/lit/ - Literature

Aristotle
Husserl
Kierkegaard
Nietzsche

>>21358066
>Heidegger recommended postponing reading Nietzsche, and to "first study Aristotle for ten to fifteen years".

>>21358073
These four except replace Nietzsche with Luther he considered the 'guiding lights' of his youth.

>>21358080
>hasn't read late Heidegger
half of his works outside S&Z talk about Nietzsche

Depart with the Danaans

>>21358073
second this.

would add kant, fichte and hegel because german philosophy but I assume that's a given imo

heraclitus is pretty important also, so is plato

I dunno read the most basic philosophy canon (heraclit, plato, aristotle; kant, fichte, hegel) and then everything existentialist and phenomenologist. that's it really.

Uexküll

>>21358066
The Call trilogy

>>21358131
I never said Nietzsche wasn't a major influence, I'm quoting Heidegger on his youth. But it's probably fair to say the fundamentals of his 'method' or basic orientation does not come from Nietzsche.

>>21358073
Heraclitus
Parmenides
Plato
Aristotle
Descartes
Kant
Hegel
Nietzche

>>21358073
>>21358080
>>21358131
>>21358142
>>21358528
Don't listen to those fucking retards, nobody with a life has the time to do this. Just jump straight into Being and Time and work your way through it, you will understand it quite well if you're not a complete brainlet.

>>21358579
>a life
You have to go back.

>>21358630
I can't

>>21358066
At minimum probably Husserl's Britannica article on phenomenology. It's not bad to have a guide next to you while reading it. You can watch the Rick Roderick lecture on YouTube to really feel the significance of the text.

>>21358066
s

>>21358066
heidegger ? more like hey nigger.

>>21358066
Bump

>>21358066
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Book_of_Tea
>Ito Kichinosuke, one of my teachers at university, studied in Germany in 1918 immediately after the First World War and hired Heidegger as a private tutor. Before moving back to Japan at the end of his studies, Professor Ito handed Heidegger a copy of Das Buch vom Tee, the German translation of Okakura Kakuzo’s The Book of Tea, as a token of his appreciation. That was in 1919. Sein und Zeit (Being and Time) was published in 1927 and made Heidegger famous. Mr. Ito was surprised and indignant that Heidegger used Zhuangzi’s concept without giving him credit. Years later in 1945, Professor Ito reminisced with me and, speaking in his Shonai dialect, said, ‘Heidegger did a lot for me, but I should’ve laid into him for stealing’. There are other indications that Heidegger was inspired by Eastern writings, but let’s leave this topic here. I have heard many stories of this kind from Professor Ito and checked their veracity. I recounted this story at a reception held after a series of lectures I gave in 1968 at the University of Heidelberg at the invitation of Hans-Georg Gadamer. Japanese exchange students attended these lectures, and I explained that there were many other elements of classical Eastern thought in Heidegger’s philosophy and gave some examples. I must have said too much and may even have said that Heidegger was a plagiarist (Plagiator). Gadamer was Heidegger’s favorite student, and we ended up not speaking to each other for 4 or 5 years because he was so angry with me.
I won't say what I think about the charge of plagiarism to avoid coloring anyone's judgment.

At the very least Descartes to understand what he's arguing against in his critique of the modern subject

>>21361910
weeb lies

>>21358066
if you're not walking in the woods for several hours a day, you'll never understand grampa heide. i'd recommend starting there.

>>21361910
>>21361991
We can have very silly ideas (I think mostly inspired by modern academia) of “plagiarism”. Plagiarism certainly exists and is immoral in certain contexts, but, on the other hand, certain great ideas and abstract concepts don’t strictly strictly belong to anyone. Great thought is made by the digestion of other great thought — all being absorbed into the marrow of one’s bones, one’s bloodstream, by one’s stomach, and becoming a part of oneself.

>>21361910
Lol

Eastern ”philosophy” isn’t philosophy

>>21358579
I call this the Leeroy Jenkins method

>>21361910
Mm, well the charge of plagiarism pertains to a single phrase from the following passage:

>But the chief contribution of Taoism to Asiatic life has been in the realm of æsthetics. Chinese historians have always spoken of Taoism as the “art of being in the world,” for it deals with the present—ourselves. It is in us that God meets with Nature, and yesterday parts from tomorrow. The Present is the moving Infinity, the legitimate sphere of the Relative. Relativity seeks Adjustment; Adjustment is Art. The art of life lies in a constant readjustment to our surroundings. Taoism accepts the mundane as it is and, unlike the Confucians or the Buddhists, tries to find beauty in our world of woe and worry. The Sung allegory of the Three Vinegar Tasters explains admirably the trend of the three doctrines. Sakyamuni, Confucius, and Laotse once stood before a jar of vinegar—the emblem of life and each dipped in his finger to taste the brew. The matter-of-fact Confucius found it sour, the Buddha called it bitter, and Laotse pronounced it sweet.

Notably, the author of the Book of Tea ascribes the description "being in the world" to Chinese historians. This passage would have to be compared with how Heidegger writes about Being-In-The-World.

But it doesn't speak well of Ito's argument that it could be countered with, "okay, but didn't the Jap author plagiarize the phrase from a bunch of Chinamen?" Total nothingburger.

>>21358073
fpbp

>>21361910
I mean the charge that Heidi stole a lot without giving proper credit is not new. Zahavi said it, Vasek said it, Magurshak said it... And it goes from "you could at least have credited that better" to "Holy shit you literally copied Being and Time from this unknown Italian suicidal novelist you met that summer."

