A Reading of Heidegger’s Reading of Immanuel Kant’s Critique Of Pure Reason
Authors: Atim Ben Carlo 
Published: October 2022

This paper intends to argue over these subsequent ideas: first, that Heidegger’s employment of ‘retrieval’, ‘repetition’, or ‘thinking dialogue’ in his interpretation of Kant’s first Critique is, following Macann, quite hazardous and destructive but only on the surface. Heidegger's hermeneutical privilege to employ a specific interpretive frame in reading Kant seems to violate hermeneutics' fundamental maxim. This hermeneutic maxim is the inevitability of multiple interpretations. This can be seen in how Heidegger treated Kant's Critique of Pure Reason, where he announces that he “understand him (Kant) better than he (Kant) understood himself.” At first glance, his declaration exudes a kind of intellectual arrogance. However, I will show this is not so. Secondly, I will argue, based on the question of Heidegger’s appropriation of Kant’s ideas in his philosophical project, that he partly appropriated Kant but in a violent manner. As evident in his interpretation of the Critique of Pure Reason, Heidegger goes beyond Kant and forces the latter to speak through his text on the issues Heidegger thought to be in Kant. This raises the question of whether Heidegger properly situated and appropriated Kant in his text or not.
References

Dahlstrom, Daniel. “The Critique of Pure Reason and Continental Philosophy.” In Kant’s Critique of Pure Reason. Edited by Paul Guyer. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2010.
Frede, Dorothea. “The question of being Heidegger’s project.” In Cambridge Companion to Heidegger. Edited by Charles B. Guignon. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1993.
Grene, Marjorie. Martin Heidegger. London: Bowes & Bowes, 1957.
Guignon, Charles B. “Introduction.” In The Cambridge Companion to Heidegger. Edited by Charles B. Guignon. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1995.
Heidegger, Martin. Phenomenological Interpretation of Kant’s Critique of Pure Reason. Translated by Parvis Emad and Kenneth Maly. Bloomington/Indianapolis: Indiana University Press, 1997.
Heidegger, Martin. Kant and the Problem of Metaphysics, 5th edition. Translated by Richard Taft. Bloomington and Indianapolis: Indiana University Press, 1997.
Heidegger, Martin. Basic Problems of Phenomenology. Translated by Albert Hofstadter. Bloomington & Indianapolis: Indiana University Press, 1982.
Kant, Immanuel. Critique of Pure Reason. Translated by Paul Guyer and Allen Q. Wood. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2000.
Kenny, Anthony. “The Philosopher’s History and the History of Philosophy.” In Analytic Philosophy and History of Philosophy. Edited by Tom Sorell and G.A.J. Rogers. Oxford: Clarendon Press, 2005.
Longuenesse, Béatrice. Kant and the Capacity to Judge. Translated by Charles T. Wolfe. Princeton/Oxford: Princeton University Press, 1998.
Macann, Christopher. “Heidegger’s Kant Interpretation.” In Critical Heidegger. Edited by Christopher Macann. London/New York: Routledge, 1996.
Moreiras, Alberto. “Heidegger, Kant, and the Problem of Transcendence.” The Southern Journal of Philosophy vol. xxiv, no. 1 (1986): 81-93.
Nelson, Eric S. “Heidegger’s Failure to Overcome Transcendental Philosophy.” In Transcendental Inquiry. Edited by Halla Kim & Steven Hoeltzel. MacMillan: Palgrave, 2016.
Sherover, Charles. Heidegger, Kant and Time. Bloomington: Indiana University Press, 1971.
Stoljar, Daniel. Philosophical Progress: In Defence of a Reasonable Optimism. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2017.
Taft, Richard. “Translator’s Introduction to the 4th Edition.” In Martin Heidegger. Kant and the Problem of Metaphysics, 5th edition enlarged. Translated by Richard Taft Bloomington and Indianapolis: Indiana University Press, 1997.
Weatherston, Martin. Heidegger’s Interpretation of Kant: Categories, Imagination and Temporality. New York: Palgrave Macmillan, 2002.