/lit/ - Literature

So, there's no honest Heidegger critique out there?
It intuitively seems bullshit that "no one has discussed Being in the same way (as Heidegger does)" and that rids Heidegger of all his fault, yet calling him a Nazi is literally beside the point. That apart from equally uncritical critiques that posit just their own points as philosophically isolate and thus also free of all actual criticism.
It doesn't help that Heidegger like Jaspers, and Husserl to some degree, drifts into the "I make positive statement and this is just for now" and then explains it, but can at least try to awaken from the dogmatic slumber between language and being, right? Trying doesn't hurt, why does nobody try. I see no projects anywhere.

Okay so what am I supposed to take away from "Beiträge zur Philosophie" compared to Sein und Zeit. I don't want anyone here to explain or even act like they've actually read it, I'd just like a starter on what he's actually "on about", what the project is, why he never published it. There's essentially nothing or nothing substantial on the internet, and I personally know no one who's at all studied Heidegger to any significant degree.
I've heard nonetheless that he tries to construct a new "philosophy" and that it is in some way opposed to what he constructs in SuZ (I won't try to summarize here in one word or sentence what he does there either).

I dreamt that I was molested by Heidegger, again.

anyone got that black karl marx one I've seen reposted here a few times?

>>18292518
Dialectics rule.

Heraclitus would agree.

>>18185252

>>17822128

It seems his public philosophy could never include of itself a private faith, such character is known to Heidegger, Der Spiegel interview only allowed to be published posthumously.

"God has always been with me," he says before organising Catholic rites a few months before his death.

>>16425203
Wrong, every great man is a Christian.

>>16414521

>Nietzsche became a nihilist

t. Heidegger

>>16281953
And I say HEY! What a wonderful kind of day.

>>16219438
>Schopenhauer is not a philosopher and he got everything of real philosophy in his system either from Plato or Hegel and Schelling(such as the the spirit/will) and it was both Nietzsche's downfall by a naming of the absolute as Will.

t. Heidegger

>>16117278
As far as I understand he thinks about death as the sword of Damocles. It's an event in the proximity of which we always find ourselves and which is guaranteed to happen at a certain, but unknown time. Being aware of our close relation to death gives us the possibility of authenticity.

>>15955571
Meanwhile in Germany