A Reaction Paper on Martin Heideggers

On the Essence of Truth and

Platos Doctrine of Truth

A Class Report in
Transcendental (PA 203)
Presented to the School of Public Affairs and Governance (SPAG)
Silliman University, Dumaguete City,
Negros Oriental, Philippines

In Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degree

Masters of Public Administration
Rivera, Ph.D.
Faculty

By

Mark Ronald C. Genove, RND

Summer 2015
On the Essence of Truth
This reaction paper will be on Martin Heideggers On the Essence
of Truth. An essay said to have been published in 1943 but has texts
that date back to 1930. (Richardson, 1974) The particular version I
read was translated by John Sallis and was translated based on the
fourth edition of the essay in 1961.
Summary
In this essay Heidegger seeks to find out what the essence of truth
is, as it is. Not based on anything else but by itself. Not by experience,
not by calculations, or technicality. Just the actual truth and nothing
more added. Heidegger did this in eight different sections.
The first section talks about the usual concept of truth. Here
Heidegger talked about the truth as to something that has to be in
accord. He further states that it is true, whether it be a matter or a
proposition, if it is in accord. Which means that truth signifies accord.
It also signifies that it is consonance with what the matter is supposed
to be and at the same time in accordance with what is meant in the
statement by the matter.
This is revealed by the traditional definition of truth in Latin says:
veritas est adaequatio rei et intellectus. Which can mean truth is the
correspondence of the matter to knowledge and can also mean truth
is the correspondence of knowledge to the matter. In both definition

this states veritas as conforming to and thus translates truth as

correctness.
The traditional definition is also inherent in the Christian
theological belief that it is as it has been created. That it corresponds
to the mind of God thus is correct and in the sense true.
The second section is the inner possibility of accordance.
Heidegger started this part with the comparison of two coins that are
alike. Physically centimeter-by-centimeter they are alike. But once you
put out a statement to the coins, the statements can never be alike to
the physical coins. Coins have measurement but statements do not.
One can use the coin to purchase but a statement cannot be used for
purchase.
What Heidegger wanted to point out is that if the usual concept of
truth were used in this situation it would say that it is in accord. But
the statement can never the coin no matter how hard it may try
because once it does succeed to be it looses its being a statement. The
statement can never be the same exact thing but it keeps a
relationship by presenting the thing that is presented. What is then
presented is the same the presentative statement.
To present here means to let a thing stand opposed to an object.
Then what stands opposed must cross through an open field of
opposedness and must stay in it stand as a thing and be visible there.
This crossing the open field happens in the open region. This

openness is entered into and becomes the domain of relatedness. This

relationship of the presentative statement to the thing is an
accomplishment to that bearing that becomes the comportment. The
comportment stands in the open region and since it has opened up it
has been named being.
Mans openness varies on the kind of beings and its way of
comportment. The things can stay within the open region together
with the being take there stand and should be capable of being said.
This occurs only when being present themselves together with the
presentative statement that the being allows itself to be to be spoken.
If this is then followed then speech that directs itself in accord is true
and therefore what is said is true.
The third section that Heidegger to show the essence of truth is
the ground of the possibility of correctness. Here he said that the
presentative statement will receive the directive to conform to the
object and to accord by the way of correctness if it has already
entered in to an open region for something opened up which prevails
there and binds every presenting. For one to be free from the binding
directedness one must be free for what will be opened up in the open
region. These then lead to the uncomprehended essence of freedom.
As freedom is the base where the inner condition of the possibility of
correctness happens through the openness of comportment. Which

leads to the essence of truth, which is freedom. So truth is now under

the subjectivity of man.
Man is attributed to all kinds of untruth. Which is why is this used
to contrast the essence of truth. The essence of truth is imperishable
and eternal unlike man who is just transitory and fragile.
The fourth section of Heidegger is the essence of freedom. The
previous discussion displaced how truth is defined as correctness
because of freedom. Freedom in here is shown as letting be. To let be
here does not mean not to mind or to renounce it. Let be here means
to engage with beings. This is further explained that this is to engage
oneself with the open region and it s openness into which every being
comes to stand, bringing that openness, as it were, along with itself.
This open region is called ta alethea, which in English means the
unconcealed.
Ta alethea translated this way would contain a directive that truth
should not be treated, as correctness of statement instead should be
thought of, as that still uncomprehended disclosedness and disclosure
of beings. Here letting be exposes ek-sitent. Which when related to
truth the essence of freedom manifests itself as exposure to the
disclosedness of being.
Ek-sistence when related to truth as freedom is exposure to beings
as they are. Heidegger also stated that mans ek-sistence only started
when man first asked the question, What are beings? Here beings

