No Heidegger was simply saying something different, something that couldn't be reduced to Kantian/Husserlian "present-at-hand" ontology. Heidegger does not muddy present-at-hand ontology with existential concepts. You must understand this before you argue against him. His existential concepts have absolutely NOTHING to do with Kantian/Husserlian ontology!

It is interesting question though how the Heideggerian ontological existentials would "correspond" to Kantian epistemological categories. In some sense H. transforms Kant's epistemological transcendental subject into ontological being. So, Heidegger's project is from epistemology to ontology. Ontology (of dynamics (of "life")) with subject though (cf. early Husserl's intentionality + Dilthey's Life context (Lebenszusammenhang), Scheler's parallel project, Aristotle?) . Theoretically knowing subject becomes lived experience in the world. Husserl is hermeneutized and Dilthey ontologized (which results in "Existence" (Kierkegaard - Jaspers)). Existentials form the experience not to primarily produce "abstract" objects but significations or meaningful encounters in general. And everything happens or is "constituted" from "inside perspective" like in Kantian transcendental subject. Nothing is "created" here (idealism), there is always something already out there. This, which is out there encountered, becomes "interiorized" into a will driven world (Heidegger) not into a consciousness (Kant).

\As fantastic as he was a philosopher, it always feels he aimed to ultimately 'submit' philosophy to some kind of other (higher?) calling, and it comes off as though weighing down - like a weight attached to the ankle, as it were - the real and clearly discernable drive of philosophical creativity and vibrancy that courses through all of Heidegger. Heidegger makes philosophy feel like it ought to serve another master, than to buoy in its own autonomous beatitude. I find it a disquieting and ugly feeling. — StreetlightX

Heidegger the closet theologian? It's something I've been thinking about recently. There seems to be some theological work happening in the background of B&T.

I'm not sure he considered philosophy as the handmaiden to theology, something of the reversal of the Scholastic elevation of philosophy to revealed theology. He did see both as mortal enemies.

Whatever "higher calling" he had in mind, certainly has a mystical element to it. I can certainly see why there would be hostility to this because there seems to be some religious trappings around the sort of "secular mysticsm" of Heidegger's philosophy.

Heidegger was the goth kid who got philosophical.

One of the more devastating charges against Heidegger's whole project was Levinas's, for whom "Dasein in Heidegger is never hungry" — StreetlightX

I'm not sure I understand Levinas' criticism here. Hunger would be an ontical affair, and not something ontological. I'm not sure why an ontology of Dasein would have to account for being hungry.

Macrosoft
Try this !

https://www.learnoutloud.com/Podcast-Directory/Philosophy/Philosophers/Heidegger-Podcast/24272

I found it excellent.
(Skip the intro ...40mins or so....about the course literature and attendence. Lecture 1)