Home | Community | Message Board

Original Seeds Store
This site includes paid links. Please support our sponsors.


Welcome to the Shroomery Message Board! You are experiencing a small sample of what the site has to offer. Please login or register to post messages and view our exclusive members-only content. You'll gain access to additional forums, file attachments, board customizations, encrypted private messages, and much more!

Shop: Unfolding Nature Unfolding Nature: Being in the Implicate Order   Kraken Kratom Red Vein Kratom   PhytoExtractum Buy Bali Kratom Powder

Jump to first unread post Pages: 1 | 2 | Next >  [ show all ]
InvisibleKurt
Thinker, blinker, writer, typer.

Registered: 11/26/14
Posts: 1,688
Heidegger's Spiral
    #22090926 - 08/14/15 12:08 PM (8 years, 5 months ago)

A notion which I have been after for a long time, for instance, lately in stoicism, is an alternative to doing metaphysics; a philosophy based in existence.

The question I often come to in the past is whether "existential" philosophy is merely a derivative, psychological trope, or if it is genuine philosophy. I wouldn't deny psychological aspects, but I think it is something else that philosophers may describe in the temperament and character of "being" as well. That is what I'd like to attempt to characterize here, in a reading of the 20th century philosopher Martin Heidegger.

Heidegger famously based his philosophy in existence. As I understand, this was not just taking the idea of existence for granted (as what merely "stands out"), but also delving into its "issue", in a broad sense.

Namely Dasein is "existence"; Heidegger wrote in his native german; it is "being there", or more or less transparently,  "the being for which being is an issue to it." "Dasein" or existence is namely what provides the impetus and apparent accessibility to the more profound questions about existence. 

A character of "existence" we often refer to today anyway, arose out of a general theoretical investigation of the question of being, according to Heidegger. Existence, is based on the impetus to ontology (an understanding of being). And as he wrote in Being and Time, ontology itself is an old tradition of thinking. Heidegger's tack in a contemporary world, was noting the importance of the question of being, and also that when we involve ourselves with a question of being, there needed to be a different approach than the traditional one of western ontologists, of just looking to the referent in general (Aristotle's being qua being was namely "the being of "beings").

"Being is not something like a being" Heidegger writes:

Quote:

The first philosophical step in understanding the problem of being consists in avoiding the mython tina diegeisthai, in "not telling a story", that is, not determining beings as beings by tracing back their origins to another being - as if being had the character of a possible being. As what is asked about, being thus requires its own kind of demonstration which is essentially different from the discovery of beings.





Heidegger claims we have to "formulate" the question of being, and indeed seemingly embody ontology at the same time, as an everyday or average understanding of being; which: is Dasein, as described, the being for whom being is an issue to it.

The main part of Heidegger's work, in trying to access this "fundamental" ontology, is articulating what would be found in relative lucidity, only practically accessible as the hermeneutic circle, or the circularity of Dasein, which bears an "interpretation" of being. This perhaps, in the existence of Dasein, would be a clarification, that Dasein could assume an alternative to leveling to "average everydayness" of temperment. Though we may go in circles, Heidegger insists, if we are clear, the question of being is not circular, in that:

Quote:


"Circular reasoning" does not occur in the question of the meaning of being. Rather there is a notable "relatedness backward or forward" of what is asked about (being) to asking as a mode of being of a being. The way what is questioned essentially engages our questioning belongs to the innermost meaning of the question of being"





This embodied way of being is not just accessed for whatever reason, but ostensibly based on the formulation of fundamental ontology:

Quote:

"We do not know what "being" means. But already when we ask, "what is being?" we stand in an understanding of the is without being able to determine conceptually what the "is" means. We do not even know the horizon upon which we are supposed to grasp and pin down the meaning. This vague and average understanding of being is a fact. No matter how much this understanding wavers and fades, and borders on being mere verbal knowledge this indefiniteness of the understanding of being that is always already available is itself a phenomenon that needs elucidation."





