/lit/ - Literature

[Anonymous No.11919139]

Well, well, well... So /lit/, do you renounce your favorite philosopher or admit that /pol/ might be onto something? It is a logical contradiction to reject these propositions simultaneously therefore you're hypocritical in your ambition to reason if you don't either make a decision or deliberately suspend your position in ambiguity, i.e. walk back from your current position of assuming /pol/ outright retards. What will it be?

https://mitpress.mit.edu/books/reading-heideggers-black-notebooks-1931-1941

https://www.theguardian.com/books/2014/mar/13/martin-heidegger-black-notebooks-reveal-nazi-ideology-antisemitism

[Anonymous No.11919142]

wtf heidegger is a nazi??? :OOOO

[Anonymous No.11919158]

Heidegger's antisemitism wasn't racial and he had no problem with Jewish individuals but to issue with what "the Jew" does to societies.

[Anonymous No.11919168]

>>11919158
“The question of the role of world Jewry is not a racial question, but the metaphysical question about the kind of humanity that, without any restraints, can take over the uprooting of all beings from being as its world-historical ‘task,'” ~ Martin Heidegger

[Anonymous No.11919191]

I don't read Heidegger for his political opinions or realpolitik he is instrumental in reestablishing the necessity of the question of being through discursive understanding and that which is prior and irreducible as the ground for any and all ontologies proceeding.

Try Carnap next time you unbelievable faggot

>>/pol/

[Anonymous No.11919197]

>>11919191
8===D~~ O: <-- you

[Anonymous No.11919205]

>It is a logical contradiction to reject these propositions simultaneously therefore you're hypocritical in your ambition to reason if you don't either make a decision or deliberately suspend your position in ambiguity
Bullshit

/pol/ confirmed retards

[Anonymous No.11919212]

[Anonymous No.11919221]

another retarded thread made by /pol/, how surprising

[Anonymous No.11919266]

>>11919139
The nazis then didn't have a monopoly on antisemitism and being an antisemite wasn't that controversial, besides this only makes me like him even more.

[Anonymous No.11919277]

>>11919197
Not an argument

Don't respond

[Anonymous No.11919287]

>>11919277
>P-please leave me alone
8==O: <---still you

[Anonymous No.11919291]

>>11919277
But, you did respond . . .

[Anonymous No.11919327]

>>11919158
That's precisely my position and I'm an intellectual of /pol/. The shallow racism against blacks and Jews is mostly tongue in cheek, the guys who sincerely hate people on the basis of race are falling out of favor in the far right, see: Mike Enoch. Our implicit value of judging individuals on merit is why Frame Game, a Jewish corporate lawyer from New York, is the current leader of the Alt Right. Recognition of collective ethnic/racial interests is the extent of the significant racism.

Heidegger is quintessentially /pol/. The brainlet Richard Spencer humiliated himself with his failure to apply Nietzsche politically as he lost all hope of gaining power by hailing victory lmao, what a complete retard. The next phase of white nationalism will be philosophically robust so you can expect to be convinced within the coming decade.

>>11919205
pic related

>>11919221
Your dinky little reading board is nothing. /pol/ is the cultural-political center of the world. This philosophy thread will affect actual politics 6 months from now through /pol/'s vast memetic influence, everything else you do here is merely for its own sake. You can use this limited opportunity to affect change as it presents itself or passively accept the future as we envision it.

[Anonymous No.11919332]

It amuses me when /pol/ use big words, which they obviously do not comprehend the meaning of. In such manner that there is an absolute incoherence, and /pol/ shouts REEEEE cognitive dissonance. The accuser preempted the accusee, this makes no sense because I'm obviously not intelligent enough to get it

[Anonymous No.11919334]

>>11919191
Okay, that's your narrow experience of Heidegger. The man was much more than your conception of him and his philosophy doesn't end at questions of being.

[Anonymous No.11919338]

>>11919332
>ahduuuuh yoo dun no dem wurds

[Anonymous No.11919339]

>>11919327
>I'm an intellectual
>of /pol/
Nigger please

[Anonymous No.11919340]

>>11919277
BASED

[Anonymous No.11919345]

>>11919332
Sorry bud, I took intro to logic and the opening post is thoroughly coherent.

