User Controls
Heidegger
-
2018-01-08 at 3:39 AM UTCI'm zeroing in on a thesis topic on Being and Time and I'm trying to immerse myself in his bizarre phenomenological nomenclature. Do any of you niggas have resources suited for this task?
-
2018-01-08 at 4:06 AM UTCAre you trying to read it cover to cover? Being and Time is one of the most notoriously difficult and poorly translated works in philosophy. Second only to Hegel but a mile ahead of Kant (what the fuck is it with Germans? God damn).
Dreyfus is probably the most famous modern commentator on Heidegger, he can still be plenty dense but it's the only way I've been able to understand the kraut bastard. "A Companion to Heidegger" might be the secondary resource you want if you're writing a thesis but it's a 500 page book on top of whatever ungodly number of pages are in Being and Time.
Have you talked to anyone about this? I mean if that's what you want to do more power to you but you're really taking the hard way on this one. -
2018-01-08 at 4:09 AM UTCIt was too opaque for me. I got through Being and Time but didn't know wtf he was talking about. I'm just posting in this thread to say that it's a good idea to make this thread and ask for resources first. It is basically impenetrable if you go into it cold.
If someone has actually good resources, I might join you in reading it. -
2018-01-08 at 4:15 AM UTCThere's also a series of audio recording of Dreyfus' lectures on Being and Time on youtube:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IaIWz_87Kz0
I'm not usually big on recorded lecturing for whatever reason, maybe it's social, I think Peterson's reputation has been damaged by his status as "youtube lecturer" on top of whatever other issues he might have. But anyway, I found Dreyfus was at about the right level for me to digest.The following users say it would be alright if the author of this post didn't die in a fire! -
2018-01-08 at 7:07 AM UTC
Originally posted by F.E. Allen Are you trying to read it cover to cover? Being and Time is one of the most notoriously difficult and poorly translated works in philosophy. Second only to Hegel but a mile ahead of Kant (what the fuck is it with Germans? God damn).
Dreyfus is probably the most famous modern commentator on Heidegger, he can still be plenty dense but it's the only way I've been able to understand the kraut bastard. "A Companion to Heidegger" might be the secondary resource you want if you're writing a thesis but it's a 500 page book on top of whatever ungodly number of pages are in Being and Time.
Have you talked to anyone about this? I mean if that's what you want to do more power to you but you're really taking the hard way on this one.
I'm working with faculty, who are very helpful. It is a monster of a book and I'm approaching his very nuanced language by way of repetition - I'm currently wading in not far beyond the intro more or less solo.
Originally posted by F.E. Allen There's also a series of audio recording of Dreyfus' lectures on Being and Time on youtube:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IaIWz_87Kz0
I'm not usually big on recorded lecturing for whatever reason, maybe it's social, I think Peterson's reputation has been damaged by his status as "youtube lecturer" on top of whatever other issues he might have. But anyway, I found Dreyfus was at about the right level for me to digest.
this kind of interpretive lecture is very encouraging, I'll need to give that a listen tomorrow when I'm clearer.
Originally posted by Captain Falcon It was too opaque for me. I got through Being and Time but didn't know wtf he was talking about. I'm just posting in this thread to say that it's a good idea to make this thread and ask for resources first. It is basically impenetrable if you go into it cold.
If someone has actually good resources, I might join you in reading it.
Let me know if you do, I'd be glad to hear your thoughts on Being and Time.
User was banned for saying the taboo phrase "monster"!The following users say it would be alright if the author of this post didn't die in a fire! -
2018-01-08 at 7:11 AM UTCAstounding! I may have cost myself the lead, just there. I had a good run.
-
2018-01-08 at 7:16 AM UTCAmazing!
-
2018-01-08 at 10:22 AM UTC
Originally posted by F.E. Allen Are you trying to read it cover to cover? Being and Time is one of the most notoriously difficult and poorly translated works in philosophy. Second only to Hegel but a mile ahead of Kant (what the fuck is it with Germans? God damn).
learn german before you read it then it all makes senses. -
2018-01-09 at 12:06 AM UTCI am lost in the sea of being-with-others and cannot locate my ownmost domain
-
2018-01-15 at 4:44 AM UTCSo I'm working my way through this text for the millionth time this week and I have to say that I'm impressed with the originality found here. Is anybody else thinking of having a go at Being and Time? I think I'm getting to the point where I could share a productive dialogue about a few of his ideas.
-
2018-01-15 at 5:18 AM UTCHeidegger sounds vaguely like "my nigger"
-
2018-01-15 at 5:30 AM UTC
-
2018-01-15 at 6:13 AM UTCLooks like a faggot I'd probably literally slap IRL.