Even if it may be taken as psychological relativity, or as it's point of access, and there is no other discrete proposition, (the question of being is not a proposition) in all this, the ontological priority of Dasein may be considered crucial. The interpretability of existence is found in openness, even if in our society says that is broached in a certain way.

So besides this "point", this is what I am saying here in a provisional way. Clearly, it is mainly thanks to Heidegger influence, that among other things, "existential" not only describes a quality of existence, but the move from the priority of theory to embodying a temperment in general, in a generally positive sense. That is the "back and forth", the spiral of the hermeneutic circle, in existence.

The question of this thread, is partly topical. Why does the term or idea "existential", at face value have a certain implied notion to it? Heidegger indeed was to speak extensively about angst, the apprehension of being towards death, but what is significant about his "existentialism" was this was significantly in balance with the projected means and ends of human beings in general, such as his goals in Being and Time of finding clarity in the projected goal of fundamental ontology.

I think this balance that Heidegger sought, is something often missed by existentialism, or the merely psychological theory. Typically, we take the broaching or "interrogation" of dasein as departure, but existential analysis is not about that, at all in Heidegger's writing (Nor is it about free floating relativism either.)

Maybe this is a commentary on Heidegger, more than anything in general. I am reading from the introduction of Being and Time here.

What I would say is generally possible to extrapolate though. There is clearly a correspondence between the theoretical formulation (an involvement with the question of being, or ontology), and embodied Dasein, the being for which being is an "issue". We might for instance extrapolate the relation as "existence", in some relation to "essence" of being.

Sartre, for instance, described this relation, as one where "existence precedes essence", in his essay Existentialism is a Humanism. Heidegger felt that this was a misunderstanding, and misinterpretation of his problematic, namely in its means and ends. His response was found in his openLetter on Humanism".

That would have to be looked at closely. But apparently enough, elsewhere Heidegger's inclinations are generally clear: He did not find "existence" to be a simple expository maxim to interpret through, nor at the same time, was he the despairing type:

“If I take death into my life, acknowledge it, and face it squarely, I will free myself from the anxiety of death and the pettiness of life - and only then will I be free to become myself.”
 
In any case, I believe its useful to consider that what we call "existential" arose as describing an approximated "character" or "quality" of being, as existence. Heidegger did not complete his projected fundamental ontology in the end, however, so what is there to say? Whether or not we take Heidegger's notions seriously, we can presently wonder: why does "existential" in this sense that it is often referred to, refer to a character or quality?

The answer could maybe be put in his own proposed terms, provisionally (whether fundamentally worked out or not): Existence or existentialism describes a quality, because it is a temperment or way of being, and that may be something in different ways, which is more or less authentic.


Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Offlinefalcon
 User Gallery


Registered: 04/01/02
Posts: 8,005
Last seen: 1 day, 3 minutes
Re: Heidegger's Spiral [Re: Kurt] * 1
    #22091692 - 08/14/15 03:27 PM (8 years, 5 months ago)

Heidegger, it is what it is, because of its isness. There seems to be no handles to grab hold of when he writes it's all self referential. I don't know, maybe in German it makes more sense.


Extras: Filter Print Post Top
InvisibleKurt
Thinker, blinker, writer, typer.

Registered: 11/26/14
Posts: 1,688
Re: Heidegger's Spiral [Re: falcon]
    #22091964 - 08/14/15 04:43 PM (8 years, 5 months ago)

He was something for sure. Have you tried any of his essays?

I took a seminar in college and at the time it was all basically impossible to me. I felt like an idiot making presentations, and I should have failed, but I think the professor was being kind to me.

Since then I have gone back to Heidegger many times and made some progress, and I can actually kind of get it. Actually, it became pretty much life forming for me even. I still have quite a bit of difficulty though, of course.

As far as I can see, with Heidegger there seems to be all these layers of analysis that refer to being. He seems to ask in so many cases for the reader to see through these layers, or really live through the layers of being, (or perhaps as he puts it, to "interrogate" dasein) as he suggests we can see and possibly understand being, through this somehow. The question seems to be; how is there something significantly "there", a point of reference, if we just see through or transcend (in one way or another) our way through being?

