/lit/ - Literature

[Anonymous No.18115105]

1000+ pages of obscure jargon just to get to simpleton conclusions like
>emotions are a way to see the truth
>we need a strong leader (wink wink) to reconnect the people with its history
>metaphysics leads to technology and therefore it is bad. I want to live in a greek polis.

[Anonymous No.18115110]

>>18115105
>I want to live in a greek polis

Based.

[Anonymous No.18115251]

and his moustache is unimpressive too

[Anonymous No.18115406]

>>18115251
This is the one thing I have alwqys admired on him

[Anonymous No.18115435]

>>18115105
Why is every single Heidegger thread made by some troglodyte who obvious never went through the trouble of actually reading Being and TIme?
If any of these points apply to Heidegger they are gross oversimplifications of what he believed.

[Anonymous No.18115465]

>>18115406
it's too short and narrow imo

[Anonymous No.18115475]

>>18115435
That is because the obscure and hard arguments are generally means to reach simple pre stablished conclusions
The emotions' conxlusion is in a short text named the conxept of truth iirc.
The strong leader is explicitly mentioned in his political theory.
Metaphysics and greek polis is all over his work.

[Anonymous No.18115729]

>>18115435
op is right

stay mad

[Anonymous No.18115886]

>>18115435
>some nazi intellectual craving for a jewess slut and a career in atheist academia has deep insight into human life

atheists are so pathetic for being desperate to hype their '''''''''''''''''''''''''''''thinkers''''''''''''''''''''''''''' post the french revolution.

[Anonymous No.18115928]

>>18115105
> metaphysics
by which he means
> principle of reason
> formal logic
> notion of causality
truely a subhuman. an entiy endowed with an IQ even lower than mrs. kahmahlah harrish, which i would have never thought to be possibile.

[Anonymous No.18115955]

>>18115251
also he was a restless manlet with brown, beady eyes and an awkwardly pointed skull. wouldn't bet 10€ on the aletheia of his registry data.

[Anonymous No.18116150]

>>18115105
What is this shit bait

[Anonymous No.18116264]

>>18115105
Unironically he goes through tortuous paths and uses esoteric terminology to say very straightforward things. Adorno too. And Hegel is the teacher of them all (Schopenhauer warned us about this).

[Anonymous No.18116283]

>>18116264
The reason Hegel does this is that if he stated clearly what he meant from the start it would be obvious that it is full of shit and absurd even to a child. Whereas the way he does it not only hides his bullshit but also makes it seem profound and the pseuds that parrot it also feel more intelligent. I assume the others are like that for the same reason.

[Anonymous No.18116335]

>>18116264
>Schopenhauer warned us about this
based.

[Anonymous No.18116362]

>>18116264
>>18116283
the worst thing of all is that I *have* read the PoS and BaT and secondary lit and I still find these post to be the most sensible objection to either.

[Anonymous No.18116375]

>>18116283
So what did he mean? Summarize it for us.

[Anonymous No.18116381]

>>18115105
this thread is full of midwits critcising authors they either never read, or did not put the effort to understand.
never change, /lit/

[Anonymous No.18116403]

>>18116375
Das Wahre ist das Ganse

[Anonymous No.18116426]

>>18116403
Was he just repeating Parmenides then?
Also, I'm pretty sure it should be "Ganze".

[Anonymous No.18116471]

>>18116426
>Also, I'm pretty sure it should be "Ganze".
No.

[Anonymous No.18116520]

>>18116264
This!

[Anonymous No.18116534]

>>18116403
>>18116471
basiert

[Anonymous No.18116547]

>>18115475
You need to fix your 'c' button. I'll mail you one if you want. Just stop typing 'conxept', I can't stand it

[Anonymous No.18116586]

>>18116426
This was my idea also. My takeaway from Hegel and Heidegger (and also Husserl even though he fell into the trap of positing a cogito in the end anyways) is that they reject the subject-object distinction as both arbitrary and not being the right premise to think of man in relation to the world. For Hegel man is involved with the world at the stage of spirit where the individual subordinates himself formally to the whole in an acting relationship ''handelen''. It's not entirely Parmenidean because as we all know, Hegels absolute is always becoming. For Heidegger man is born into an acting with the world also ''handelen'' where a thinking that posits a divide between himself and the objects is only a result of a disfunctional relationship with the world. This is not necessarily a bad thing and it is a consequence of the sentiment that gives rise to philosophy. This primary sentiment is for man's acting (as in fulfilling tasks) relationship with the world to be disturbed and become 'voor-handen' where it's considered as problematic is where man is confronted with nothingness, death as the passing of time, and a lack of insulation. Heidegger says we should confront ourselves with this nothingness and not make the mistake of distracting ourselves with positing a god into the void, or political ideals and what have you. This is why he said that the array of idols spiritual or political in the Weimar era and all the way into our times, are true nihilism.

[Anonymous No.18116606]

>>18116534
lol you didn't just make this did you? ahahaha

[Anonymous No.18117131]

>>18115105
>tfw most post-Enlightenment philosophy is just pre-Socratic ideas regurgitated in the most obtuse way possible
Why are G*rms and frogs like this?

[Anonymous No.18117407]

>>18116264
>Making itself intelligible is suicide for philosophy.
He should have said suicide for the philosophy professor. Gotta look smart and not offend the bosses.
And Schopenhauer is always right.