>>11919339
That's the joke.

[Anonymous No.11919354]

>>11919334
vorhandenheit aletheia lichtung parmenides anstoss bionicles aristotle's chicken

Did I do it Greg?

[Anonymous No.11919401]

>>11919327
>Frame Game, a Jewish corporate lawyer from New York, is the current leader of the Alt Right.
JUST

[Anonymous No.11920800]

>>11919401
What point are you making? Frame knows what he's doing, he's establishing the ideal foundation for saving white Americans from total ethnic displacement. There's no way the social media corporations get away with what they're doing and he'll receive credit for the inevitable Internet Bill of Rights which he conceived two years ago.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=r0OIJ1Dx5cY
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8V6N-7xjOh4

[Anonymous No.11920817]

>>11919327
>I'm an intellectual of /pol/
>molymeme picture
holy fuck this is epic

[Anonymous No.11920822]

>>11919327
Nice bait.

[Anonymous No.11920845]

>>11919142
fpbp

[Anonymous No.11921102]

>>11919191
I wish I could do the same because I really like what he proposes but his political thought is a consequence of his philosophy.

[Anonymous No.11921117]

>>11919139
Heidegger's work in fundamental ontology and his description of the Existential Analytic have little to no relation to his abhorrent antisemitism. /pol/ is still bursting at the seams with mental illness, Heidegger was still a clever philosopher, and the world continues to turn. Nihil novi sub sole.

[Anonymous No.11921140]

>>11921117
>Heidegger's work in fundamental ontology and his description of the Existential Analytic have little to no relation to his abhorrent antisemitism
Wasn't he antisemitic because he thought the way in which jewish interacted with other cultures was intrinsically utilitarian? How is that not related to his system?

[Anonymous No.11921146]

>>11919139

THE ZIONISTS ARE THE ENEMY.

[Anonymous No.11921148]

>>11919191
but is the necessity of the question of being compatible with Judaism?

[Anonymous No.11921154]

>>11921140
>intrinsically utilitarian

Ethics aren't part of fundamental ontology, although some aspects of it are pretty ethics adjacent. I would argue that this isn't a result of his work, but rather a misapplication of his theory based on preexisting ethnic prejudices. It's post-hoc application. One would have to already understand jewish people uniformly as users to make this leap.

[Anonymous No.11921162]

>>11919168
/thread

>I once tried to read "Heidegger: The Introduction of Nazism into Philosophy"
>mistakes everywhere
>author had obviously not even tried to properly understand Heidegger
>brainlets too dumb to understand philosophy keep studying the lives of philosophers

[Anonymous No.11921181]

>>11921162
Don't act like Being and Time entails antisemitism. You have to first believe that Jewish people take as their project the disruption of Dasein's Being-in-the-world. The antisemitism comes first, Martin just gave you a new structure in which to house it.

[Anonymous No.11921201]

>>11921154
>but rather a misapplication of his theory based on preexisting ethnic prejudices.
Are you saying the jewish in germany as a community weren't utilitarian?
>One would have to already understand jewish people uniformly as users to make this leap.
But Heidegger's system lends itself to analyses whole groups as an unite. His antisemitism wasn't against jews as individuals but against the way they interacted as a group.

[Anonymous No.11921260]

>>11921201
>Are you saying the jewish in germany as a community weren't utilitarian?
Yeah that's unintelligible. That's like asking if the Romans as a society weren't deontologists. Most people do not have a coherent ethical theory on which they base their lives, and Jewish people are no different. They're people, not a monolith. Further, you act as though Utilitarianism is something so horrible that it justifies cultural prejudice. It's a perfectly understandable ethical theory which, if you disagree with it, should be interrogated, not exterminated.
>But Heidegger's system lends itself to analyses whole groups as an unite. His antisemitism wasn't against jews as individuals but against the way they interacted as a group.
No, it doesn't. It allows for analysis of Worlds, and an argument could be made for religious worlds, and the involvement whole of those religious Worlds could be explored, but none of that leads toward something like the way groups interact unless you argue that Das Man dictates the way a factical case of Dasein acts within that world. In other words, one must first claim that "One" (Das Man) who is a part of the Jewish world treats other cases of Dasein as in-order-to instead of Being-With before you can continue that analytic. Hence the antisemitic belief precedes the existential understanding. It's a corruption of Befindlichkeit.

