/lit/ - Literature

[Anonymous No.17401290]

If existence precedes essence then an ad hominem is a valid form of argument and not a logical fallacy as it's commonly believed. Am I missing something?

[Anonymous No.17401301]

>>17401290
A brain

[Anonymous No.17401303]

>>17401290
it doesn't matter becase "existence precedes essence" is categorically false

[Anonymous No.17401319]

>>17401290
I'm rejecting your argument because you sound like a stupid nigger.

[Anonymous No.17401333]

>>17401290
Yes. You are missing that Sartre, who adopted or rather abducted (like the walleyed Parisian he was) that formulation "existence precedes essence" from a passage in Heidegger's Being and Time, and in so doing, completely misunderstood what Heidegger was trying to say in favour of his own gay Parisian Cartesian "just b urself lol" faggotry.

[Anonymous No.17401348]

>>17401333
>existence precedes essence
No

[Anonymous No.17401374]

>>17401290
Existence precedes essence already presupposes an atheist metaphysical outlook insofar that it only applies to us and renders reality entirely anthropomorphic and subjectivist. The first question of any questioning is always the first principle. What is the case? A questioning is always in the first instance a metaphysical questioning insofar as it makes an attempt to understand reality, were it not, it would always be merely epistemological at best or subjectivist at worst, the byproduct of which is an eternal collapse into subjectivist nihilism and relativism. Properly done, metaphysics leads us back to the "First" Cause in which essence and existence are one and the same thing: God.

[Anonymous No.17401407]

>>17401374
I don't see what your problem is - what is the consequence of accepting a atheistic world view; why must one accept Platonist essentialism? More so, even if god did exist, I'm under no obligation to listen to him or care about him.Existence precedes essence because man is the measure of all things; even someone who believes in god doesn't share the same essential beliefs of what constitutes god and his law - god himself is a subjectvist affair.

[Anonymous No.17401413]

>>17401374
The experience of modernity then is that there is no middle position as such or any third position. The entire world is either God or total chaos. Dostoevsky understood this intuitively by proclaiming "If there is no God, everyhting is permitted" but of course this is not merely an ethical statement, the truth of the statement lies precisely in its applying to reality as such. It would be better restated as "If there is no God, there is total chaos". Philosophically speaking there is no middle position between God or total nihilism, the lesson of modernity has been then that all humanly devised systems that reject God collapse into total nihilism and relativism. There is no possibility of order outside of God, with the choice between a return to God and a return to a pre-civilizational bestial state staring us in the face.

[Anonymous No.17401431]

>>17401407
This is an exceptional example of modernity. Pure subjectivism, relativism, nihilism, a constant critique. A kind of sentimental indignation at the fact that sucking cocks and watching tranny porn is objectively wrong. The descent into a pre-civilization state of mind is inevitable now.

[Anonymous No.17401454]

>existence precedes essence
Yes

[Anonymous No.17401457]

>>17401431
Pious people really are insecure about the fact that we live in age where the divine rule of kings, and gods, is dead, and man can finally enjoy his own self autonomy, make his own laws and duties. Man has finally awoken from the heavy dream, and only joyous self interest follows. No longer is man a tool for popes, and pedophilic priests, but a tool of his own destiny. And there is nothing you can do to stop this great march.

[Anonymous No.17401568]

>>17401431
Incredibly based
>>17401457
>man is now a tool of his own destiny
I hope you're 14 years old and not 33 or something like that

[Anonymous No.17401672]

>>17401374
>t. hasn't read Heidegger

[Anonymous No.17401813]

Essence and existence occur at once phenomenologically. See husserl.

[Anonymous No.17401849]

>>17401813

Bless you Husserlanon, you are doing God's work.

[Anonymous No.17402007]

>>17401672
Why don't you put forth Heidegger's claim then? Rather than just name-dropping.

[Anonymous No.17402057]

>>17401431
no. we must go forward not bury our heads in the sand, or we are doomed to repeat the same cycle of ignorance

[Anonymous No.17402079]

>>17402057
There is no forward. Nor is there backwards.

