I'm 2/5ths through Being and Time and could use a visual aid. Heidegger names a lot of ontic categories of things present-at-hand, and also what he calls "existentiales" of Dasein, not to mention listing the various types of being as well (present-at-hand, ready-to-hand, Dasein). There's a lot of terms here and I could use a visual aid, like a hierarchical tree or map of all these notions. But a quick search doesn't give me what I want. I found some German version but nothing English. Additionally, I may as well ask: What are some good articles or commentary books on Being and Time that go over this stuff?
I have no idea who this guy is but that is absolutely god awful card formatting. Let me fix that.
excellent
based formatting and +1 for effort posting
Heidegger should at least be blue.
this makes me want to make a IQfyerary custom magic set
I'm interested.
Heiddi should have "All Forests counts as Black".
Then he'd be worth his price.
Can someone explain the relation between Quine and Heidegger?
>to be is to be the value of a bound variable
Techno-scientist cucklosophy
I think you can make some interesting remarks on the two dogmas and Heidegger’s lack of ”ground”
I'm not so much triggered by the formatting but more about the god-awful pricing of this card. Heidegger truly is shit.
A 3/4 for 5 mana that grants protection from it and the ability to tap a specific keyword is beyond horrible.
> Hehe look at these clever references
You have to go back
Don't shoot the messenger.
Hide Egger would also have green in his color identity
>the Nothing itself nothings.
I see.
So there's Being
Then there are beings
There are beings whose own being are an issue for it, ie are existential: Dasein
The structures of Dasein are existentiales
Then there are all other beings, and as they appear in Dasein's world, there are: beings present-at-hand and beings ready-to-hand
Oh wow that actually makes sense. Thanks you.
Is being an issue for Being? Is Being conscious for Heidegger?
In Being and Time, no. In his later work it gets murky.
Is this what separates him from Hegel?
All of those are names with no real existence
Being-with-coping-and-seething
if Being has no real existence you should have a nice day right now. to Be is to momentarily exist between birth and death
>All of those are names with no real existence
homie Being is existence itself, you fricking mong
Only Dasein has ex-istence, that is ”standing out” in time
Being is
Beings are
what about beings that aren't
Well, they aren't.
how do you know if you've never seen them, they could be not being
I mean, by definition they aren't.
they are aren'ting, you might say...
Nah, they can't, because they don't have "they"s to not do things with.
isn't not having "they" a thing "they" are doing as we discuss and ascribe such a negative quality to "them"? sounds like something to me
Nah, it's just a linguistic convenience.
Not really beings then innit
Well Heidegger criticises the whole ”does this actually exist”-thinking in philosophy by linking it with metaphysics of presence - where a being’s degree of ”reality” is determined by whether it can show itself/be conceived in constant presence. God for example is thought of as ever-present and omni-present and possesses the greatest degree of reality, and even insures the presence of other beings (through causes). Even the word ”real” (Wirklich) means that which has been caused. Heidegger thinks philosophy is dealing with a kind of aberrance of reasoning here, and proposes another conception of the relationship between presence and absence through ”Aletheia”, his truth-concept, where truth is a happening (beings show themselves in their Being - they presence - and then recede into Verschlossenheit/concealedness). You can also see the critique of presence in Zuhandensein and Vorhandensein, where ”academic philosophy” has only focused on the latter, the kind of ”mental” making present through ”ideas” and thinking, while most of Dasein’s existence takes place in Vorhandensein, which is exactly a way of being that is not ”present”.
>what about beings that aren't
Thats contradictory, everything that *is* is a being, regardless if its an Elephant or a chemical process on the other side of Mars. Even stuff like "Pegasus" are beings, just a different kind of being, though/mind beings
Saying that about beings that arent is the same as asking what about circles that are triangular
Heidegger is at great pains to distinguish extantness from Being.
A unicorn is a being, but it is not an extant being.
ex-istence in the sens of being orientated towards/outward of your being
But not in the traditional sense, that you need to explain first so that people understand
I get this part, but it would be nice to see the entire list of Heidegerian notions mapped out on a tree structure. For example right now I'm reading about state-of-mind and understanding and being-there and thrownness and all that stuff. Hegelians have made visual aids for Hegel's entire dialectical project in the Phenomenology of Spirit and Science of Logic, I've also seen visual aids for Plotinus/Proclus, and obviously when it comes to Kant or Aristotle and their categories/etc it's easy to find charts. Why not something comprehensive for Heidegger? Like I said, seem's there's German versions, just no English ones, at least from a quick search. Was curious if any anons have them in English.