reveal itself as physis or nature. If man ek-sist then he has the

freedom but he does not own his freedom, instead freedom owns the
man.
Heidegger also stated that the non-essence of truth couldnt be
seen before truth itself because it derives from the essence of truth.
They are relevant to one another because they belong together.
The fifth section explains truth is through the essence of truth.
Here it is explained that we need to attune ourselves not just to
beings but also to beings as a whole. Where attunement exposes man
to beings as a whole but experiences this without being aware of the
essence of attunement. This attunement can make man make man
know more than it actually already knows and things that he does not
know can just disappear.
Letting being be anticipates all the open comportment that
flourishes in it. Although in mans life looking at things as a whole is
sometimes overwhelming and incomprehensible. It makes man stop
and

bring

things

into

accord

and

let

it

remain

indefinite,

indeterminable, and puts it together with the most fleeting and the
most unconsidered.
In the sixth section Heidegger talks about untruth as concealing.
Here he discusses that man in its core being and how it comports to
Being and beings there will always be some disclosure and some
concealing. Further stating that concealment has always been there

from start and that all comportments strive to conceal. Leading to

mystery or what Heidegger calls the concealing of what is concealed
as a whole. When something is concealed it gets concealed in the
process of concealing.
He further stated that the proper non-essence of truth is the
mystery. Where non-essence would mean the deformation of an
inferior essence. Although looking at non-essence and untruth this
way can be hard to understand by normal thinking. This is because
this non-essence of truth as untruth is related in the domain of the
truth of Beings not beings.
Freedom is an open bearing and never closes up and all bearing is
directed towards beings and disclosure of them. If the bearing is
concealing these conceals itself in the process then gets forgotten
then it disappears. When this happens man chooses something that is
already there and something that can be controlled. As this is done it
can make one get used to thing to familiar and loose sight of a lot of
things. Concealing beings as a whole should only be used as a limit as
concealing

as

something

that

happens

naturally

can

lead

to

forgetfulness.
The forgotten mystery of man has not been forgotten but
forgottenness can lead to a disappearance of what is forgotten. When
it has been forgotten the mystery leaves the historical man and leaves
him to his own resources. So man continues and fills his world with

what he needs. Then man sets his own standards not even thinking as
to where the standards are based on. Then man goes wrong with the
standards the more he takes himself as the subject and thus looses its
way.
Section seven talks about untruth as errancy. Here he talks about
man as insistent and moves towards things that are readily available.
This is where man takes beings as standard and by doing this
humanity turns away from mystery. The insistent want to what is
available and the ek-sistent turning away from the mystery belongs
together.
Man errs and is always in errancy. Errancy is part of Da-sein that is
part of man. Errancy is the counter-essence of truth. It opens up open
region for every opposite of truth. Error then is not just a single
mistake but a domain where it is part of the history of all kinds of
erring gets interconnected.
Every mode of comportment has its mode of erring. Incorrectness
of judgment and falsity of knowledge is just one mode of errancy and
is superficial one. Da-sein man is subjected to the rule of mystery and
the oppression of errancy. The essence and the non-essence of truth
lead to a perpetual to and fro. Dasein is a turning into need.
Errancy and mystery belong to the elemental essence of truth.
Freedom as a whole happens in its essence only when from time to
time it gets taken up to its primordial essence. The thinking of Being