[Anonymous No.17402086]

>>17401568
Kill yourself, reactionary, ego sum deus non serviam

[Anonymous No.17402096]

Sartre signed a petition against age of consent laws. So whatever he says must be wrong because he holds a very unpopular opinion.

[Anonymous No.17402101]

>>17401290
Gee idk.... maybe everyone itt should post face before stating their opinion

[Anonymous No.17402109]

>>17402096
There no objective laws that govern morality. If you want to rape children; you only need the courage to do so.
Also
>Appeal to the majority
Cringe

[Anonymous No.17402111]

>>17401457
It says, dilating in a pile of filth, sipping cockroach milk

[Anonymous No.17402119]

>>17402086
Ah the satanic influences coming to light. Hardly surprising.

[Anonymous No.17402120]

>>17402111
Its time to cope

[Anonymous No.17402128]

>>17402119
If it was up to me, I would kill your whole family. I value no life besides my own.

[Anonymous No.17402134]

>>17402128
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_x828dkEgQ0&ab_channel=GoodHope

[Anonymous No.17402135]

>>17402120
You'll come crawling back once you've realized just how incapable you are. Like trust fund kiddies coasting of daddies hard work, you inevitably find yourself addicted to crack or something

[Anonymous No.17402137]

>>17402007
>Why don't you put forth Heidegger's claim then? Rather than just name-dropping.
The essence of Dasein lies in its existence. The problem with the ontotheology you're espousing is that it has forgotten the question of the meaning of being. Hence Heidegger's project to try and ground ontology phenomenologically.

[Anonymous No.17402142]

>>17402128
Post body u autistic tub of lard

[Anonymous No.17402145]

>>17402137
>The essence of Dasein lies in its existence.
So Heiddeger simply substituted Dasein for God? Wow, powerful.

[Anonymous No.17402146]

>>17402135
Just as Napoleon's armies spelled the end of the divine right of kings, feudalism; the modern man spells the end of history. All the bloody battles that played out for mans freedom from the gods have triumph, and there is no returning to your malignant age.
>>17402134
Yes, I do support abortion, and I will continue to support politicians that do. I'm greatful that I voted for Joe Biden, and that he is rescinding all of Trump's abortion orders. There is no god, no afterlife, and never will ever happen to people like me who work against you, and your pathetic gods. I do as I please with my life for my own happiness, and no god will ever control me.

[Anonymous No.17402152]

>>17402142
Post your address

[Anonymous No.17402161]

>Sartre's definition of existentialism was based on Heidegger's magnum opus Being and Time (1927). In the correspondence with Jean Beaufret later published as the Letter on Humanism, Heidegger implied that Sartre misunderstood him for his own purposes of subjectivism, and that he did not mean that actions take precedence over being so long as those actions were not reflected upon.[16] Heidegger commented that "the reversal of a metaphysical statement remains a metaphysical statement", meaning that he thought Sartre had simply switched the roles traditionally attributed to essence and existence without interrogating these concepts and their history.[17]

[Anonymous No.17402174]

>>17402161
Philosophers think people have to care what they believe when they really don't. Any two bit moron can be a philosopher; philosophy is settled by combat, not by debates

[Anonymous No.17402175]

>>17402146
Before Christ's second coming the Church must pass through a final trial that will shake the faith of many believers. The persecution that accompanies her pilgrimage on earth will unveil the "mystery of iniquity" in the form of a religious deception offering men an apparent solution to their problems at the price of apostasy from the truth. The supreme religious deception is that of the Antichrist, a pseudo-messianism by which man glorifies himself in place of God and of his Messiah come in the flesh

[Anonymous No.17402186]

hes got nice hair

[Anonymous No.17402202]

>>17402146
Forget the gods, how about nature. People are already being humbled by the pandemic. There's an immutable order to this world and it's in everyone's best interest to follow it.
>>17402152
You'll need to leave mummies basement before you can do anything with it

[Anonymous No.17402203]

>>17401457
dude we live in the most invasive, centralised, totalitarian, anti-individualistic time in history. your sentiment is the tired 'muh progress' that has been repeated for 500 years just as the things above have come about. it's always 'just wait till we get to the next hill', 'everything will be fixed if we just...' with you people. not just an empty sentiment, if not a malicious one (you people also tend to take glee in the above for some reason), but literal brainwashing.

not to say religion is the answer because for me it can only be LARPing. for some it is.

