Theodore Kisiel, John van Buren

Theodore Kisiel and John van Buren are philosophers who collaborated on works examining Martin Heidegger's thought. Their joint scholarship focuses on the early development of Heidegger's philosophical system, particularly his formative years and the evolution of his ideas before the publication of "Being and Time." Kisiel is a professor emeritus of philosophy at Northern Illinois University who has spent decades studying Heidegger's early manuscripts and lecture courses. Van Buren is a philosophy professor who has written extensively on Continental philosophy, with particular attention to phenomenology and hermeneutics. Their collaborative work "Reading Heidegger from the Start" represents their effort to trace Heidegger's intellectual development from his earliest philosophical investigations. The book examines previously unpublished manuscripts and lecture notes to provide insight into how Heidegger's mature philosophical positions emerged. Their approach emphasizes the importance of understanding Heidegger's thought as a developing system rather than a fixed doctrine, showing how his ideas evolved through his early teaching and writing.

Readers of Kisiel and van Buren's collaborative work appreciate their scholarly approach to Heidegger's early development. Philosophy students and academics find their analysis of previously unpublished manuscripts valuable for understanding how Heidegger's thought evolved. Readers note that the authors provide access to materials that were not available in English translation before their work. Some readers praise the authors' ability to trace connections between Heidegger's early theological interests and his later philosophical positions. Graduate students in philosophy report that the book helps clarify the origins of concepts that appear in Heidegger's major works. Critics point to the challenging nature of the material, noting that the book requires substantial background in both Heidegger's philosophy and German intellectual history. Some readers find the academic prose dense and difficult to follow. A few reviewers suggest that the book serves specialists rather than general readers interested in Continental philosophy. Several readers mention that the collaborative nature of the work sometimes results in uneven sections, though they acknowledge the authors' expertise in their respective areas.