[ 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: 59 KB, 342x500, image.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
4148018 No.4148018 [Reply] [Original]

What does /lit/ think of Buber?

>> No.4148023

that book is fantastic and changed the way i think

>> No.4148028

I'm a beluber

>> No.4148105

>>4148028
10/10

>> No.4148241

I have a book of his. On the first page I write down the names and dates of all the girls I've kissed (it was about how you can only know god through experiencing life or whatever so I found it fitting when I started it).

>> No.4148293

>>4148241
When I read this post a little voice in the back of my head says "Kill yourself."

>> No.4148422

>>4148018
I recently read I and Thou, I really enjoyed it. It reminded me a little bit of Levinas, I wonder if there was a connection beyond oth of them being jewish philosophers

>> No.4148592

>>4148422
Major connections, really, in terms of ideas. I seem to remember Levinas explicitly responding to some of Buber's ideas in Totality and Infinity. It's been a while since I've tried reading T&I, though, so I can't remember for sure. (That book was a bit beyond me.)

>> No.4148611

>>4148592
Fuck it, I've dredged up the reference:
>Buber distinguished the relation with Objects, which would be guided by the practical, from the dialogic relation, which reaches the other as Thou, as partner and friend. This idea, central in his work, he modestly claims to have found in Feuerbach. In reality it acquires all its force only in Buber's analyses, and it is in them that it figures as an essential contribution to contemporary thought. One may, however, ask if the thou-saying does not place the other in a reciprocal relation, and if this reciprocity is primordial. On the other hand, the I-Thou relation in Buber retains a formal character: it can unite man to things as much as man to man.

>> No.4148616

>>4148611
(continued)
> The I-Thou formalism does not determine any concrete structure. The I-Thou is an event, a shock, a comprehension, but does not enable us to account for (except as an aberration, a fall, or a sickness) a life other than friendship: economy, the search for happiness, the representational relation with things. They remain, in a sort of disdainful spiritualism, unexplored and unexplained. This work does not have the ridiculous pretension of "correcting" Buber on these points. It is placed in a different perspective, by starting with the idea of the Infinite.
To be honest, I'm not sure how convincing I find Levinas's argument here.

>> No.4148836
File: 144 KB, 295x350, 1362731508957.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
4148836

Hmmm let me Wikipedia this guy...

>"Buber was an Austrian-born Israeli Jewish philosopher"

seems suspicious already....let see what else

>In 1902 Buber became the editor of the weekly Die Welt, the central organ of the Zionist movement.

uhhhh....

>> No.4148843

>>4148836
he was actually a hardcore leftist, advocating for a very peculiar kind of bi-national zionism.

>> No.4148915

>>4148592
i rarely read such convoluted mess as t&u. why will I not kill in the face of the other? what is the face of the other even ought to be? why won't i lie? the book is a terrible mess and made shun all french philosophy.
>>4148836
you only read hitler and ahmad sheykh yassin?
>>4148843
he is indeed an idol for some neonazis because he was sinewhat sceptical about zionism BEFORE the Germans tried to kill them all.
he change his mind. read his exchange with gandhi for his post-war views.

>> No.4149095

>>4148915
>Germans tried to kill them all

So, is /lit/ not supportive of historical revisionism?

>> No.4149097

>>4149095
rephrase

>> No.4149103

>>4149097
Is /lit/ skeptical of stock textbook material? Does your judement rest upon the state of the debate concerning the subject or upon the standardised historical establishment?

>> No.4149158

>>4149103
gb2 /pol/ skinhed

>> No.4149187

That book was assigned to me at uni in one of my philosophy classes. I like Philosophy OP, but I could not read that book. I tried. I just could. not. do. it.

Maybe if I knew German and gave it a shot in the original language? I don't know. I remember that Buber prefaced the edition I read with an apology for his writing style. He said it was written in like 1 sitting in "a fit of passion" and it shows. I remember finding that preface very intelligible and not altogether unpleasant, but as for the rest of the book... I felt like it was gibberish.

I can't judge the ideas contained within since I didn't read the book. He probably makes some good points since people feel the need to assign him in uni. The lectures on him were utterly forgettable too. Though I think that probably had more to do with the fact that my professor gave zero fucks for that semester. I remember he was a no show for the first day because his mother had died just days before. The class was titled "God and persons," but NOT ONCE did was the concept of personhood even mentioned! Instead the class was themed around "the meaning of life." ...yeah he was totally just mourning his mother that whole semester.

>> No.4149259

>>4149158
>I'm a moron incapable of rational argument
Heh.

>> No.4149274

>>4149187
which book are you talking about?
t. German. I'm always on the watch for joos.