To all of you who will get to read this what is a "thingly thing of a character" in a philosophical way?

Question

This question has to do with Heidegger's point of view ? He keeps mentioning that the character has a thingly thing, but really it just keeps going in cirlcles and it's confusing. Just like how he says: ''..to enter into the question of the thingly character of the thing?...the work's work-characte can't be defined in terms of its thingly character, but as against that the question about the thing's thingly character...''? Does anyone get this? Cuz I sure don't?!

Answer 1

Ah, the nature of philosophy rears its ugly head!

Because philosophy forces us to question our realities, it also abounds with vague, half-developed ideas and twists of logic that just end up confusing many. When this happens, I usually begin questioning the philosophy and root myself back into my own reality.

Answer 2

In college 40 years ago I watched my roommate, who was quite high on LSD, holding a piece of bread and shouting "it's bread, goddammit, it's bread." He was in touch with the "ding an sich", the thingly character. Others might call it essence or essential being. Similarly, several decades after childhood I tripped and fell down and vividly refreshed my memory of just how hard concrete sidewalks are. That too is the thingly character.

You might want to try as well a zen story: a master wanted to test his students understanding, so he held up a fan and said, "what is this?" His poorest student said, "It's a fan." His middle student said nothing, knowing the limitation of words. His best student scratched his back with it, stirred the fire with it, then spread it out, put a gift on it, and handed it to his teacher. The teacher smiled."

The 3rd student "knew" the thingly character of the fan, not as a concept but as an experience.