Anyways, what are other people's most uninteresting philosopher/philosophy and why? — schopenhauer1
I didn't say you should implicate yourself.In other words, when one misunderstands it. — 180 Proof
The problem is the popular philosophers did something new and for this reason alone they can be deemed somewhat interesting. For me Heidegger is absolutely predictable and boring after reading one book I know them all, that's a style of philosophy easily replacable by chat gpt — Johnnie
Well, fwiw, I'd begin here ...I would love to hear your summation of Heidegger’s contribution to philosophy. — Joshs
I would love to hear your summation of Heidegger’s contribution to philosophy.
— Joshs
Well, fwiw, I'd begin here ...
https://thephilosophyforum.com/discussion/comment/790451
... and whose "thought" has engendered a few pseudo-intellectual (according to Chomsky et al) generations of "post-truth" p0m0 populism. No doubt, Heidi is very important but, imho, more as a negative example – how not to philosophize – than anything else — 180 Proof
I appreciate for the mention. Maybe my local public library will have a copy.Pretty much what Richard Wolin did in his Heidegger in Ruins book. — Joshs
Gladly. Here's some old posts ...I would love to hear your summary of Heidegger’s philosophy ...
I would love to hear your summary of Heidegger’s philosophy ...
Gladly. Here's some old posts — 180 Proof
↪180 Proof Thoughts on Husserl? I personally believe Heidegger, for the most part, hijacked Husserl's line of investigation and fixated on one tiny aspect of it effectively throwing the entire point of the phenomenology out of the window. I kind of think of it a little like the New Age movement hijacking Jung's work. The only difference being people took Heidegger seriously. — I like sushi
My criteria for uninteresting here:
1) The subject matter is small/pedantic/minutia-mongering
2) The answers to the problem are not new or informative but a rehash of what we already think, or a rehash of previous philosopher but in drag (e.g. We must take for granted certain things like "Other people exist" in order to move on with our language games.. this is already our common sense notion made writ large into a profound statement- Hinge propositions). — schopenhauer1
No doubt, Heidi is very important but, imho, more as a negative example – how not to philosophize – than anything else. — 180 Proof
The guy who said snow is white if and only if snow is white... That's like ... deep ... ya know... — Tobias
"What is the meaning of Being (orHeidggers' main question? — Tobias
:up: :up: Btw, I prefer Merleau-Ponty's phenomenology (and those variations derived from, or influenced by, it e.g. David Abram's ecophenomenology, enactivism, etc) to any other version including Husserl's which is much too Cartesian/idealist for me.I personally believe Heidegger, for the most part, hijacked Husserl's line of investigation and fixated on one tiny aspect of it effectively throwing the entire point of the phenomenology out of the window. — I like sushi
All the people marketing their niche topic (self help, self healing, self improvement etc) as being a way of life, a genuine philosophy. And are marketed thus as philosophers.My criteria for uninteresting here:
1) The subject matter is small/pedantic/minutia-mongering
2) The answers to the problem are not new or informative but a rehash of what we already think, or a rehash of previous philosopher but in drag — schopenhauer1
Or the worst philosophers.The most uninteresting philosopher/philosophy is interesting because they are (or it is) the most uninteresting philosopher/philosophy. — Agree-to-Disagree
"What is the meaning of Being (or Seyn)? I believe is Der Rektor-Führer's "main question"↪180 Proof ... At any rate, "why is there anything at all?" on my profile page is just a prompt, or TPF conversation starter – dismissal of the Leibnizian (ontotheo) fetish – and has never been my aporia¹. :smirk: — 180 Proof
Are you saying Heidegger’s main question is ‘ why is there something rather than nothing’? — Joshs
How often have you seen someone completely change their world views after exposure to a philosopher's ideas? — Tom Storm
It must happen. — Tom Storm
Are you saying Heidegger’s main question is ‘ why is there something rather than nothing’?
— Joshs
I do not know if it is 'the question'... it is his opener in his 'einführung in die Metaphysik" I believe... — Tobias
How does it come about that beings take precedence everywhere and lay claim to every "is," while that which is not a being - namely, the Nothing thus understood as Being itself- remains forgotten? How does it come about that with Being It is really nothing and that the Nothing does not properly prevail? (Introduction to What is Metaphysics?)
Anyone who's seen my posts know I am not a fan of Wittgenstein's philosophy as it seems to make common sense notions into philosophical "strokes of genius" (heavy on the quotes). — schopenhauer1
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.