[ 3 / biz / cgl / ck / diy / fa / ic / jp / lit / sci / vr / vt ] [ index / top / reports ] [ become a patron ] [ status ]
2023-11: Warosu is now out of extended maintenance.

/lit/ - Literature

View post   
File: 812 KB, 500x281, tumblr_lxsaoiVo9Z1r2ohozo1_500.gif [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
3618752 No.3618752 [Reply] [Original]

So im reading Being and Time and a friend of mine who has read it said Heidegger borrowed quite a bit from The Book of Tea.

Anyone read both works and have an opinion on this? Does it matter?

>> No.3618820

I read Heiddy and thought he was just a moron who used his shitty-made-up-words for something far more simpler. After reading some additional literature I realized what problems he is really discussing and that the man is a genius.

Seriously the man is next to Kant and Hegel with his heavy use of words.

tldr dont read Heidegger unless you have some philosophical insight

>> No.3618849
File: 152 KB, 1920x1080, 1358644312848.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
3618849

>>3618820
Im actually doing research on the book with a student of Gadamer, so I should have some insight at least through him.

What problems did you not notice at first and only later? Were you disregarding his idea of the ontological difference and thinking his definition of the ontical is all there really is, so all the problems dealing with his ontology are bs?

>> No.3618883

>>3618820
what was the additional literature you read??

>> No.3618890

Protip for reading Heidegger: try and read "meaning" every time it says "Being" (capital B). It often sorts out some of the confusion tr "what is this BS-iness"

>> No.3619316
File: 157 KB, 1440x900, 1358644606624.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
3619316

>>3618890
huh thats strange...

>> No.3619620

>>3618820
So I take it you have not read Aristotle's metaphysics. IN which case you had no business reading Heidegger.

>> No.3619713

>>3618890
.....That is utterly and completely NOT how to read Heidegger. His notion of Being is akin to Hegel in that it is a middle ground between Plato's Being and Aristotle's Becoming.

>>3619620
This anon is correct. You don't simply pick up Heidegger and start read or you will utterly fail to comprehend him. Same with Nietzsche; you need the Greek and Biblical context if you plan on actually understanding what he is trying to say.

>>3618849
Wasn't Paul Ricoeur a student of Gadamer? I am becoming a big fan of both Gadamer and Ricoeur, which means I sort of have to become a fan of Heidegger by default....