[ 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: 12 KB, 420x350, images-4.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
11266962 No.11266962 [Reply] [Original]

I didn't understand nothing about this fucker's view on ethics other than the attempt to connect ontology to an ethic system prior to ontology itself.
>Why is Heidegger so hard?
>I don't think anyone understands him at all, specially on this subject

>> No.11266980
File: 79 KB, 567x425, 1518680437083.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
11266980

nothing hard about authenticity vs Das Man, it's the easiest thing about his opus, you should have read more Nietzsche and Kierkegaard

>> No.11266991

>>11266980
I've read some Nietzsche, what's the relation?

>> No.11267008

>>11266991
Nietzsche's take on authenticity is to elevate oneself above others' herd animal morality, an atheistic reimagining of Kierkegaard. Both would agree that it's the individual's job is to take active part in the shaping of one’s beliefs and then to be willing to act on that belief.
>op in charge of existentialism

>> No.11267054

>>11267008
What's the difference, then, from them both?

>> No.11267317

>>11267054
For Kierkegaard, God, for Nietzsche the Eternal Return, for Heidegger authenticity begins with acknowledging the inevitability of your death, or being-toward-death. Death is nothing but the possibility of impossibility, when you can do nothing because all possibilities have been irreversibly exhausted. Because when you die it's not a random person that dies, it's you. Thou. Nobody else is going to experience thy death. Nobody can tell thee what's its like. Nobody dies in thy place, nobody but anon. Angst is what comes out of dreading death, and angst instead of being some pathology, for Heidegger is good because it allows authenticity: you stop Das Man from telling you how to live and distracting you from realizing that you still have time but it's limited, and ultimately explore your own possibilities while you still can. Being is time.

>> No.11267386
File: 296 KB, 750x300, jhali-yuga.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
11267386

>>11267317
Anon, if you aren't you should consider been teacher, mine on University couldn't be this clear. Thank you very much.

>> No.11267409

>>11267317
quality post

>> No.11267416

>>11267317
>>11267008
really nice but work that out without the individual

>> No.11267417

heidegger is a kike faggot

>> No.11267457

>>11267416
Because "I don't get Heidegger", or because you have a problem with the business of the individual out of non-Heideggerian philosophical reasons?

>> No.11267466

>>11267417
he had the opposite problem

>> No.11267477

Heidegger was a nazi and therefore anything he says is irrelevant. He was very racist and problematic.

>> No.11267484

>>11267477
he was fugging arendt

>> No.11267502
File: 393 KB, 490x462, 1525339260558.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
11267502

>>11267484

>> No.11267850
File: 1.10 MB, 480x384, 1524259878032.gif [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
11267850

>>11267477
And that's why he matters, fucking kike

>> No.11267862

>>11267317
good post

>> No.11267908

>>11267317
Appreciate this anon. Ive just started Heidegger and I have a few questions if you don't mind. Did Heidegger and Buber have any correspondence or influence on each other? Because they both use "thou" in very similar ways (although I don't think Buber's I is equitable to Being upon my first reading). And would you recommend the Zollikon seminars? It seems like it could be very useful to learn from Heidegger's own treatment of his work geared toward non specialists.

>> No.11267962
File: 1.47 MB, 5066x3540, D 14 Buber-Heidegger Ms Var 350 15 53 002.jpeg.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
11267962

>>11267908
First of all, I used "thou" in my post simply because I will never forgive the English language for forsaking the distinction between singular and plural pronouns, and here the distinction was of utmost importance. The recent trend of forgetting he and she for "they" when there is "it" as a gender-neutral pronoun that is applicable to babies (I wonder if anglos think babies are human beings...) doesn't seem to help. Throw in a pluralis maiestatis too, and English will complete its transformation into the language of herd animals, unable to tell self from herd, the anti-existentialist language.

Read this on Buber & Heidegger, it's a post-war thing, they met in person:
http://web.nli.org.il/sites/NLI/English/collections/personalsites/Israel-Germany/Division-of-Germany/Pages/Buber-Heidegger.aspx

I am utterly useless on the late Heidegger so I can't answer you on the Zollikon Seminar.

>> No.11268009

>>11267477
Kek

>> No.11268063

>>11267962
Thanks, I'll check this out when I'm off work. It's not just you, many translations of Heidegger use 'thou' in his papers.