I don't know anything about the German language per se other than what I've glossed in reading and learned from friends. You can see how the language itself is in so many cases cramming this and that together (those huge words) making it very partial to neologistic constructs, which Heidegger makes ample usage of. I think even Germans held Heidegger to be a little weird, by the way. Heidegger is Heidegger, probably no escaping that.

We have some of the same things going on in English though anyway.

The term german term Da-sein, "there-being" is what we Anglos apparently interpret "existence". And to ex-ist means literally to stand out. That is definitely the grapple point for Heidegger, and it could be for us.

For example, if existence stands out (we even describe what it is to be existential, as despair or anxious, for some reason) then a large part of a tradition of philosophy asks what is essence? Do we consider essences as possible today?

These of course would be attempts at thoughtful provisions. I'd say the language is essential...but also pragmatic. Yeah, I dunno; Heidegger's going to be Heidegger.


Extras: Filter Print Post Top
OfflineKickleM
Wanderer
 User Gallery

Registered: 12/16/06
Posts: 17,856
Last seen: 1 hour, 14 minutes
Re: Heidegger's Spiral [Re: Kurt] * 2
    #22092395 - 08/14/15 07:01 PM (8 years, 5 months ago)

I think your questions are pretty interesting. Hell, I think any investigation of existence is going to be an interesting rabbit hole.

I'm not quite sure how to approach such a topic. I guess with my own frame of reference, what else?

I've come to view existence from a Buddhist point of view over time. As stated in the heart sutra, "Emptiness is form and form is emptiness." The meaning of which could ramble on for as long as any philosophical text you can muster. But in relation to your questions about Heidegger, this is how I relate.

Heidegger seems to have been trying to dig into existence, below the surface of what we see, below the broad conventional characteristics. To not buy into the labels of existence but instead to actively try and grok what existence itself is, prior to these labels being slapped on. This IMO is what emptiness embodies in Buddhism. Emptiness is existence stripped back as far as possible. It is taught through an examination of existence that leaves a distinct sense that there is a lack of a root cause, a root source; an origin. A lack of an underlying base, of solid ground, of concreteness. And so existence can be seen as empty of all this presumed solidity.

But of course to discuss the term "empty" there is an attempt to express something concrete! Much as I take you are describing occurs with the word existence.

A philosophy can spend so much time trying to show that a term doesn't mean x, y, or z, only to then, in attempting to communicate clearly, become Q! And thusly negate the whole point of negation!

I dunno, I think it's all a good laugh personally.


--------------------
Why shouldn't the truth be stranger than fiction?
Fiction, after all, has to make sense. -- Mark Twain


Extras: Filter Print Post Top
InvisibleDividedQuantumM
Outer Head
Male User Gallery

Registered: 12/06/13
Posts: 9,819
Re: Heidegger's Spiral [Re: Kurt] * 1
    #22092413 - 08/14/15 07:06 PM (8 years, 5 months ago)

I am enjoying this thread.  Sometimes I have to wonder whether some of the philosophers got too deep into playing word-games with themselves, almost to the point of being drunk on them.  Sometimes for me, it's when the words go away that I really begin to appreciate being.


--------------------
Vi Veri Universum Vivus Vici


Extras: Filter Print Post Top
InvisibleKurt
Thinker, blinker, writer, typer.

Registered: 11/26/14
Posts: 1,688
Re: Heidegger's Spiral [Re: Kickle]
    #22093210 - 08/15/15 12:47 AM (8 years, 5 months ago)

In my closet I found a stack of some old notes and printouts including this extract of a dialogue on language...


Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Offlinefalcon
 User Gallery


Registered: 04/01/02
Posts: 8,005
Last seen: 1 day, 3 minutes
Re: Heidegger's Spiral [Re: Kurt]
    #22093802 - 08/15/15 07:22 AM (8 years, 5 months ago)

I've looked at some of his essays, it's not that he doesn't make sense, it's that he never comes to any conclusions that stick. It's sort of like a kid that's relating a story more for your attention than to convey any meaning. And then, and then, and then and so on.