[Anonymous No.17402217]

>>17402120
>democracies
hahahhaha. you mean untouchable oligarchs, and bread and circus for the peons.

[Anonymous No.17402231]

>>17402202
> That pic
I cannot fucking wait.
If only the La Palma nightmare wave (worst crazy estimates) could also happen...

[Anonymous No.17402241]

>>17401457
Was this posted from the 19th century?

[Anonymous No.17402247]

>>17402203
>dude we live in the most invasive, centralised, totalitarian, anti-individualistic time in history.
No, we do not. We live in the most wonderful time of human history where man has enough abundance to ensure his own freedom. We live a post-ideology world where man can utilize its own utility. An age where communism, fascism have been defeated, and where man's own self autonomy is possible. This was only possible from the republican, liberal revolutions that swept the global past Napoleon.
People like you are resentful that ultimately failed; that your alternative will never come to pass.

[Anonymous No.17402257]

>>17402217
>dude we live in the most invasive, centralised, totalitarian, anti-individualistic time in history.
Imagine being autistic enough to believe this. Just because your guy doesn't win mean its an oligarchy you fucking loser. You just don't have the ability to succeed in this world, so, of course you want to make excuses. Oh its the jews, oh its capitalism - no, the problem is people like you who don't have the genetics, the intelligence to actually succeed

[Anonymous No.17402262]

>>17402202
>People are already being humbled by the pandemic.
Yes, people are thanking science and not god for solving it. Imagine if we had a government filled with religious idiots like yourself who thought we could pray the world's ills away

[Anonymous No.17402282]

>>17402247
>We live a post-ideology world

jej

[Anonymous No.17402290]

I wish I could understand philosophy

[Anonymous No.17402295]

>>17402257
He says during the greatest transfer of wealth in history. As wall street cartels openly bend the rules when everyone else gives them a taste of their own medicine. The games rigged son. Juden Weinerson lied to you.
t. 3.7 gpa

[Anonymous No.17402307]

>>17402262
Nice strawman dipshit. Imagine if we had a populace that wasn't low iq and "free" to be fat sickly and useless.

[Anonymous No.17402314]

>>17402282
>>17402295
>>17402307
Freedom is not granted, it taken. Freedom is not granted by society, but its given to you by your own intuitive. Don't blame society for being a slave because you lack the courage to challenge its adversity. There is no utopian, speculative world where everyone lives in harmony without pain or suffering. In this life, just as in life thousands of years before your birth, it has always been your responsibility to use the tools society gives you to achieve your existential goals. Weal, resentful people like yourselves will always find something to scapegoat for your problems besides your own self. No one, no thing owes you anything in this world and never will. Human life intrinsically has no value; you just as recyclable as every organism on this planet. Learn how to take responsibility for your own life, and live with poor choices you've made.

[Anonymous No.17402335]

>>17402295
>We live in global poverty!!!
No, we do not, you fucking loser. We live in an advantage where most human beings live above the global poverty line, and therefore, have enough money to get their basis necessities. Capitalism has created an abundance of wealth for you live a long life. The only problem is you.

[Anonymous No.17402342]

>>17402145
No. You obviously have no idea of what you're talking about.

[Anonymous No.17402358]

>>17402314
I'm 28 thousand shares deep in BB right now trying to take my slice from the oligarchs. Consider this, I've mastered your Jordan Peterson platitudes for a long time now. And I actually have the means to strive out and influence the world instead of needing to play it safe

[Anonymous No.17402368]

>>17402335

How much money is there in total in the world?
How much of it is tied to virtual assets that have no value outside of the specific value exchange system that is late stage capitalism?
How much would either amount result in if fairly distributed amongst the entire population?