originally thought of by Plato as philosophy has received a title

metaphysics.
In section eight Heidegger tackles Philosophy and the question of
truth. Here he talks about how the thinking of being has been put into
words. This is a great leap but this also is the time where the marked
domination of common sense or sophistry began. Sophistry deals with
the unquestionable character of the beings are being attacked. Where
philosophy thought of using common sense does not touch the
essence of philosophy. Philosophical thinking is a stern and absolute
openness that does not stop concealing but treats it as unbroken
essence into the open region of understanding and into its truth.
Kant talked about philosophy as is seen in a fact to be placed in a
precarious position, which is supposed to be stable to where it is
based. Further stating that it is here that it has to prove its integrity
as the keeper of its laws that does not come from implanted sense or
by who knows what tutelary nature. This has envisioned a domain,
which can only be understood through modern metaphysics, founded
on subjectivity and is understood as the keeping of laws.
Reaction Related to Governance
I read the first few lines of the essay before going to bed and it was
a bad idea. The opening paragraphs makes you think beyond the
words. It lets the reader makes you imagine how the words fit
together to form the ideas that has been relayed by Heidegger. In

short I had a hard time sleeping because the words and the ideas
keep floating in my head as I close my eyes.
This is the first time I encountered this type of reading. I usually
just read through articles and am done after one reading. With this
article I got to a point of giving up because I cant seem to grasp the
concept. Good thing, little by little it got clearer. Then went back to
being hard to understand at the same time.
But this is not the reason why I am writing this reaction paper. I
am going to relate what I have learned from this essay and how can
this be applied to governance. Let us look first at how governance is
defined.
Governance can be defined in different ways. One way to look at it
is that it refers to the process whereby elements in society wield
power and authority, and influence and enact policies and decisions
concerning public life, and economic and social development. Another
way of defining it is that it is a broader notion than government,
whose

principal

elements

include

the

constitution,

legislature,

executive and judiciary, which also involves interaction between these

formal institutions and those of civil society.
On one hand it talks about the processes and the other would talk
about the elements that is involved with governance. At first glance
one might say that it can be two different things. But when looked into

10

closer, it can be seen that when process and the elements are put
together will come out to be just parts of each other.
Another way that it differs is that one definition would look at how
the policies, decision-making, and socioeconomic parts of life are
being influenced towards a certain group of elements that controls
this. When looked into closer again you would notice that this process
happen between the elements of the other definition, namely the
constitution, judicial, legislature. Among all the elements mentioned
there are different ways of influencing that can happen between them.
When definition is understood just mainly on the definition of the
words that it contains. You definitely say that it can indeed be
different. Which is not how it is to be looked at. Rather as Heidegger
would want you to see a thing is through an open mind and let it be.
Let its essence come forth and see it in its entirety.
Governance as it is, is never easy. This would go with everything
else. How what we see makes us loose sight even more. And the more
we see the more we loose sight.

The more we look for things the

harder they are to be found.

11

References:
Heidegger, M. (1943). On the Essence of Truth (J. Sallis, Trans.).
Richardson, W. J. (1974). Heidegger. Through phenomenology to
thought. The Hague, Martinus Nijhoff. Retrieved 2016, from
https://www.ontology.co/heidegger-aletheia.htm.
Sadler, G. B. (Producer). (2013, May 5). Existentialism: Martin
Heidegger, On the Essence of Truth [Video file]. Retrieved
2016, from https://www.youtube.com/watch?
v=uWLSNnBX0mE
Understanding the Concept of Governance. (n.d.). Retrieved 2016,
from http://www.gdrc.org/u-gov/governance-understand.html
Governance: A Working Definition. (n.d.). Retrieved
January/February, 2016, from http://www.gdrc.org/u-gov/workdef.html

12

Platos Essence of Truth

This reaction paper will be on Martin Heideggers lecture on
Platos Essence of Truth. An essay said to have been written
between in 1931 - 1932 and was published in 1940. (Gordon, 2006)
The particular version I read was translated by Thomas Sheehan and
was taken from the book Pathmarks that has William Mcneill as editor
and was printed in 1998 in Cambridge, Cambridge UP.
Summary and Analysis.

