/lit/ - Literature

>>15096266
>’ate Jews
>’ate technology
>’ate metaphysics
>’ate aesthetics

>luv poetry
>luv me shed
>luv the inner truth and greatness of National Socialism

Simple as.

>>15096266

Reminder that /lit/ is a pro-Heidegger board.

where are the eggs

>>15096343
shutthefuckupnegger

>>15096343
The strange this is Heidegger is cited all the time by left wing intellectuals.

Why?

>>15096294
Him being associated with NSDAP is a footnote. Stop trying to play it up retard. It would be a loss to ruin his reputation by having it spring to mind first.

>>15097198
Heidegger's reputation is only "ruined" by his association with the Nazis if you're a specific brand of post-1945 neoliberal faggot who thinks any opposition to capitalism other than eating tranny cum and fetishizing "subaltern minorities" while letting them rape women in your hometown is evil. Otherwise his association with the Nazis is not only inspiring, it's educational.

>>15096266
>>15096294
>>15096343
I’ve long detested Heidegger, for a number of reasons. (Did I ever mention the academic conference where a militant Heideggerian, regarding me with the same scorn and disgust he would have shown if he had accidentally stepped into a pile of dog shit, told me with lofty condescension that my problem was that I was unwilling or unable to “patiently hearken to the voice of Being”?). Heidegger embodies for me, more than any other thinker in the Western tradition, what Nietzsche called the “spirit of gravity.” He’s heavy and morbid, without an ounce of humor or irony or even sense that we human beings are/have bodies. He picks up on the worst part of Nietzsche, the heavy-handed, pompous, self-obsessed, doom-laden, apocalyptic, romantic rhetoric — so stereotypically “Germanic” — of Zarathustra, but completely misses Nietzsche’s gaiety, sarcasm, “French” scepticism, and general sense of dancing over the abyss. I’ve never been able to decide which part of Heidegger is worse: the existential part, all about authenticity and resoluteness and the earth and the dwelling and being-towards-death (i.e. the Nazi side), or the ontological part, with its endless dissection of concepts by returning to their etymological roots, its walking on forest paths, its idiotic hatred of technology, its mythology of (capital-L) Language, its waiting and hearkening, its twisting of its own formulations into an endless process of self-confirmation through self-undoing (i.e. the deconstructionist side).

How viable is it to try to become a scholar of Heidegger in the current year?

>>15097322
It's oversaturated and people will assume you're naive. I was told pretty clearly not to include Heidegger in my dissertation or people will think I'm too stupid to realize it's a stone that has been squeezed dry.

That being said, all existing Heidegger scholarship licks balls so you could very well be doing original research on Heidegger. It's just a question of whether or not the academy would recognize it. For example there is a resurgence right now of appreciation of Heidegger as a right wing thinker, but it's all by fringe figures who don't have the benefit of an academy to hem them in, so only a few of them do a good job of it. Greg Johnson gave a talk on Heidegger, I think even Jorjani does, I know Dugin is into him. These are all persona non grata for obvious reasons, but they are also saying much more interesting things, or at least the beginnings of genuinely interesting things, compared to academics repeating the same sanitized liberal readings of Heidegger for 50+ years.

Heidegger studies were big into the 90s, then the 90s saw the whole "Heidegger debate" over whether he was a Nazi which was a total waste of time, then the Black Notebooks came out and nobody even really cared because the cottage industry of caring about Heidegger had already sputtered out to the point that even the smoking gun of antisemitism just wasn't that interesting. That's how academia works, it's worthless. If you want to survive in it, you need to know its meaningless and arbitrary fashions, but if you truly don't care about it, then yes there is lots of value in resuming study of Heidegger. If anything he will be a window into understanding many others who share his fundamental problematic. Disclosure and Gestalt by Radloff is a good book.

>>15097175
Because he's a great thinker, same with Carl Schmitt.

>>15097397
>I was told pretty clearly not to include Heidegger in my dissertation or people will think I'm too stupid to realize it's a stone that has been squeezed dry

I agree with this anon. You have to really be careful not to read anything which other people have already read. Everyone knows that the more people who read a book, the less valuable that thinker's thoughts become, and god forbid anyone read to learn, rather than to publish.

>>15096266
he was just vibing