[Anonymous No.11921366]

>>11921117
see: >>11921102

[Anonymous No.11921389]

>>11921366
I've made several other posts that further my belief that the Existential Analytic does not lead to Antisemitism (the long ones pushing against antisemites). I study Heidegger and those he's inspired and I abhor antisemitism, which is a pretty mainstream position in philosophy departments.

[Anonymous No.11921414]

>>11919139
>Heidegger
>Even top 5 of /lit/'s favorite philosophers
Fuck off /pol/

[Anonymous No.11921420]

It is impossible for Heidegger to be /pol/, because Heidegger was and is , the most anti-western philosopher there is. Especially after his so called "turn" (Kehre). Heidegger thought Jews occupied a privileged position in the instrumentalization or money politics of the western politics, but they were not unique in this. Heidegger singles out the United States of America and the Soviet Union as the most driven by the metaphysics of presence/technology/massification. This is a process in which the Jews are part of, but they are cog in a greater process that has been happening ever since the start of western metaphysics. Because the western world cannot think without metaphysics, Heidegger literally condemns it as a thing that has become an abomination. Heidegger had some hope in the conservative revolution and the Nazis , but those hopes were dashed pretty early on when the Nazis turned full on to technological assisted authoritarianism and domination. For Heidegger what the West is essentially was a great speculative opening through philosophy and thinking that amounted to a great failure.

[Anonymous No.11921479]

>>11921260
>They're people, not a monolith.
A family is a unit. A tribe is an extension of the family.

>>11921389
>my belief
Okay

>>11921420
>This is a process in which the Jews are part of, but they are cog in a greater process that has been happening ever since the start of western metaphysics.
Zuck and Larry Page alone are far more than a mere cog.

>For Heidegger what the West is essentially was a great speculative opening through philosophy and thinking that amounted to a great failure.
This is the exact position of /pol/.

[Anonymous No.11921598]

/pol/ are mostly brainlets, but their fundamental conclusions are 100% correct

[Anonymous No.11921619]

>>11921181
the post I was quoting totally agrees with what you say - at least I think that's how it should be understood.

[Anonymous No.11921976]

>>11921479
>A family is a unit. A tribe is an extension of the family.
This is not Heideggerian. Just armchair sociology, which is pretty far from what Being and Time concerns itself with.

Also, yes, my belief. I can defend it, and I can argue for its veracity. But fundamentally all we have are beliefs. I didn't choose that word frivolously, I chose it carefully. Would you be so callous and non-rigorous as to call your philosophy factual? Read Kierkegaard, or just sit back and think a bit.

>>11921619
My bad, mate. I misunderstood your point.

[Anonymous No.11922012]

>>11921414
name the top 5 then, peabrain

[Anonymous No.11922045]

>>11922012
Not that guy, but most of the people here haven't even sincerely read five philosophers, let alone enough to have a top five.

It'd probably look something like-
>Plato
>Aristotle
>Nietzsche
>?????
>?????

[Anonymous No.11923152]

>>11922045
/lit/ isn't that fond of of Aristotle, but Plato is by far number one. Nietzsche is beloved also. After that it's Deleuze, Heidegger, and Kant (Hegel and Zizek by extension). Stirner is an extension of Nietzsche and Foucault is the anti-Nietzsche and therefore most hated.

[Anonymous No.11923232]

>>11919345
>Sorry bud, I took intro to logic and the opening post is thoroughly coherent.
Please be bait

[Anonymous No.11924479]

>>11921976
>Would you be so callous and non-rigorous as to call your philosophy factual?
Predictive capability makes a system of belief more or less factual, ergo scientific method. Predicting coincidences comes easily by assuming a couple things about Jewish people.