Extras: Filter Print Post Top
OfflineMarkostheGnostic
Elder
Male User Gallery


Registered: 12/09/99
Posts: 14,279
Loc: South Florida Flag
Last seen: 3 years, 2 days
Re: Heidegger's Spiral [Re: Kurt]
    #22094445 - 08/15/15 10:59 AM (8 years, 5 months ago)

Coincidentally, I picked up Heidegger's Being and Time last night, about 2:00 a.m., for the 3rd time in my life, determined to finish the tome this time. I need to begin at the beginning again however. I was inspired by having read Irrational Man by William Barrett. You appear to have a better feel for his writing style than I do. It would be immensely important to be conversant in German, and I am not. Western treatment of Being, after Plato and Plotinus, and Christian theology always took a back seat to Indian thought on the matter for me, which was always far less prosaic than Heidegger or Hegel for that matter. I feel a need to challenge myself at this point while so many of my contemporaries prefer to sit back and allow their 'thinking function' to become fallow. So, I appreciate the topic. :thumbup:


--------------------
γνῶθι σαὐτόν - Gnothi Seauton - Know Thyself


Edited by MarkostheGnostic (08/15/15 11:11 AM)


Extras: Filter Print Post Top
InvisibleKurt
Thinker, blinker, writer, typer.

Registered: 11/26/14
Posts: 1,688
Re: Heidegger's Spiral [Re: MarkostheGnostic]
    #22097389 - 08/16/15 02:47 AM (8 years, 5 months ago)

Nice. Definitely hope you'll share any thoughts you have, if you get a chance. I am surprised how much it has begun to help to hash through things a bit through writing.

Kickle indeed gestured to an eastern correspondence, Falcon will take some convincing, while DQ seems to be along for the ride...

The question we have thus far arrived at. Is it possible to read Heidegger?

Just kidding. I think we are all wondering what "existence" is, if we have stumbled on Heidegger in one way or another.


Extras: Filter Print Post Top
InvisiblehTx
(:
Male User Gallery


Registered: 03/27/13
Posts: 5,724
Loc: Space-time
Re: Heidegger's Spiral [Re: Kurt]
    #22097483 - 08/16/15 03:49 AM (8 years, 5 months ago)

I've never read Heidegger but I'm sure I am familiar with his ideas.

If we are talking about being then we all are. :wink:

seems to be that being may be a bit of a paradox in that while being is, it at the same time isnt.

There seems to be an information trade-off, an awareness of experience before the experience -

And this awareness exists in all beings as being.

or something like that.


--------------------
zen by age ten times six hundred lifetimes
Light up the darkness.


Extras: Filter Print Post Top
InvisiblehTx
(:
Male User Gallery


Registered: 03/27/13
Posts: 5,724
Loc: Space-time
Re: Heidegger's Spiral [Re: hTx]
    #22097512 - 08/16/15 04:14 AM (8 years, 5 months ago)

And yet, how strange to even exist at all. That there is something rather than nothing -- and that this something is so intimate with being.
Even if we take everything away as in John C Lillys isolation chambers, there is that little bit of something.

Even if we remove every particle in any given area, there still exists the higgs-field...

There still exists!

Why?

Because absolute 'nothing' is equivalent to infinity, and due to infinities structure -- something is going to happen eventually and that eventuality is existence.

And in beings case, experience.


--------------------
zen by age ten times six hundred lifetimes
Light up the darkness.