[Anonymous No.17402372]

>>17402358
>omg people are so poor and suffering!!!
>Has a phone, has an apartment, has food in the fridge,
>can play video games and shit post on 4chan all day
>mommy paying for your loans

[Anonymous No.17402379]

>>17402368
Completely irrelevant; most human beings can afford food, housing, shelter and clean water. And, there is no such thing as a "fair distribution" of goods. Fairness does not exist - it is a complete moral category you can reject.

[Anonymous No.17402381]

>>17402342
That is what you said in your statement by the essence of Dasein lies in its existence, since that is a typical formulation for God. I asked you to explain what Heidegger meant but you produced two non-sensical statements. I'm suspecting you either have not read Heidegger yourself or didn't understand what you read, since you clearly cannot explain what you mean beyond name-dropping. I suggest you go back to the post you name-dropped Heidegger on and show the distinction between what is written in that post and what Heidegger meant that critically undermines it. Things such as "the essence of Dasein lies in its existence" or "it has forggoten the question of the meaning of being" is simply vague nonsense.

[Anonymous No.17402384]

>>17402335
>>17402372
Show me where I said any of the commie gobbdlygook you're arguing agains. I said the game is rigged, and I want my rightful place at the top. yes I'm working for it >>17402358

[Anonymous No.17402396]

>>17402384
I don't care if the game is rigged; life is not fair and never will be. You can complain about it all you want, you pinko

[Anonymous No.17402421]

>>17402396
Yes im just complaining. Not doing anything at all. Boo hoo, please schlomo just a crumb of the trickle dow

[Anonymous No.17402423]

>>17402379

> My ideology makes me incapable of even entertaining these simple questions
> But we live in a post-ideology world.

So this is the power of radical centrism.

[Anonymous No.17402433]

>>17402335
>my son might grow up into a tranny and dox me at the slightest political deviance, and maybe the economy is controlled by oligarchs that propagate an exploitive system for their own benefit, but at least I'm ostensibly wealthier and healthier than my ancestors.

[Anonymous No.17402438]

>>17402423
>Set up a false dilemma
>OH YOU CAN'T ANSWER ME!!!!!
I don't have to care what you think
>>17402396
Commit the su

[Anonymous No.17402445]

>>17402438
>I don't have to care what you think

Argued like a liberal.

[Anonymous No.17402456]

>>17402433
>Too stupid to hide your personal information
Your fault
>My tranny son
You shouldn't have had kids if you failed as a parent
>maybe the economy is controlled by oligarchs
If your exploited, that is your fault. The poor creates the wealth of the rich; it has no right to complain about exploitation if they do nothing solve it. Man makes himself free.
>healthier than my ancestors.
Kid, you might want to read a life expectancy chart, or better read a economic textbook that wasn't written int he 1800s, you commie retard

[Anonymous No.17402467]

>>17401457
>Slave to desires

[Anonymous No.17402475]

>>17402433
>dox me at the slightest political deviance
So what? Freedom means doing whatever you want; it doesn't mean people have to respect you. Freedom is without restriction; that means I can trample you if I have the power, the ability to do so. Might makes right

[Anonymous No.17402480]

>>17402467
>Life-denying

[Anonymous No.17402483]

Imagine your entire life being oriented on Ayn Rand and a misreading of Nietzsche

[Anonymous No.17402495]

>>17402480
>life denying
t. normie

[Anonymous No.17402499]

>>17402483
Imagine being such an idiot you think there is only one way to interpret a philosopher; imagine being such a fool you serve ideology instead of opportunistically use it for your own goals. Imagine being such a fucking fool you elevate Rand, Nietzsche as "great men" to be worshiped and followed to a T, as if their gods, and no mortals like you and me

[Anonymous No.17402512]

>>17401290
tmthe fact that regardless what precedes what you are still retarded

[Anonymous No.17402517]

>>17402480
24/7 meditation is comfy, refute me

[Anonymous No.17402528]

>>17402517
You could dilate 24/7 if you wanted; as long as you don't bother me

[Anonymous No.17402535]

>>17402174
dude sartre was too dumb to understand philosophy and so created this conforming, boring pseudophilosophy to get status and fame.