[Anonymous No.18117424]

>>18116264
>>18116283
Hegel is based. Get fucked you morons.

>>18116362
You're clearly not a deep thinker.

[Anonymous No.18117433]

>>18115105
His writings are kino and that's all that matters to me

[Anonymous No.18117451]

>>18116264
Who wouldn't want that? That's how you actually learn how to think. Simple spoon-fed statements with clarity do nothing but make you naively think that you know more than you do and that you have a solid objective understanding of what is around you.

[Anonymous No.18117775]

>>18116586
And yet he supported fascism so he could live in a polis and then regretted it not because it was amoral, since he said he wasn't a humanist, but because it didn't fulfill his polis ideal and used technology just as the urss and america.
Didn't he put this ideal into the void?

[Anonymous No.18117896]

>>18115105
sounds based

[Anonymous No.18118781]

>>18116534
Nice.

[Anonymous No.18119078]

When did this board become so full of midwits? I remember, for example, not too long ago most Nietzsche threads garnered some pretty good discussion but now it's nothing but shit bait and memes.

[Anonymous No.18120456]

>>18117775
he grew disappointed with NSDAP policy once the novelty of the early 30's wore off.

[Anonymous No.18120496]

>>18117451
>Who wouldn't want that?
people who don't lie to themselves

[Anonymous No.18120513]

>>18119078
The tranny janny actively bans anyone who makes it feel intellectually insecure.

I cant think of any other reason why a productive thread about crypto technology (including various essays, thesises, pdfs, and lots of healthy discussion) was deleted twice (and I've got a ban pending) but there are half a dozen frog threads on here.

This site has turned into an over-moderated shithole. Hiro needs to hold these janitors to some accountability. Whats the point of effort posting when it just gets you banned?

I swear this board actively bans people who actually contribute thoughtful discussion while having multiple dedicated trolls who only exist to gaslight and slide threads. Its time to find a new website I guess, it was fun while it lasted anyways.

[Anonymous No.18120533]

>>18119078
>>18120513
They also delete group project threads as advertising. Meanwhile there are a dozen copypasted race-baiting threads a day pushing the same five titles from big name publishers that are left untouched. I guess 4chan is just another curated propaganda site now, no wonder it doesn't produce OC any more.

[Anonymous No.18120573]

>>18120513
>>18120533
Notice they always hand out bans just long enough that they cant be appealed. Pretty pathetic, this website used to be on the cultural cutting edge and now its not even worth visiting.

[Anonymous No.18121613]

>>18115110
How is that based?

[Anonymous No.18121652]

>>18115105
This post is another entry in the interminable chain of people who are just smart enough to muddle through books and dumb enough to not understand why people write books. If the point of a book, especially a philosophy book, was to transmit a conclusion and nothing more, then OP would be right. However, abstracting the conclusion from the argumentation is useless, because it tells us nothing. Any statement taken aside from the process and argument which generated it is an empty statement.

"Metaphysics leads to technology." Yes, but what is metaphysics to Heidegger? What is technology? Why does he link the two? Why should we care? Questions like these are why people write books, and why people like OP will always be second-rate pseuds looking for fortune cookie philosophy.

[Anonymous No.18121661]

>>18121652
I'm looking to get into Heidegger, does he use "technology" in the same sense Spengler use "technics"?

[Anonymous No.18121683]

>>18121652
Not exactly, he sees "technology" as being one particular instantiation of the technological mindset, which is the real danger. In this mindset, the world of intelligibility and entities is "enframed" in such a way that everything appears as a resource to be tapped, everything is a standing reserve of things waiting to be put to use. A forest is no longer a forest, its just timber that we haven't gotten around to, or a national park that we haven't established yet so that productive workers can take their designated rest and recreation. Everything becomes countable and oriented towards productivity. The monolithic character of this thinking is particularly dangerous because it obscures its own origins, and we uncritically accept the premises that this is simply the world is, rather than one way of experiencing the world among others. The greater danger is that we will turn this way of looking at the world back on ourselves, and see the human essence as something to be managed and optimized like a natural resource. See: microdosing silicon valley employees taking nootropics and various transhumanist endeavors.

[Anonymous No.18121685]

>>18117451
>who wouldn't want obfuscated nonsense that can be effectively shortened so as not to waste hundreds of hours of study time which could be used doing something much more strenuous for the mind (like mathematics).

[Anonymous No.18121688]

>>18121661
Sorry, meant to respond to you >>18121683
here

[Anonymous No.18121705]

>>18116264
>(Schopenhauer warned us about this).
Based Schopenhauer keep winning.

[Anonymous No.18121834]

>Heidegger
>Schopenhauer
>Nietzsche
>Jung
Germany is a country of pseuds that will die suffocating on their own farts. Only Kant is slightly respectable.

[Anonymous No.18121842]

>>18115105
His shorter books are better. Check out the Letter on Humanism for example. Absolute masterpiece.

[Anonymous No.18121845]

>>18120573
Appeals don't work anyway.

[Anonymous No.18121848]

>>18121834
>Only Kant is slightly respectable.
>the Anglo Germ was right

[Anonymous No.18121861]

>>18121848
Unlike the others, he actually did real philosophy. Also I can't believe I neglected to mention Hegel but I guess chose to repress memory of him.

[Anonymous No.18121898]

>>18120513
See you tomorrow

[Anonymous No.18123017]

testerino