Extras: Filter Print Post Top
OfflineMarkostheGnostic
Elder
Male User Gallery


Registered: 12/09/99
Posts: 14,279
Loc: South Florida Flag
Last seen: 3 years, 2 days
Re: Heidegger's Spiral [Re: Kurt] * 2
    #22098286 - 08/16/15 10:42 AM (8 years, 5 months ago)

Heidegger is labelled an atheist, but so are Buddhists. This doesn't mean that both do not acknowledge the presence of Ultimate Reality, just that they do not want to cast it in mythic and poetic words like "In the beginning God created the heavens and the earth..." This too is a metaphysical statement, but there are so many things that do not satisfy the intellect, that it is a statement that is read literally by children and fundamentalist Jews and Christians. The first word of the Torah, of which Genesis 1:1 is the first of 5 books, is the word "in." This little word is called the Bereshith in Hebrew and can be translated "at/in [the] head," according to Wiki. To me this always elicited a sense of "once upon a time" as fairytales often begin and additionally, about a point in time long ago. But in the exegesis of scriptures, there is the linguistic device of Pardes (PRDS), which means 'orchard,' but translates to our word paradise. Each of the 4 letters refers to a level of interpretation of scriptures:

P - Peshat - Literal
R - Remez - Allegorical/Symbolic
D - Darash - Midrashic/Comparative
S - Sod      - Mystical/Esoteric

It is the Sod interpretation that carries the metaphysical meaning of scriptures. And "In the beginning" can mean 'to begin with,' in the sense of laying down an a priori that is simply accepted on faith. In the Tenach, that a priori is called God in English. The Hebrew name for God in this affirmation is Elohim, which the -im ending suggests plurality of the masculine noun. Esoteric Judaism (Kabbalah) reads its 10 sephiroth or spheres of divine attributes into this. Christian theology has frequently read trinitarian notions into this, but both of these idiosyncratic theologies have one thing in common. That is, that the Being of God (Being in Heidegger and others), is not some monolithic 'oneness.' I am reminded of a memorable passage in Huston Smith's now classic book The Religions of Man where he is referring to Christian author C.S. Lewis:

"Professor Lewis tells us that while he was a child his parents kept admonishing him not to think of God in terms of any form, for these could only limit his infinity. He tried his best to heed their instructions, but the closest he could come to the idea of a formless God was an infinite sea of grey tapioca.”

I had this vision myself the 3rd time I took LSD with a friend on a gray drizzly November Saturday morning, while lying on my back gazing into the sky, allowing my eyes to focus on infinity, like the little ∞ that one finds on decent 35 mm camera lens cases. I 'saw God' in that practice, or so it powerfully occurred to me. :lol: But the point I want to make besides extracting the philosophical metaphysics of Being from the mytho-poetic language of the Tenach, is that Being must suggest more than stasis in its nature, but also  potential for Becoming (creation). The Buddhists remind us that anything which becomes, unbecomes. Temporal being is temporary, being becomes non-being. Heidegger apparently wants to define human beinghood as completely temporal.

My whole life I have endeavored to find a metaphysical identity in Being, not just as psychophysical existence. An experience 3 years after the one mentioned above illuminated the New Testament "I AM" statements of Jesus in the New Testament with my personal identity vanishing, but a self-effulgent plenum-void of "unbearable compassion" and sapphire light (sephira/sephiroth  in the Hebrew meaning sapphire). It was simultaneously an experience of the Clear Light of the Void and an experiencial understanding of the Great Mantra OM MANI PADME HUM, when the Infinite Plenum-Void retracted into an Infinitesimal Bindu or Jewel of piercing "unbearable compassion" in a center which became my Heart. The conclusion was that 'each' of us IS that Eternal Being, Eternal Light, Love that becomes hoodwinked into erroneously believing that we are this or that individual. It's 'God' or Being playing pee-a-boo with creation, through created beings, each to its capacity. But when individual identity (temporal being) dissolves at death (or even ego-death), there is the familiarity of who we (as human beings) are, awakening to our true identity as Being itself. As poet Percy Bysshe Shelly put it:

"Life, like a dome of many-coloured glass, stains the white radiance of Eternity."