[Anonymous No.17402542]

>>17402517
24/7 meditation? Isn't that usually called a coma?

[Anonymous No.17402543]

>>17402456
>if you're exploited, its your fault
how cucked can you get, pack it up friedman
>failing as a parent => trannies
partially true, the other half is the entire zeitgeist perpetuating gender theory and the general deconstruction of a functional society. you have to be a dishonest sophist to not even acknowledge that
>>17402475
you're a literal idiot

[Anonymous No.17402548]

>>17402247
>No, we do not
there is no private life, i.e. individuality. we are now socially determined, extreme conformism. what is is now regulated by the state was always the domain of families and communities, or simply not addressed at all (completely free), for all of history. you can't seriously say you're more free when there are rules in domains that in the past had no rules.

[Anonymous No.17402557]

>>17402499
there are good interpretations and then there are low IQ retard interpretations. you fall squarely into the latter

[Anonymous No.17402559]

>>17402535
>so created this conforming, boring pseudophilosophy
Like every philosopher because philosophy is a joke; you're suppose to mock them

[Anonymous No.17402562]

>>17402257
i don't even know what you're talking about? i'm not american and i'm speaking generally. i'm assuming this is bait, it's very bizarre.

[Anonymous No.17402570]

>>17402557
There are no metaphysical laws that govern morality; "goodness", "interpretation" are all nominal and relative, cope more, Platonist

[Anonymous No.17402574]

>>17402535
>to get fame and status
Reflection of (you)

[Anonymous No.17402577]

>>17402433
>I'm ostensibly wealthier and healthier than my ancestors.
yeah ostensibly is right. it's not even true for actual wealth and certainly not true for health.

[Anonymous No.17402582]

>>17402570
there is IQ. the quality of interpretation and worldview regardless of its content displays something about the intelligence of the one who espouses it. your espousal reeks of low IQ and outs you as an idiot.

[Anonymous No.17402587]

>>17402548
>we are now socially determined, extreme conformism.
If you follow the herd mentality; that is your fault. And, there is no "we"

[Anonymous No.17402595]

>>17402582
No, there is no "IQ." "IQ" is relative to culture, and it is completely irrelevant - no one has to care about. The only people who talk about "IQ" are insecure about their own lack of intelligence, and need to invent something to protect theirs as a coping mechanism

[Anonymous No.17402613]

>>17402595
ah I get it now, you got filtered because of your low IQ and now you larp as a post-IQ ubermensch. pathetic

[Anonymous No.17402634]

>>17402613
IQ is a spook, cope more, brainlet. IQ only exists to measure the amount of memorization an individual has towards the silly doctrines of the current mode of civilization they live under. It doesn't matter how "smart" you are, you still have to die like everything else. It is a socially determined value, and I, as an individual, do not have to value the things or memorize the things society wants me to believe. If you want to brag about "IQ" to make yourself feel better about the inevitable, do so

[Anonymous No.17402664]

>>17402634
I'm using IQ as a figure of speech you retard not the actual test. If you weren't able to pick up on this, then you most likely really are a retard. Your brain functions on the most base level.

[Anonymous No.17402680]

>>17402664
If your brain functioned at base level; you wouldn't be making such horrible posts, but here we are

[Anonymous No.17402682]

>>17402634
>die like anyone else

Given an infinite amount of time after your death(to outside observers),it is possible that entropy fluctuations reconstruct your brain and bring you back alive. You cannot experience the time passed in between your death(to outside observers)and the reconstruction of your brain(10^10^10^10^10^x years) and this means you will never die in your experience. All possible events that leads to your death(in your experience)will never happen and you will always be there to experience(as non experience is impossible)

[Anonymous No.17402700]

>>17402664
If anything IQ, if the measure of how well you've been indoctrinated by the public education system. Ah yes, how very Nietzschean of you to value the amount of knowledge you've consumed from being product of herd mentality. You certainly are the Zarathustra, over man he cherished with your love for conformism!