SPINOZA, MartiN talks around german idealism, and german idealism talks explicitly about spinoza's ethic

>>21363026
>>21358528
this is true

>>21358073
this is guy is probably a facist

>>21363300
>for it deals with the present—ourselves. It is in us that God meets with Nature, and yesterday parts from tomorrow. The Present is the moving Infinity, the legitimate sphere of the Relative. Relativity seeks Adjustment; Adjustment is Art. The art of life lies in a constant readjustment to our surroundings.
pure metaphysics of presence and ontotheology

Francisco Suarez.

>>21358066
Plato, Aristotle and Kant. This is philosophy itself, practically.

Whenever you need to confront Heidegger and Descartes, you can take the chance to read him (and you most certainly will have to read Descartes at some point). The same with Husserl, the neo-kantians, Leibniz, Suárez, Hegel, Hölderlin, etc.

Plato, Aristotle and Kant are really what you need to know beforehand to grasp what Heidi is doing in the first place. Some sense of what philosophy was about in the archaic period (the ""presocratics""") is also important to be familiarized with.

>>21364200
>Plato, Aristotle and Kant. This is philosophy itself, practically.
Why come?

>>21358066
Everything on the Popeye's Louisiana Kitchen menu, a tin can full of Boston baked beans, and 2 springs of thyme.
>>21358150
Is that a fucking Flip Flappers reference?

>>21363265
Depends how you define philosophy. Do you define philosophy as sheer erudition and historical case studies, with perhaps a small amount of naïve reasoning tacked on top? Then yes, Eastern philosophy is not philosophy. Do you define philosophy as an uncovering of the most important and meaningful aspects of reality and the divine? Then Western philosophy is not philosophy.

>>21358066
>Aristotle’s general influence on Heidegger has been widely acknowledged,
certainly by the Meister himself, who once told his students that “[i]t is advisable,
therefore, that you postpone reading Nietzsche for the time being, and first study
Aristotle for ten to fifteen years.”

>>21358073
Replace Husserl with Kant, otherwise good post. I know he worked with Husserl, and I know there was obviously a pattern of influence as he adopted the phenomenological project, but you can understand Heidegger just fine without reading Husserl.

>>21358066
For a complete list:
Parmenides*
Heraclitus*
Plato
Aristotle**
Aquinas*
Kant
Hegel*
Kierkegaard
Neech**
Dilthey/Spengler
Husserl*
* for key.

>>21358066
greeks

>>21363530
>german idealism talks explicitly about spinoza's ethic
Hegel worked with Spinoza's panenthetistic conception of the universe, but I don't think that Heidegger sprang from the absolute idealist current of thought. Heidegger was more influenced by 19th century philosophical psychologism, which, contrary to Hegel's positioning of human consciousness as the center of the universe, in direct contact with the Absolute, reduces all of human thought and experience down to mental faculties.
Husserl did make use of Descartes' Meditations, which were one of the key texts in 17th century rationalist philosophy, but there is a very loose line connecting Descartes to Spinoza, and an even looser one connecting Spinoza to post-Kantian philosophy (by post-Kantian we really mean various developments in philosophy that took place after Hegel's death, that burnt down the entire Hegelian system and went back to Kant's 3 Critiques, acting as if Fichte, Schelling, and Hegel had never been alive).
Despite the fact that Heidegger is centered on Being, just like Aristotle and the Scholastics were, his separation of the ontological and the ontic and his entire expansion of the subject of Dasein makes no mention of God. It takes exterior reality for granted, but makes no effort to explain how it came about, or what the fundamental laws of it are. Like psychologism, it leaves it all as a mystery that reduces all such metaphysical questions down to Man's own condition (Heidegger calls it Being-in-the-world, but only because he gives priority to the world's existence being taken for granted).

Although philosophical skepticism has been a thing since ancient times, and has often been associated with Descartes (amongst other thinkers), the difference between Heidegger and Descartes is that Heidegger does not claim that human reason can prove anything about what is ultimately real. According to him, it relies on awareness of itself to assert its own existence, which is why it cannot "prove" its own existence. Rather, any such proof would be circular and merely assert that the aware thing is telling itself that it is something.
Unlike Kant, Heidegger does not claim that there is any a priori knowledge or that there is any a priori intuition of space and time going beyond all experience, situating everything together on the plane of being in the world.

Going back to the main topic, reading Spinoza is not necessary for reading Heidegger. Reading Leibniz might be, prior to reading Kant, although only because Leibniz's Monadology makes a grand series of claims about the universe and reality that are demolished by Kant in his first Critique.

>>21358528
>>21366234
good companions to Parmenides and Heraclitus?

>>21366234
Plato not key? Are you retarded?

>>21366414
>Despite the fact that Heidegger is centered on Being, just like Aristotle and the Scholastics were, his separation of the ontological and the ontic and his entire expansion of the subject of Dasein makes no mention of God. It takes exterior reality for granted, but makes no effort to explain how it came about, or what the fundamental laws of it are. Like psychologism, it leaves it all as a mystery that reduces all such metaphysical questions down to Man's own condition (Heidegger calls it Being-in-the-world, but only because he gives priority to the world's existence being taken for granted).
So Kant is the main reference here, no? Of course Heidegger will take a less transcendental, idealist route.

>>21366235
This. And Kant and hegel.

>>21366823
Plato and Aristotle. You don't need anything else.

>>21366859
He's pretty key, but mostly in a negative sense; the only thing Hei-tan really took from him is the concept of the temporalising of time being a subjectively human one.

For Parmenides and Heraclitus what are the books to read? The 2 that are on the wiki? The Art and Thought of Heraclitus and Parmenides of Elea by David Gallop?

>>21367973
Heidegger has lectures on both that are now released and translated as part of his complete works. Those are beneficial because you will be exposed to his interpretation of them, and that plays in significantly to BnT.