Searle, and Deasy, may be buffoons, but doing thought-laps around them doesn't change squat) — csalisbury
This is also the problem of addiction in general: problem is (this kind of) thinking can justify itself as Poetry (it isn't) in a more convincing way than other addictions. — csalisbury
Define addiction generally as: 'a defense against change' and you can go a long way in understanding why a certain kind of thought endlessly renews itself. — csalisbury
Why does Ulysses (or Portrait of The Artist) work? Because Joyce doesn't edit out Stephen's earlier confusions, he works them into everything that comes after, as essential. — csalisbury
:death: :flower:We do not belong to those who only get their thoughts from books, or at the prompting of books,-it is our custom to think in the open air, walking, leaping, climbing, or dancing on lonesome mountains by preference, or close to the sea, where even the paths become thoughtful. Our first question concerning the value of a book, a man, or a piece of music is : Can it walk? or still better: Can it dance? — F.N.,The Gay Science
I just thought I'd throw out there that as I recall, there is a footnote to the Stambaugh translation of BT in which Heidegger 'approves' of Nietzsche's characterization of being as a 'vapor' - I don't have a copy in front of me so can't cite the exact page/passage but thought it might be of interest.Heidegger discusses "being" a lot where Nietzsche thought it was a "vapor" and "mistake" --
I just thought I'd throw out there that as I recall, there is a footnote to the Stambaugh translation of BT in which Heidegger 'approves' of Nietzsche's characterization of being as a 'vapor' - I don't have a copy in front of me so can't cite the exact page/passage but thought it might be of interest. — Kevin
Elaborate please. — 180 Proof
He believes being is that on the basis of which we define ourselves and everything else in the world, and that although the question has been forgotten we still walk around with a "pre-ontological understanding of being" - — Xtrix
It intrigues me that someone like Heidegger could focus so fiercely on this idea that forms the basis of everything he thought and then either find that engaging with the Nazis was the logical consequence or live a life completely contrary to the philosophy he worked so hard at. — Brett
But I don't fully understand what you mean by "contrary to the philosophy he worked so hard at." Heidegger has no ethical philosophy, really. Later Heidegger is preoccupied with language, technology, and poetry -- but never ethics. — Xtrix
Exactly. For all his oompah oompah on "the question of the meaning of being" (or, according to Rorty, "myth of being"), Heidi's daseinanalysis is as autistic as it is solipsistic - I agree with the critical observations of Karl Löwith, Theodor Adorno, Emmanuel Levinas, Hannah Arendt, Walter Kaufmann, George Steiner, et al - which makes his indefensible political "stupidity" somewhat intelligible.In some ways I can see that being the grounds for people rejecting him and his work; not because he worked with the Nazis but that it blew back on the grounds [of] his thinking and writing. — Brett
He believes being is that on the basis of which we define ourselves and everything else in the world, and that although the question has been forgotten we still walk around with a "pre-ontological understanding of being" - which has gone through many variations (creature of God, a subject with desires to satisfy, etc) but which has remained Greek through and though. — Xtrix
Ja. Gelassenheit :point: 'Scheiße-sein'.[Heidegger] ended up recognizing that he had been unable to give an explanation of the problem of Being. So much effort and so much praise [of] Hitler for nothing. — David Mo
Those who know that they are profound strive for clarity. Those who would like to seem profound to the crowd strive for obscurity. For the crowd believes that if it cannot see to the bottom of something it must be profound. It is so timid and dislikes going into the water. — F.N., The Gay Science
I have no way of, or interest in, judging him, except in how it might happen. Someone who seems so tuned into the blinkers we apply to ourselves and yet went wrong himself and then later regarded what he’d done as stupid (I can’t remember the exact words). — Brett
In some ways I can see that being the grounds for people rejecting him and his work; not because he worked with the Nazis but that it blew back on the grounds for his thinking and writing. — Brett
For all his oompah oompah on "the question of the meaning of being" (or, according to Rorty, "myth of being"), Heidi's daseinanalysis is as autistic as it is solipsistic — 180 Proof
But he ended up recognizing that he had been unable to give an explanation of the problem of Being. — David Mo
In my modest opinion neither he nor those who followed him were able to give an explanation of the fundamental concepts of his doctrine — David Mo
impossible to fully understand ten pages in a row of Being and Time. — David Mo
Those who know that they are profound strive for clarity. Those who would like to seem profound to the crowd strive for obscurity. For the crowd believes that if it cannot see to the bottom of something it must be profound. It is so timid and dislikes going into the water. — F.N., The Gay Science
Unable to give an explanation? I've tried a number of times, and I'm happy to answer any questions. It's not so difficult to do once you've gotten into his funny language. — Xtrix
Sure, but the problem is that Nietzsche is perfectly understood (sometimes more than his fans would like) and Heidegger is not. What's more, Heidegger uses a few resources to provoke darkness, not lightness, which could be shared by any esoteric sect guru. For example, a specific jargon that is never clearly defined and that provokes endless discussions among his followers about what the master said. You know, "that seeing they may see and not perceive, and hearing they may hear and not understand, lest they should be converted and their sins forgiven!" (Mark 4:12).Those who know that they are profound strive for clarity. Those who would like to seem profound to the crowd strive for obscurity. For the crowd believes that if it cannot see to the bottom of something it must be profound. It is so timid and dislikes going into the water. — F.N., The Gay Science
"The clarity. The clarity of the explainable, of the indubitable, of what results from avoiding contradiction, is not in its essence any clarity, because it can only shine where darkness is and where it forces as a foundation of thinking, that is, where darkness does not disappear with clarity, but unfolds". — Martin Heidegger, Cuadernos Negros, Editorial Trotta, 2017
What he'd done -- meaning joining the Nazi party or his earlier work? Because neither is true. He infamously never apologized for being part of the Nazi party, although he once referred to it (in a letter I believe) as a "blunder." — Xtrix
In some ways I can see that being the grounds for people rejecting him and his work; not because he worked with the Nazis but that it blew back on the grounds for his thinking and writing.
— Brett
In what way? I'm not sure exactly what you mean here. — Xtrix
But he never said clearly what that stupidity consisted of. He never disavowed the assumptions of his philosophy that led him to that "stupidity". He never denied the political basis that led him to glorify Hitler and his party. He always abhorred the Jews, communism and democracy.He is quoted as saying it was “The greatest stupidity of his life”. — Brett
Get involved in philosophical discussions about knowledge, truth, language, consciousness, science, politics, religion, logic and mathematics, art, history, and lots more. No ads, no clutter, and very little agreement — just fascinating conversations.