[Anonymous No.17402726]

>>17402381
The reason I mentioned Heidegger at all is because "existence precedes essence" in the OP is based on Sartre's (misguided) reading of Being and Time. I wouldn't call it "name-dropping". I guess it was unreasonable to assue that you would have a cursory understanding of Heidegger, posting in a thread like this. But sure, let me spoon-feed you some. In Being & Time he critiques all of Western metaphysics from Plato and onwards for only thinking of "being in terms beings" instead of "thinking being as being". (And yes, his critique applies to the scholastic theological metaphysics you speak of as well.) This "forgetting of the question being" eventually gives rise to all kinds of philosophical issues, like the mind/body problem. To "solve" this, to return to question of being (Seinsfrage), Heidegger tries to present a fundamental ontology using phenomenology as a method. And this is where this 'existence precedes essence' comes from. It's a phenomenological observation regarding the being of Dasein. All of these "vague terms" have a quite well-defined, technical meaning, you should read him if you're interested.

[Anonymous No.17402795]

>>17402634
>IQ only exists to measure the amount of memorization an individual has
Filtered you dumb dumb

[Anonymous No.17402796]

>>17402726
>"being in terms beings" instead of "thinking being as being"

Unconvincing. The idea that all philosophy since the start got something wrong is an exceptional claim that requires exceptional evidence. Instead to me this seems like circular logic in that to potentiate your own notion of being one simply substitutes the traditional meaning with it and claims all predecessors got it wrong. It's hard to make a convincing argument for it.

>>17402726
>the mind/body problem.
The mind body problem starts with Cartesian dualism not before it.

>>17402726
>Heidegger tries to present a fundamental ontology using phenomenology as a method. And this is where this 'existence precedes essence' comes from.
But existence precedes essence is already an essential claim. I am certain that Heidegger has a deeper account of it but your portrayal of it simply leads me to believe that it is a complex and possibly interesting substitution of terms and meanings close to the kind of conceptual art that modern philosophy often is.

>>17402726
>the being of Dasein
To me this means nothing. And I suspect Heidegger was interested in inventing an entire new terminology for his stuff which is a classic sign of conceptual art as philosophy. No problem with it, the only thing is anybody can do it (of course to a more or less succesful degree), it is a bit like a rat spinning its wheel.

[Anonymous No.17402800]

of course you exist before you perceive your own existence

[Anonymous No.17402816]

>>17402800
you actually have both essence and existence before you can reflect on it. but any reflection on it, including the statement that existence precedes essence, is already a statement about essence.

[Anonymous No.17402894]

There is nothing one can do in life that will change the fact that they are certain for extinction. Morality was an invention by man to dupe individuals into believing particular actions lead to better afterlifes. It is nothing but lies. Religion was used to dupe the weak & impressionable, those who were unable to understand this, into serving it.

[Anonymous No.17402930]

A lot of idiots don't seem to realize there were plenty of religions that predate Christianity, and are larger than it. In fact, even scientific materialism, atheism predates Christianity as a field of thought

[Anonymous No.17402967]

>>17401407
>More so, even if god did exist, I'm under no obligation to listen to him or care about him.
Obligatory or not, you would make sure to record and memorise every Word of God, all the while considering yourself most fortunate for the opportunity. Remember, God isn't your average bozo, he's THE LAW.