Now, I have only begun to read Heidegger, but I have been much influenced by mystics, many of whom held theistic views. Jacob Boehme wrote that God is a "Coincidentia Oppositorum," a coincidence of opposites. "Being and Nothingness" were written as "Byss and Abyss." One of my agendas is to see if Heidegger's conclusions about Being are at loggerheads with the most mystical experiences of my life. Ultimately, his intellection on the matter (and everyone else's West or East) will not negate the telling mystical/gnostic experiences that have informed me and influenced my values about how to 'Be' in the world. There is that meme these days which says that 'religion is faith in someone else's experience, but spirituality is based on one's own experience.' There is truth in that meme despite the adjurations Christian and Buddhist about devilish delusions (Satan appearing as "an angel of light"), or of nimittas (signs, illuminations) in Buddhism which should be dismissed as makyo (illusion). I do not expect at this point in life to end up a Nihilist, which is a stage I certainly passed through as a late teen. But my thoughts have roamed far and wide here. 'nuff said.


--------------------
γνῶθι σαὐτόν - Gnothi Seauton - Know Thyself


Extras: Filter Print Post Top
InvisibleKurt
Thinker, blinker, writer, typer.

Registered: 11/26/14
Posts: 1,688
Re: Heidegger's Spiral [Re: MarkostheGnostic]
    #22104329 - 08/17/15 08:21 PM (8 years, 5 months ago)

American Professor on Hubert Dreyfus on Heidegger (Metaphysics, phenomenology, contemporary philosophy - 7 minutes)



Extras: Filter Print Post Top
OfflineMarkostheGnostic
Elder
Male User Gallery


Registered: 12/09/99
Posts: 14,279
Loc: South Florida Flag
Last seen: 3 years, 2 days
Re: Heidegger's Spiral [Re: Kurt]
    #22106578 - 08/18/15 12:24 PM (8 years, 5 months ago)

Thanks for the video! Professor Dreyfus is a pleasure to listen to.


--------------------
γνῶθι σαὐτόν - Gnothi Seauton - Know Thyself


Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Offlinefalcon
 User Gallery


Registered: 04/01/02
Posts: 8,005
Last seen: 1 day, 3 minutes
Re: Heidegger's Spiral [Re: Kurt]
    #22112654 - 08/19/15 03:49 PM (8 years, 5 months ago)

I can see where Heidegger could be interpreted like that, but it doesn't jump out at me when I read what he writes, it's more like a parody of the way Dreyfus describes Cartesian philosophy in the video.


Edited by falcon (08/19/15 04:37 PM)


Extras: Filter Print Post Top
InvisibleKurt
Thinker, blinker, writer, typer.

Registered: 11/26/14
Posts: 1,688
Re: Heidegger's Spiral [Re: falcon]
    #22113242 - 08/19/15 05:43 PM (8 years, 5 months ago)

What do you mean? I am interested, and I appreciate your critical influence. I have started writing in depth with your remarks in mind.

Anyway here is a simple take;

Heidegger is coming a lot from the Greeks mainly. I am not sure if it helps to point this out but the reflexive or "recursive" basis of his approach, or the openness of his critical question of being, was arguably there before Cartesian meditations.

For instance, in Aristotle's question of "being qua being," (ontology) there is reflexive basis already. Heidegger does bring a modern take to that, ie. the whole disparity of reference, which yea, Descartes is mainly responsible for. He wants to describe a "phenomenology of being"

Not sure if I am on the same page, but that is my shot at a general picture.


Extras: Filter Print Post Top
InvisibleKurt
Thinker, blinker, writer, typer.

Registered: 11/26/14
Posts: 1,688
Re: Heidegger's Spiral [Re: Kurt]
    #22113398 - 08/19/15 06:17 PM (8 years, 5 months ago)

BTW I mean Heidegger wants to describe a phenomenology of being. The sense that he inherits phenomenology, and is at the same time looking to make a deep critique of Descartes and post Cartesian philosophy at the same time is a good question.


Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Offlinefalcon
 User Gallery


Registered: 04/01/02
Posts: 8,005
Last seen: 1 day, 3 minutes
Re: Heidegger's Spiral [Re: Kurt]
    #22119078 - 08/20/15 09:52 PM (8 years, 5 months ago)

I mean Heidegger seems to me to be, taking apart how we think about what is to get at a clear picture of what is. But in doing so, I assume he is doing so from a position as an observer that is both outside and involved with what is happening. I enjoy your writing and looking towards what you have to say.