13

This is Heideggers analysis on Platos Allegory of the cave. He

explains the imagery used by Plato show what truth is. It started with
the location of the allegory that is the cave where Heidegger said that
this is an image of where we stay and what we see everyday. The fire
in the cave represents the sun and the dome live cavern represents
the heavens. This is what we see everyday and this is what we
consider as real.
Outside the cave is the image for the being of beings. Outside is
where beings show themselves. These are where one needs to step
forth for the being to present itself. The things that are visible in the
daylight is considered as illustration of ideas. It is in the ideas that
they are able to know what a visible thing is, which can include the
house, cars, and the things that you see around. One might see them
but without the ideas they would not know what it is. Plato also says
that what seemed to be real actually is just the umbra of the shadow.
People live in the shadow everyday and leave behind their idea. Under
the dome is where people experience judgment, which they use as the
sole standard for all things and relations.
The people inside the cave believe with a passion on their view not
knowing that what they have is just mere shadow. They just remain
unaware. The sun outside the cave is different and whose brightness
things can be readily seen without any shadows. What is seen outside
the cave are the ideas, and what shines so bright is the image for

14

what makes ideas visible. This is the image for the idea of ideas or as
Plato puts it the idea of good.
Then there are the movements of going out of the cave and going
back in to the cave. Where the eyes have to accustom itself from the
darkness to the brightness and back again to the darkness. What is
the confusion coming from the eyes? One of this is that people can
leave their hardly notice ignorance and get to where beings show
themselves to them but they are initially not enough for the essential.
Another is that people fall out of the stance of essential knowing and
be forced back into the region where common reality reigns supreme
but they could not recognize what is common and customary as being
real. This can include their souls that have to accustom themselves to
being to where they are exposed.
This process where as Plato would put it, the process by which
human essence is reoriented and accustomed to the region assigned
to it at each point. Plato calls this paideia, which essentially means
movement of passage. This in English would be Education. In
Heideggers case the closest word he got in the German language is
bildung or formation. Bildung can mean two things. One, it means
forming someone in the sense of impressing on him a character that
unfolds. This can happen by impressing a character on the person.
Which could make another meaning of impressing a character on
someone and guiding someone through a paradigm.

15

The allegory of the cave illustrates the essence of education and

opens our eyes to the essence of truth. The allegory at the same
time hold the relationship between the two and show how education
works in it basic structure. So what is this link?
Paideia means turning around the whole human being. Which
means man is transferred from his usual abode and then brings him to
another realm where beings appear. Which can mean that when
human beings transfer something is revealed to them, which can
happen in different ways. Unhiddenness in Greek is aletheia which
when translated means truth. Truth here should not be taken
literally. In the allegory of the cave there are different kinds of
unhiddenness. So there are different levels of aletheia in the allegory.
In the first stage those who are chained would not consider
anything unhidden except for the shadows cast by the artifacts. In the
second stage when the chains have been removed they move to an
area nearer to what is. They then enter the sphere of more unhidden.
These is where the people will consider those things that has
previously been seen as more unhidden than what has now been
shown. This is because the light blinds them for they have not been
accustomed to it. They still believe that the truth are those to be
found in the shadows because they lack the proper condition for
assessing, which is freedom.

16

The third stage is where real freedom is discovered. When they

have been unshackled and are lead outside the cave and into the
open. This is when things show themselves in the blinding force and
validity of their own visible form. They would come out as ideas that
constitutes the essence where each being shows itself as it is. This
liberation though does not come about by simple removal of the
chains. True liberation is the steadiness of being oriented toward that
which appears in its visible form and which is the most unhidden in
this appearing. This is the only way education can be fulfilled to be
based on the most unhidden or the truest. Which makes the essence
of education grounded on the essence of truth.
The fourth stage comprises the return to the cave and the battle
waged within the cave between the liberator and the prisoners who
resist all liberation. This stage also has to deal with the unhidden that
conditions the area of the cave that the freed person now visits once
again. As the unhidden is also present in the cave there will be two
types of unhiddenness. One is that it renders accessible whatever
appears and keep it revealed it its appearing and it also constantly
overcomes the hiddenness of the hidden. The Greeks would consider
hiddenness as an act of self-hiding that permeates the essence of
being

and

thus

determines

beings

in

their

presentness

and

accessibility or truth. The Greeks likewise originally defines truth as

wresting from hiddenness wherein wresting would be a form of

17

revealing. In the allegory the supremely unhidden must be wrested

from a base and stubborn hiding.

