Walter Kaufman - Have any of you been influenced by his writings?: Philosophy Forums

Philosophy Forums » Introduction to Philosophy / Factual Issues / Books » Walter Kaufman - Have any of you been influenced by his writings? » Walter Kaufman - Have any of you been influenced by his writings?

Walter Kaufman - Have any of you been influenced by his writings?

Page: 1 2

Walter Kaufman - Have any of you been influenced by his writings?

xzJoel
Bio-clump

Usergroup: Sponsors
Joined: Aug 30, 2005
Location: New Jersey

Total Topics: 32
Total Posts: 842

Posted 06/03/09 - 11:52 AM: Subject: Walter Kaufman - Have any of you been influenced by his writings?	#1
Not so long ago I was reading Kaufman’s introduction to his translation of Buber. I was somewhat struck by Kauffman's writing style and became interested in what, if anything, Kaufman had to say for himself. I am just wondering, have any of you studied Kaufman for his own thoughts? If you have, what have you taken from him? Did you like him? http://faculty.gvsu.edu/speara/Wal...mann_Web_Project/Home.html http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Walter_Kaufmann_(philosopher)
Make a joyous noise onto the lord... Not a good one, just a joyous one.

endless nameless
Aspirant

Usergroup: Members
Joined: Jun 04, 2009

Total Topics: 0
Total Posts: 21

Posted 06/08/09 - 06:34 AM:	#2
I only know of him for his translations and commentaries on Nietzsche, which I did find useful as a student.

Crackers
Professor

Usergroup: Members
Joined: May 28, 2009

Total Topics: 5
Total Posts: 519

Posted 06/08/09 - 01:07 PM:	#3
As above; his translations of Nietzsche.

xzJoel
Bio-clump

Usergroup: Sponsors
Joined: Aug 30, 2005
Location: New Jersey

Total Topics: 32
Total Posts: 842

Posted 06/08/09 - 01:20 PM:	#4
I think most anyone who has read Neitzsche in translation has used Kaufman's translation. Quite the expert, was he.
Make a joyous noise onto the lord... Not a good one, just a joyous one.

Crackers
Professor

Usergroup: Members
Joined: May 28, 2009

Total Topics: 5
Total Posts: 519

Posted 06/08/09 - 02:07 PM:

xzJoel wrote:
I think most anyone who has read Neitzsche in translation has used Kaufman's translation. Quite the expert, was he.

Yes, however Nietzsche is probably best read in it's original german form as intended by Nietzsche himself. In fact, Nietzsche was quite a harsh critic of the english language. He might have even opposed the idea of his texts being translated into english in the first place.

xzJoel
Bio-clump

Usergroup: Sponsors
Joined: Aug 30, 2005
Location: New Jersey

Total Topics: 32
Total Posts: 842

Posted 06/08/09 - 02:09 PM:	#6
Well, Neitzche was known for saying silly things - better to read in German and understand nothing than read in English and understand something.
Make a joyous noise onto the lord... Not a good one, just a joyous one.

Postmodern Beatnik
I Just Work Here

Usergroup: Administrators
Joined: Nov 18, 2005

Total Topics: 17
Total Posts: 2103

1 of 1 people found this post helpful Posted 06/08/09 - 06:56 PM:	#7
xzJoel wrote: I am just wondering, have any of you studied Kaufman for his own thoughts? If you have, what have you taken from him? Did you like him? Like the others, I started with Kaufmann's translations of Nietzsche, as well as his Nietzsche: Philosopher, Psychologist, Antichrist. After that, however, I did have occasion to read both From Shakespeare to Existentialism and The Faith of a Heretic. I can't say that I read the latter continuously or studiously enough to provide useful comments on it, though it was interesting enough that I would like to read it again more thoroughly. The former, however, is a different story. It's broader view of the history and development of Existentialism confirmed and improved upon what I had been taught and conclusions I had reached myself about the importance of non-Sartrean versions of the philosophical movement (Sartre being too often cited as if he fully and accurately represents the breadth of Existentialist thought). It's that sort of context that makes for the best books in the history of philosophy. Crackers wrote: Yes, however Nietzsche is probably best read in the original German form as intended by Nietzsche himself. In fact, Nietzsche was quite a harsh critic of the english language. He might have even opposed the idea of his texts being translated into english in the first place. Generally speaking, it is always best to read philosophers in their native language (though there are Germans who swear Kant is more comprehensible in English than he is in German). As xzJoel notes, however, there is a level of proficiency required to do so. As for Nietzsche on English: Certainly, he did not spare the vitriol when it came to the English people, but , do you have any references in which the language itself is critiqued? I can't recall any off the top of my head (though this is hardly indicative of anything). Regardless, he had no objections when Helen Zimmern proposed an English translation of Beyond Good and Evil -- though we can only guess what he might have thought had he lived long enough to see it completed.
"The key to being a good manager is keeping the people who hate me away from those who are still undecided." --Casey Stengel

Crackers
Professor

Usergroup: Members
Joined: May 28, 2009

Total Topics: 5
Total Posts: 519

Posted 06/09/09 - 08:20 AM:	#8
xzJoel wrote: Well, Neitzche was known for saying silly things - better to read in German and understand nothing than read in English and understand something. Haha, very true. Postmodern Beatnik wrote: As for Nietzsche on English: Certainly, he did not spare the vitriol when it came to the English people, but , do you have any references in which the language itself is critiqued? All I can find is this, but it might not be fully representable as Nietzsche's actual views; it's just a guy who claims this is what Nietzsche's views were, but it doesn't give any sources, Theatre is not fitted for dealing with philosophy in a directly rational construction. The englishman sees no means to communicate but theatrics. Philosophy, for him, must thereofre always be treated indirectly. Philophy must be played out, not thought about. The only thought the Englsihman is capable of is pure abstract thought involving no language of his heredity, and theatrical, poetic expression of sentiments. [...] English is a beautiful language, that is why it is unfit for philosophy - for profundity, that is - it is too seductive. It lures the writer into clever phrases. It is the democratic, language par excellence - how is that for a contradiction in terms! http://killdevilhill.com/nietzsche...p?f=28&i=25632&t=25631&v=f Edited by Crackers on 06/09/09 - 09:36 AM

Postmodern Beatnik
I Just Work Here

Usergroup: Administrators
Joined: Nov 18, 2005

Total Topics: 17
Total Posts: 2103

Posted 06/13/09 - 11:39 AM:	#9
Crackers wrote: All I can find is this, but it might not be fully representable as Nietzsche's actual views; it's just a guy who claims this is what Nietzsche's views were, but it doesn't give any sources... It looks more like he's expressing his own views and talking about Nietzsche in the same post. I see no attribution to Nietzsche himself. But no matter, I was just curious.
"The key to being a good manager is keeping the people who hate me away from those who are still undecided." --Casey Stengel

Namyl
Initiate

Usergroup: Members
Joined: Jun 23, 2009

Total Topics: 0
Total Posts: 1

Posted 06/23/09 - 08:21 AM: Subject: Kaufman	#10
In 1978 I read Kaufman's book, "Faith of a Heretic" and liked it a lot. I recommend it; there are used copies for sale online. I recently reread his translation of "I and Thou" and enjoyed his introduction very much.

Page: 1 2

Sorry, you don't have permission to post. Log in, or register if you haven't yet.