1. Martin Heidegger, Was heißt Denken? (Tübingen: Niemeyer, 1961). Also “Was heißt Denken?” in Vorträge and Aufsätze (Pfullingen: Neske, 1954). [“Die Wissenschaft denkt nicht,” p. 127.]
2. Heidegger, “Science and Reflection,” p. 176. In The Question Concerning Technology and Other Essays, trans. W. Lovitt (New York: Harper & Row, 1977). Cited hereafter in the text as SR.
3. Patrick A. Heelan, “Heidegger’s Longest Day: Twenty-Five Years Later,” p. 579 above.
4. William J. Richardson, “Heidegger’s Critique of Science” New Scholasticism, Vol. xlii (4), 1968, pp. 511 – 536.
5. In contrast to Heelan’s broad and considered review, one of the first responses to Richardson’s essay was produced by a scholar who was manifestly so provoked by the first sentence that he offered an entire essay devoted to an exact refutation: Hans Seigfried, “Heidegger’s Longest Day: Being and Time and the Sciences” Philosophy Today 22: 319–331. Rather than following Richardson’s careful lead, concentrating on Heidegger’s express reflections on science (particularly physics and mathematics in) in “Die Zeit des Weltbildes,” “Wissenschaft and Besinnung,” “Die Frage nach dem Ding,” Seigfried refers to the praxical analyses of Being and Time.