What is the task of thinking that Heidegger talks about?

[Anonymous No.17831811]

In what way is it more difficult than philosophy?

[Anonymous No.17831862]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qouZC17_Vsg

[Anonymous No.17831890]

>>17831862
Sounds like confused doublethink imo

[Anonymous No.17832494]

>>17831890
Why?

[Anonymous No.17833036]

>>17831811
philosophy
>ooomg systems, epistemology, formal logic, look at that justification and grounding, look at that observationsproposition epiiiisch mein kamrat
>I fucking love arguments and debates and being right!! look at this sophistic diarrhea with fancy words to WIIIN!!!!
>ISSUES like ethics, abooortion and human rights bro I love ISSUES
>I fucking love teaching brats John Stuart Mill from a textbook to earn a wage!!
>gotta publish another paper in metametametaemetaethics, a new cool FIELD, this week!!

thinking
>poetic dwelling, gathering
>Dichtung
>listening to Being
>being quiet a lot of the time and being very careful with language
>Gelassenheit
>Destruktion and reinvigorating the classical tradition with new careful readings

[Anonymous No.17833051]

>>17832494
It sounds like he's trying to redefine "philosophy" and "thinking", and put better connotations on "thinking", because, if I'm not mistaken, he was against metaphysics and viewed it as confused (as many big time philosophers tend to conclude). So him trying to redefine the terms leads to confused doublethink because he's trying to push a falsehood, like winston pushing false historical nerrative.

But I'm no expert

[Anonymous No.17833086]

>>17833051
The pre-Socratics didn't do "philosophy", they thought and poeticised. There were no "standards" or norms of discourse for them as had been established by Plato for example. That is what Heidegger is going for.

[Anonymous No.17833148]

>>17833086
Late Heidegger acknowledged that Plato didn't make some all-encompassing mistake which doomed Western thought, and he didn't think the question of being had been "forgotten". And though with his thinking he saw a value into the various metaphysical philosophies over the ages, where from within the frame of metaphysics other metaphysics is either correct or false, he did not consider Plato as part of those metaphysicians, but rather as greater than the Presocratics.

[Anonymous No.17833197]

>>17833148
why did you reply to my post?

[Anonymous No.17833232]

Jesus this thread is a trainwreck.

Its pretty simple:
>think (v.)
Old English þencan "imagine, conceive in the mind; consider, meditate, remember; intend, wish, desire" (past tense þohte, past participle geþoht), probably originally "cause to appear to oneself," from Proto-Germanic *thankjan (source also of Old Frisian thinka, Old Saxon thenkian, Old High German denchen, German denken, Old Norse þekkja, Gothic þagkjan).

>philosophy (n.)
>c. 1300, philosophie, "knowledge, learning, scholarship, scholarly works, body of knowledge," from Old French filosofie "philosophy, knowledge" (12c., Modern French philosophie) and directly from Latin philosophia, from Greek philosophia "love of knowledge, pursuit of wisdom; systematic investigation," from philo- "loving" (see philo-) + sophia "knowledge, wisdom," from sophis "wise, learned;" a word of unknown origin [Beekes]. With many spelling variants in Middle English (filozofie, phelosophie, etc.).

Someone who can't think properly can still demonstrate good taste in philosophy. All he really has to do is follow the bouncing ball.

[Anonymous No.17833749]

>Nietzsche hat mich kaputt gemacht