eines Lebensweges (1910-1976) [2000] :677/HR 330) with Greek antiquity and the Middle Ages. Modernity arrives at its completed or consummate form in the age of technology (see, e.g., GA5o:i49). Although he calls it the “nihilistic” (GA5 GA5
GA5BD
GA5CL
GA5WB
Holzwege
GA 5
GA V
HW
CF2002
CB2012
CMNP
Chm Holzwege (1935-1946) [1977] :218/163), “godless” (GA5 GA5
GA5BD
GA5CL
GA5WB
Holzwege
GA 5
GA V
HW
CF2002
CB2012
CMNP
Chm Holzwege (1935-1946) [1977] :76/58) age of “planetary technology” (GA16 GA16
GA 16
GA XVI
GA16AS
GA16JVB
GA16Sereno
GA16AF
Spiegel
AssuntoPensar Reden und andere Zeugnisse eines Lebensweges (1910-1976) [2000] :668/HR 324; cf. GA90 GA90
GA 90
GA XC
GA90DP Zu Ernst Jünger [2004] ), modernity should not be defined in terms of the political, social, religious, scientific, or technological revolutions that have marked it since the 1600s, but rather by their common, hidden source. The concept of modernity is central to Heidegger’s apocalyptic vision of Western culture in crisis. Complicating attempts to interpret that vision, however, are his idiosyncratic notions of the history of metaphysics and the “essence” of science and technology. This article aims to clarify the relations among these ideas.

For Heidegger, historical epochs are marked by incommensurable interpretations of what it is to be a thing and what it means to be true. This may seem strange: how can there be different views about ideas as basic as “being” and “truth”? Haven’t things always been just things? Didn’t “true” and “false” mean the same for the Greeks or medievals as for us? Heidegger argues that it is just the apparent self-evidence (SZ GA2
Sein und Zeit
SZ
SuZ
S.u.Z.
Être et temps
Ser e Tempo
Being and Time
Ser y Tiempo
EtreTemps
STMS
STFC
BTMR
STJR
BTJS
ETFV
STJG
ETJA
ETEM Sein und Zeit (1927), ed. Friedrich-Wilhelm von Herrmann, 1977, XIV, 586p. Revised 2018. [GA2] / Sein und Zeit (1927), Tübingen, Max Niemeyer, 1967. / Sein und Zeit. Tübingen : Max Niemeyer Verlag, 1972 2, 4, and passim) of such terms that occludes alternative interpretations, leading us to neglect (GA20 GA20
GA20ES
GA20EN Prolegomena zur Geschichte des Zeitbegriffs (Sommersemester 1925), ed. Petra Jaeger, 1. Auflage 1979. 2., durchgesehene Auflage 1988. 3., durchgesehene Auflage 1994. :147fr.) or forget (GA5 GA5
GA5BD
GA5CL
GA5WB
Holzwege
GA 5
GA V
HW
CF2002
CB2012
CMNP
Chm Holzwege (1935-1946) [1977] :2 21-22/165-66; SZ GA2
Sein und Zeit
SZ
SuZ
S.u.Z.
Être et temps
Ser e Tempo
Being and Time
Ser y Tiempo
EtreTemps
STMS
STFC
BTMR
STJR
BTJS
ETFV
STJG
ETJA
ETEM Sein und Zeit (1927), ed. Friedrich-Wilhelm von Herrmann, 1977, XIV, 586p. Revised 2018. [GA2] / Sein und Zeit (1927), Tübingen, Max Niemeyer, 1967. / Sein und Zeit. Tübingen : Max Niemeyer Verlag, 1972 2; cf. SZ GA2
Sein und Zeit
SZ
SuZ
S.u.Z.
Être et temps
Ser e Tempo
Being and Time
Ser y Tiempo
EtreTemps
STMS
STFC
BTMR
STJR
BTJS
ETFV
STJG
ETJA
ETEM Sein und Zeit (1927), ed. Friedrich-Wilhelm von Herrmann, 1977, XIV, 586p. Revised 2018. [GA2] / Sein und Zeit (1927), Tübingen, Max Niemeyer, 1967. / Sein und Zeit. Tübingen : Max Niemeyer Verlag, 1972 5,169) the “question of [the sense of] being” (SZ GA2
Sein und Zeit
SZ
SuZ
S.u.Z.
Être et temps
Ser e Tempo
Being and Time
Ser y Tiempo
EtreTemps
STMS
STFC
BTMR
STJR
BTJS
ETFV
STJG
ETJA
ETEM Sein und Zeit (1927), ed. Friedrich-Wilhelm von Herrmann, 1977, XIV, 586p. Revised 2018. [GA2] / Sein und Zeit (1927), Tübingen, Max Niemeyer, 1967. / Sein und Zeit. Tübingen : Max Niemeyer Verlag, 1972 2,215,403)> and so be blind to the inner nature of other historical epochs and our own. Since it is within the undiscerned metaphysical horizon of “being” that modern scientific, religious, political, and other discourses are conducted, it is only by clearly defining it that we can grasp their common modern “essence.” Thus Heidegger unearths archaic conceptions of being and truth, so as to expose the roots of our own conceptions, and their implications for the future of humanity. His admittedly awkward (GA16 GA16
GA 16
GA XVI
GA16AS
GA16JVB
GA16Sereno
GA16AF
Spiegel
AssuntoPensar Reden und andere Zeugnisse eines Lebensweges (1910-1976) [2000] :671/HR 326) name for this essence is “das Ge-Stell,” the inventory or syn-thetic com-posit(ion)ing. Since Heidegger views the sciences as the clearest manifestation of modernity (GA5 GA5
GA5BD
GA5CL
GA5WB
Holzwege
GA 5
GA V
HW
CF2002
CB2012
CMNP
Chm Holzwege (1935-1946) [1977] :76/58), explicating their presuppositions will clarify the nature of Ge-Stell, and so too the essence of modernity. [CHL Wrathall
Mark Wrathall
CCHBT
CHL WRATHALL, Mark A. ]

N.T.: Na passagem acima, Heidegger vale-se do conteúdo significativo do termo alemão para designar a modernidade: Neuzeit significa literalmente o “novo tempo”. Como esse conteúdo específico ao termo alemão desapareceria na tradução, optamos por inserir a tradução literal antes do termo normalmente utilizado. [Casanova Casanova
Marco Antonio Casanova
Marco Casanova CASANOVA, Marco Antonio. Filósofo e tradutor para português das obras de Heidegger. ; GA6MAC:763]