This stage gives a preview of

privation.
The allegory is set in a cave because it resembles the original
essence of aletheia. That the
Greeks original sense of aletheia, which means the unhiddenness that,
is related to the hidden. As much as this is shown in the allegory
another essence of truth comes out but still implies unhiddenness as
truth.
The unhiddenness makes idea visible. The idea is what makes the
visible form that offers a view of what is present. The phrase the sun
shine show how the idea shines. It does not need anything else to
make it shine because it does the shining by itself. Idea is that which
can shine and its essence consists in its ability to shine. The ideas
ability to shine and be seen brings about presencing that means the
coming to presence of what a being is in any given instance. The
brightness

of

the

idea

brings

about

the

unhiddenness.

This

unhiddenness through an idea is that which is known in the act of

knowing. The way this is seen brought about the essence of
apprehension and the subsequent essence of reason. This makes
the unhiddenness the unhidden always as what is accessible thanks to
the ideas ability to shine.

18

Unhiddenness comes hand in hand with seeing. Seeing can only be

done through the eyes. In which case this makes the eyes sunlike
because it gives power to the suns essence, which is the shining. The
eye emits light and devotes itself to shining so it can receive and
apprehend whatever appears.
The idea is good and it shines and thus provides vision to
something that is visible. The idea of good is the power of visibility
that accomplishes all shining forth and should only be considered last
or hardly ever seen at all. This good is often translated as the moral
good. In the Greeks interpretation of the good and is seen morally is
considered to be a value.
Greeks also think of the good as a means that is capable of
something and enables another to be capable of something. Every
idea provides a look of being. Idea enables something to appear and
presents its constancy. The idea of all idea consists of making possible
the appearing in all its visibility and of everything present. This idea
of idea is that which enables the good. It makes all things capable of
shining shine and thus Plato calls the good the most able to shine of
beings.
The idea of the good is the name for that distinctive idea which
enables everything else. Only this idea can be called the good
because this fulfills the essence of idea. This maybe called the
highest idea because it is the highest in the hierarchy of making

19

possible. Once the highest idea is seen this conclusion can be drawn.
That this when gathered together this would be the original source
both of all the right and all that is beautiful. The highest idea is the
origin of all things and their thingness. The good makes the
appearing of the visible form of what is present provides its stability.
The allegory contains Platos doctrine of truth that is based on the
unspoken event and makes idea more dominant that aletheia. Aletheia
comes under idea. The essence of truth does not unfold to its fullness
but it shifts towards the essence of idea and gives up its essence of
unhiddenness.
To see the visible form our effort must be to making sure that we
will make thing visible. This requires correct vision. Everything
depends on the correctness of gaze. In this correctness knowing
becomes correct so that in the end it looks directly to the highest idea
and fixes itself in the direct alignment. Once it has been directed it
can be easier to see the visible form of the being. Thus resulting in
apprehension that is an agreement of the act of knowing the thing
itself. This results in the transformation of the essence of truth and it
becomes the correctness of apprehending and asserting. Due to this
transformation the essence of truth takes place the same time of the
change of truth. Fundamentally truth is still the unhiddenness but as
correctness

it

becomes

the

correctness

of

apprehending

and

asserting.

20

Platos own interpretation of the allegory of the cave is guided by

the thought that the highest idea yokes together the act of knowing
and what it knows. This is to be understood in two ways. One is that
the original source of everything correct as well as of everything
beautiful. On the other hand it is also said that the idea of the good is
the mistress who bestows unhiddenness as well as apprehension. To
thoughts that does not run parallel to each other but rather runs in a
crisscross pattern. This corresponds to what is correct and its
correctness and corresponding to what is beautiful where there is
unhidden. The essence of beautiful lies in being that which is most
purely shining of and from itself and showing its beautiful form and is
therefore unhidden. The two thoughts speak of the primacy of the
idea of the good as enabling both the correctness of knowing and the
unhiddenness of the known.
Aristotle on the other hand would say that the falseness and
trueness is not in the things as it is but it is in the intellect. Truth then
is true if it conforms to the state of affairs. The determination of the
essence of truth is now taken in the false sense of incorrect is now
thought of as correct. The correctness of both representation and
assertion now becomes the normative for the Western thinking.
For Thomas Aquinas truth is properly encountered in the human or
divine intellect. Descartes would say truth or falsehood in the proper
sense can only happen in the intellect. Nietzsche would also say that