-
2018-01-15 at 6:13 AM UTCWell nazi party and all, hard to imagine him being a champion of racial diversity.
-
2018-01-15 at 6:21 AM UTC
Originally posted by Lanny Well nazi party and all, hard to imagine him being a champion of racial diversity.
I admittedly haven't quite gotten to reading up on that aspect of his life, but my impression is that he was seduced by the nationalistic goals of the Nazi party prior to the actual mobilization of the pogrom; whether he was deceived or harboured private antisemitic views himself, I cannot claim to know. If you have sources that identify him as a racist or, even better, indicating that it influenced his philosophy, I would be very grateful. I'm still learning a lot about his positions and anything that informs my understanding of his moral character would be helpful in filling the void of any particular ethos in his work. -
2018-01-15 at 7:12 AM UTCNah, I don't really know either to be honest. After the war, I believe in some piece of correspondence, he described his association with the Nazi party as "the worst mistake of my life". I don't think there's any record of anti-semitism in his works or even his personal writings, the general attitude in academia seems to be that his philosophical work should be treated as wholly separate from his personal political opinions.
-
2018-01-15 at 7:21 AM UTCDisregard nomenclature, acquire money.
Originally posted by Zanick I admittedly haven't quite gotten to reading up on that aspect of his life, but my impression is that he was seduced by the nationalistic goals of the Nazi party prior to the actual mobilization of the pogrom
Pogroms were a Ukrainian thing, when they'd burn some jedi moneylender's house for sending a local family into poverty by lending the dad money to buy vodka for himself, at exorbitant interest, causing his kids to go hungry. jedis felt no pity for starving what they regard as soul-less subhumans. This continues up to the current day, with the likes of the jedi Sobchak calling ordinary Russians genetic filth.
Pogroms were, in actuality, good things. Necessary push-backs against the deprivations of usurers.whether he was deceived or harboured private antisemitic views himself, I cannot claim to know.
No serious 1930s intellectual was not an antisemite. They had lived through the 1920s, and seen what jedis had done in when given control of a non-jedi country in the parallel forms of Wiemar Germany and Soviet Russia. In addition the depression of the 1930s was largely a phenomenon of the jedi-American Federal Reserve System.If you have sources that identify him as a racist or, even better, indicating that it influenced his philosophy, I would be very grateful.
Racism wasn't a serious thin back in his time. The Arabs and Blacks were considered harmless side-actors to world affairs. Remember that at the time the world was majority white. The idea arabs and black would someday colonise Europe was ridiculous, an invention of the most paranoid mind.I'm still learning a lot about his positions and anything that informs my understanding of his moral character would be helpful in filling the void of any particular ethos in his work.
Don't regard the long attention span and capacity for sophistry of someone like Hegel as necessarily indicating a capacity for especially deep thought. -
2018-01-15 at 7:31 AM UTCIssue313, what made you hate the (genetically) chosen people so much? We’re it not for the jedis human society would not be nearly as advanced as it is today. Are you aware of just how much jedi people have accomplished? It seems to stem from some sort of resentment toward their success.
-
2018-01-15 at 7:55 AM UTC
Originally posted by Malice Issue313, what made you hate the (genetically) chosen people so much? We’re it not for the jedis human society would not be nearly as advanced as it is today. Are you aware of just how much jedi people have accomplished? It seems to stem from some sort of resentment toward their success.
The main reason I hate jedis is their policy of encouraging immigration to Europe. Ironically this is a policy that will only hurt jedis in the long term, as has been pointed out by superior jedi thinkers like Benjamin Nethenyahu. The jedis use their minds as weapons against the white and black people of the earth, who lack the means to defend themselves.
I also do feel a certain resentment against jedis. When I was younger my Dad once told me I should have been born a jedi, and I totally agreed. jedis think more and do more of the shit I care about. I would rather live in Israel than Ireland.
However I do not agree that jedis have been essential to progress. Relativity was a simple deduction from the Lorentz transformation, and would have been experimentally noted in any case. Freudianism has been discredited. Boaz was a simple charlatan. jedis are far above average, but they grab credit more than they innovate.
Even today to some extent I despair of other Europeans, as they're dumb as hell, however I don't really hate them. However I do despise the jedis for embodying neuroticism and lack of physical presence in themselves. For instance even if I'd be more mentally at home around someone like Woody Allen, I would feel physically out of place as I'm large (not just fat) and tall.
The defining characteristic of the jedi is that he thinks constantly, but not deeply. Thus he is not critical of himself as often as he is critical of others. I learned over time not to think in an abstract manner, but to confine my thoughts to real world applications. It increased my happiness and success in life. I am the anti-jedi. -
2018-01-15 at 4:07 PM UTC