[Anonymous No.17403114]

>>17402796
>Unconvincing.
You haven't even read the book. I mean, there's a reason why they can't ignore Heidegger even though he was a Nazi.
>The mind body problem starts with Cartesian dualism not before it.
Your reading comprehension isn't the best. I explicitly said "eventually gives rise to". Heidegger argues that Descartes is a consequence of the tendency in the history of metaphysics to think of being as a thing. Quite literally in the case of Descartes with his res cogitans and res extensa as fundamental categories.
>But existence precedes essence is already an essential claim.
He's doing ontology, yes.
>I am certain that Heidegger has a deeper account
Deeper than a shitpost? Nah, mate.
>To me this means nothing. And I suspect Heidegger was interested in inventing an entire new terminology for his stuff which is a classic sign of conceptual art as philosophy.
The reasoning behind the terminology is that it can point to the phenomenon itself, without it getting concealed by the connotations of historical metaphysical terms.

[Anonymous No.17403147]

>You haven't even read the book
Unconvincing was towards the thesis you put forth.

>Heidegger argues that Descartes is a consequence of the tendency in the history of metaphysics to think of being as a thing.
Again, unconvincing when stated this way. A classic case of charlatan is to say that not-x leads to x, especially when he is making the claim that everyone before him got it wrong.

>The reasoning behind the terminology is that it can point to the phenomenon itself, without it getting concealed by the connotations of historical metaphysical terms.
It is also a classic tactic of people who swindle in their assumptions into a new term and then say others got it wrong, either before them or after them.

Like I said I'm sure Heidegger has something more to say, but so far what you told me about him doesn't exactly make me think that I should read him, too many red flags.

I'd probably need an exposition on how everyone else got it wrong before Heidegger but something tells me that I wouldn't find it convincing.

[Anonymous No.17403287]

>>17403147
>A classic case of charlatan is to say that not-x leads to x
He's not saying this, don't know what gave you that idea. He's saying that x leads to x.
>especially when he is making the claim that everyone before him got it wrong.
He doesn't say this either. He's pointing out that there was a shift in thinking between pre-Socratics and Plato that sent the history of philosophy down a certain path. So Heidegger's thinking isn't "modern" in this sense, rather it's "reactionary". He's trying to revive something that the Greeks understood at one point, that waned away and got lost. Read his etymological exposition of the Greek view of truth as unconcealment/unforgetting (aletheia/a-lethe), it's great.

[Anonymous No.17403306]

>>17403287
The x of scholastics and Greeks is clearly not the same x as of Descartes though.

[Anonymous No.17403337]

>>17403306
It's not literally the same, obviously. Then they would be saying exactly the same things. Think of it like fruits from the same tree.

[Anonymous No.17403424]

>>17403337
well the question would be whether they are in fact from the same tree. given for example scholastic distaste for descartes and cartesian dualism i dont think it would be fair to classify both as from the same tree

[Anonymous No.17404967]

>>17401303
>>17401333
>>17401348
>>17401374
>>17401431
>>17402137
None of these guys read sartre
he has different aims than heidegger and is more indebted to husserl than heidegger, closer to hegel.
one can easily apply the game of influence to heidegger to see that he was borrowing from hegel and lukács. The question of being is finally a mute point and a dead end by 1936, so he moves on to quietism and talkind of technology, going so far as to attribute subjectivism to nazism and nietszche as final metaphysician, in the end his priorities, and this is seen in letter on humanism are his own self-importance. sartre was not heideggerian and his existence is not ousia, the for-itself is as much a bursting forth of consciousness and the world itself as dasein. the presence to actualities or essences presuppose existence or human reality, in the sense that there has to be a subject to talk of object, even if the object precedes him, this temporality is structured as it is for someone. still, for sartre as a for-itself gets caught up in self-reflection (a dimension lacking in heidegger) to recover itself regarding its reasons and foundation. what sartre says is that this is impossible, man can never be whole. and this is the pre-ontological understanding of god, man's drive to be a causa sui. still he can never be a foundation to himself. metaphysics and god will still be inevitable. there is a cartesian element tht is balanced by giving up the spirit of seriousness and engaging with the world, and he in this part of the book decries the revolutionary for his spirit of seriousness. his philosophy leads to praxis, heidegger's to textualism or hermeneutics. heidegger skillfully tries to pass himself off as the origin of sartre's thoughts, but the problems of both are not the same. their common source are husserl and hegel.