Extras: Filter Print Post Top
OfflineMarkostheGnostic
Elder
Male User Gallery


Registered: 12/09/99
Posts: 14,279
Loc: South Florida Flag
Last seen: 3 years, 2 days
Re: Heidegger's Spiral [Re: falcon]
    #22121410 - 08/21/15 09:15 AM (8 years, 5 months ago)

Quote:

falcon said:
I mean Heidegger seems to me to be, taking apart how we think about what is to get at a clear picture of what is. But in doing so, I assume he is doing so from a position as an observer that is both outside and involved with what is happening. I enjoy your writing and looking towards what you have to say.




With Kurt's suggestion, I have been listening to Professor Dreyfus' lectures on Being and Time. Last night I heard him speak to the issue of Heidegger trying to extract himself from the human condition, from Dasein, to explicate what you are saying. However Heidegger doesn't believe that anyone can truly do that according to Dreyfus, and therefore he deviates from his mentor Husserl who promulgated a Transcendental Ego from which one could observe from "nowhere." I also learned that Being and Time is considered his early work wherein he recognized only 3 kinds of Being. That is later expanded to 7 kinds.

The last thing I listened to on lecture 2 was about the cultural definitions of Being, which are many, so from a cultural perspective, it may not be possible to define Being. My mind continually seeks a universal underneath the plethora of particulars. I suppose that is why I always believed myself to be a Platonist. :shrug:


--------------------
γνῶθι σαὐτόν - Gnothi Seauton - Know Thyself


Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Offlinefalcon
 User Gallery


Registered: 04/01/02
Posts: 8,005
Last seen: 1 day, 3 minutes
Re: Heidegger's Spiral [Re: MarkostheGnostic]
    #22123939 - 08/21/15 07:00 PM (8 years, 5 months ago)

What I've read of Heidegger, he seems to straddle that fence in his writing, mostly Being an Time. I'll check out some more of his writing, might be a while till I get to it. I'd like to watch Dreyfus some more, but not before I read more of Heidegger, Dreyfus is persuasive, it would make it hard to critique Heidegger, for me.


Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Jump to top Pages: 1 | 2 | Next >  [ show all ]

Shop: Unfolding Nature Unfolding Nature: Being in the Implicate Order   Kraken Kratom Red Vein Kratom   PhytoExtractum Buy Bali Kratom Powder


Similar ThreadsPosterViewsRepliesLast post
* LSD, Sex, Cosmic Consciousness and Evolution
( 1 2 all )
Swami 3,958 39 11/26/07 05:47 PM
by redgreenvines
* Heidegger and Being Authentic
( 1 2 all )
r72rock 2,418 25 02/01/15 06:28 PM
by quinn
* Why is Phenomenology so esoteric and difficult? spud 1,342 5 04/28/07 11:52 PM
by spud
* Heidegger, Time, and Tripping
( 1 2 3 4 5 all )
Jessel 3,160 93 03/10/12 02:37 AM
by BlueCoyote
* The phenomenology of death.
( 1 2 3 4 all )
deCypher 4,043 63 11/25/08 03:30 PM
by deranger
* Maurice Merleau-Ponty, phenomenology Malachi 847 4 12/17/03 10:24 AM
by fireworks_god
* Heidegger and Being NiamhNyx 650 4 11/05/07 10:04 PM
by NiamhNyx
* [[Departure]] AlteredAgain 601 4 09/01/06 11:28 PM
by AlteredAgain

Extra information
You cannot start new topics / You cannot reply to topics
HTML is disabled / BBCode is enabled
Moderator: Middleman, DividedQuantum
3,231 topic views. 1 members, 14 guests and 1 web crawlers are browsing this forum.
[ Show Images Only | Sort by Score | Print Topic ]
Search this thread:

Copyright 1997-2024 Mind Media. Some rights reserved.

Generated in 0.034 seconds spending 0.007 seconds on 16 queries.