21

truth is the kind of error without which a certain kind of living being
could live but the value of life is what is decisive. Nietzsche views the
truth as error where its essence whose way of thinking falsifies the
real. This determination of truth as the incorrectness of thinking is in
agreement with the traditional essence of truth as the correctness of
assertion. This changes the truth from the unhiddenness of beings to
the correctness of the gaze.
In this interpretation idea is not subordinate to unhiddenness in
the sense of serving what is unhidden by bringing it to appearance.
Idea is the shining that within its essence and in a singular selfrelatedness may not be called unhiddenness. Truth then is the
consequence of getting yoked under the idea and will be a
characteristic of the knowing of being.
Truth as the correctness of gaze and the correctness of its
direction and is oriented towards beings achieves the correct view of
the ideas. This shows the tale of the passage from one abode to the
next as with the allegory of the cave. The difference between the
abodes is a difference of wisdom.

The one in the cave only has a

glimpse of the beings of being and is distinguished by the desire to

reach out beyond what is immediately present and to acquire a basis
in what is shown. What is outside the cave is called philosophy. Where
he described it as gazing up at the ideas. This was later called

22

metaphysics. This is where thinking goes beyond and goes out toward
the ideas.
It is said that these are suprasensuous, which is seen with a
nonsensuous gaze. These are beings that we cannot grasp with our
bodily senses. In its highest essence where the ideas of ideas are seen
where this idea is the idea or the good. This has been thought of
as metaphysical and seen likewise as theological. Where in theology
the cause of being is God who is the being-est of beings.
In Platos thought the beginning of metaphysics is the beginning of
humanism. Where humanism means that it is that process that is
implicated in the beginning and in the end metaphysics where
humans move in the middle of all beings together with the highest
being.

Platos Essence of Truth and Governance

Reading the allegory I somehow tried to grasp the meaning of it
before reading how Heidegger will explain it. I was wondering how I
would do it. Then I thought that I could just imagine the whole thing,
as I will read through it. Somebody was sitting facing his back to the
light. That certain somebody gets to see shadows of artifacts and I
was thinking that it would be explained, but it was not. The story
continues, and that somebody got released from the bond and was
able to move about. Trying to make out what the freedom was all

23

about. Still no explanation was given. He was able to go out. Almost

got blinded by the light. Got accustomed to the light. See everything
in its glory. Decided to go back down and get a chance to be killed by
the others who are in the cave due to the difference of circumstance.
More questions come to my head, but still no explanation, and I got
more confused.
Then as I read how Heidegger explained the allegory and I thought
this was similar to the essence of truth but somehow different.
Different things come of from the story. How education was described
and how everything else seems to fall into place.
Now that the election is coming, you hear a lot things said by
different candidates. They can tell different stories of how they will be
the best for the position that they are running in. You would also hear
them speak about their opposing candidates and it does not sound
nice. You would hear them mudslinging and get the mud thrown back
at them.
You know that they are educated, but what good would it do the
people that they will soon govern. Just like this article and lecture by
Heidegger where if a reader would not know the back ground of the
allegory, of Plato, and all the different philosophers, it would just be
difficult to understand allegory of the cave and what it stands for.
Then it dawned on me that it is not just the people who are running
that is supposed to be educated. It should be the voters that should be

24

educated more. To understand how governance is supposed to work

and why the mudslinging would not help them when they start to do
their job. They should also know that the money that would be given
to them for their votes would be taken back as soon as the person
running would win election. All the money used should be brought
back, and more.
I am talking about this because good governance can only happen
when what the majority would assume that the person that will be
handling the position would really have the know how to govern.
Govern not like what has been done for over one hundred years, but
govern to be able to give what is the good.

References:

25

Gordon, H., & Gordon, R. (2006). Heidegger on Truth and Myth: A

Rejection of Postmodernism. New York, NY: Peter Lang
Publishing.
Plato's Doctrine of Truth (T. Sheehan, Trans) (n.d.). Retrieved
January/February, 2016, from
http://religiousstudies.stanford.edu/wp-content/uploads/1942PLATOS-DOCTRINE-OF-TRUTH.pdf
Snyder, J. T. (2012). Reading Plato with Heidegger: A Study of the
Allegory of the Cave. Retrieved January/February, 2016, from
https://etd.ohiolink.edu/rws_etd/document/get/kent133428116
2/inline

26