/lit/ - Literature

>>12399704
>I don't know if this book had anything to say or it was merely a giant bluff, but i know that it doesn't prove anything. Heidegger provides no proof whatsoever for what he claims. Even if he is saying something, he doesn't prove it. So it becomes a little pointless to try to figure out what he said.
>To me Heidegger's convoluted and unscientific style seems to have more in common with psychiatrists than philosophers. I shudder at his grotesquely naive analyses of existence, fear, anxiety, the uncanny, conscience and death.
>If you pick up this book at a library or at a second-hand bookshop, you will notice that only the first few pages have annotations and bear signs of having actually being turned. Virtually nobody had ever read this book to the end. But it is routinely listed as a milestone of philosophy. I personally think it represents a milestone of everything that gives philosophers a bad reputation: unscientific, incomprehensible, incompetent, and, ultimately, just plain silly.
>Be suspicious of any philosopher who hailed this as a great book. Heidegger stated that Sartre had misunderstood most of his ideas, and that's the biggest compliment ever paid to Sartre.
Then again any summary, written in ordinary language, of this book constitutes a misunderstanding of his "ideas", because those "ideas" depend entirely on being written in a convoluted and unscientific language.

Is he right?

this is the most talmudic shit i've ever read. no wonder the nazis kept him shut away in some fucking office

The only worth while achievements of facism are Carl Schmitt and this

Is anyone else's copy of this edition have really faded print?

What am I in for?

what is essential to read before i read this?

Read Being and Time. You're being a bad Dasein by not engaging with other Daseins and ready-at-hand entities. Take up physical hobbies and engage with collective bodies.

holy fuck could this be more boring?

I am new to philosophy, can I start with this?

What am I in for?

just finished this. not bad, i give it a 6.5/10

Was it autism?

>talk to philosophy student
>say "Modern philosophy is useless"
>philosophy student gets pissed, "You have no idea what you're talking about"
>say "So what is its utility?"
>philosophy student, "First of all it's not SUPPOSED to have utility"
Every time lmao

Genius or gibberish? Should I spend months or years studying this only to learn nothing?

What should I read before tackling this, besides Aristotle's Metaphysics?

What's up guys; I'm reading Being and Time by Heidegger. Deep stuff, it's really helping me connect to my inner dasein and have more self-confidence and things like that. What's a good book to go along with it? I was thinking Mein Kampf, but, I don't know, it seems like a controversial book.

Is this actually worth studying? Seems it would take weeks just to skim it, probably years of continuous work to even remotely understand it. What's the point? Is it better to study one really convoluted tome of what seems like nonsense in the same time I could read dozens of sensible history/science/geopolitical/art books and actually learn something practical about the world? Should I expend such a huge volume of effort and relinquish my precious man-hours to understand ONE person's obscure vision of the universe when I could learn about hundreds of normal, useful, communicable, applicable ideas in the same time?

Do I really "grow" "wiser" reading one guy whose ideas are impossible to communicate and have no effect on my life? Aren't I "smarter" if I understand how actual humans actually behave in the actual world around me, rather than "understanding" how "beings" "be" in "the world-as-being" for the sake of "being-unto-being-for-beings"?

inb4 "Philosophy isn't about communication or having an effect on your life" and thus "If you're asking what the point is you're not smart enough" which seems to be the standard philosopher's defense of convoluted nonsense that's impossible to explain or defend to anybody

Just started pic related. Not as hard so far as I was warned. I have a few questions tho..

What exactly does he mean by dasein?

Is Being and Consciousness interchangeable?

What did he mean when he said that to understand and entities in being will help to understand the question of being?