I don’t know what translation you’re using but a lot of them don’t really translate his terminology, so for that the German version of the tree you mentioned in op could be fine. Maybe print it out and write on it or something.
Look up Dreyfus' lectures on Being & Time, they are probably still on Youtube but if they aren't, check archive.org. You used to be able to get the syllabus on his Berkeley website too but I haven't been able to find it since he passed away. It may still be copied and posted somewhere.
I don't know about visual aids but he's very good about practically contextualising things. In fact a little too practical - I find he "gets to" Heidegger through a kind of prosaic Anglo mentality, because he's lacking certain basal metaphors that are instinctive for Germans. But he does get to Heidegger either way, and that's what matters, and I have a feeling his approach will help people who are less familiar with German autism.
The syllabus was especially helpful because he not only tackles the book in a slightly out of order way (e.g. he says ignore the preface at first because it's famously opaque for beginners and becomes easy later), even better, he lists optional parallel readings from Heidegger's 1920s lectures, where he's basically saying the exact same thing as in the respective Being & Time passage but much more straightforwardly.
I've never found diagrams particularly helpful for Heidegger myself but maybe that is because I am averse to viewing his system as a transcendental architectonic, much less a deductive "system." It obviously has the features of an architectonic, it is ultimately transcendental in my opinion, but I think it's much more important to grasp certain BASIC Heideggerian (German-autistic) metaphors to grasp the totality of his thought, rather than fixating on the particular analytic structure of Being & Time, which he later backed away from for just this reason. But if it helps someone it helps, and you can "kick the ladder out from under you" when you get to where you're going either way.
It does make it a lot easier to understand Heidegger if you understand Husserl, but honestly, Husserl is 20x harder to understand, and most people who DO understand Husserl get to him in the first place by first understanding Heidegger, so I can't in all good conscience recommend starting with Husserl unless you are very patient or have a good teacher. However every time I read Husserl I go "ohhh, this KIND of thinking or way of dealing with phenomena is what gave Heidegger the phenomenology 'click' moment, when they started working together.." Maybe you could strategically read a few small things like the Sixth Investigation, that one Introduction to Phenomenology most people read, and Ideas I. But again only if you're very interested, or at a loss with Heidegger or something.
Also
https://counter-currents.com/2014/12/making-sense-of-heidegger/
Have you read Peirce or James? I read Husserl > Hei-tain > Peirce and am now reading James. I didn't realise how much Husserl in his phenomenology took from the Americans.
If you are going to read the Germans, I'd highly recommend the Americans, too; it's amazing how many 'oh so that's how X works' moments I'm getting reading them.
James goes amazingly well with Heidegger, so does post-TLP Wittgenstein
Whoever can translate this is a hero. From what little I can recognize as an American, it looks great!
If you're serious about Heidegger you might as well learn to recognize the original German words for his concepts, or better yet: learn German
It's a nice end goal to learn German and become a Heidegger expert, but that end goal doesn't rule out the usefulness of getting a visual aid precisely to help reach such an end goal, I'm sure you realize that.
I'm not serious enough about Heidegger to learn an entire language and to become immersed into it enough to be able to read it in the original German.
It’s seriously worth learning German just to read Heidegger
Germans themselves don’t read him out of Holocaust shame so you should do the job
Look, taking a class on Being and Time, and reading Introduction to Metaphysics, Question Concerning Technology, and parsing his work on ontotheology changed the way I looked at the world. But honestly? I don't think there's much more that I could glean from him. I don't want to be a Heidegger scholar. I want to find the answers. And he doesn't have all of them. Nobody does.
I've read B&T and am throwing up reading Intro to Metaphysics + 'Basic writings'—is it worth it? I was a great fan of his main work, though his general politics and Neechian Elitism turns me off from his specifically formulated views.
I'm learning German in order to read Klages but if I can do that I should be able to read Egghider too.
Sounds good
There’s plenty of untranslated German philosophy
You’re missing out, I’ve gotten completely different readings and nuances from original Heidegger compared to reading him in translation
I don't care. Sorry. Diminishing returns and all that. I'd rather learn French.
>I'd rather learn French.
Unironically have a nice day
Look, I only have one lifetime to live. I'm not going to waste it learning German so I can read a philosopher who I know is a dead end.
>Hölderlin, the poet of poets
>Nietzsche
>Rilke
>Goethe
>Mann
>George
>Novalis
>Kafka
Don’t forget our friend Hoffman.
ETA? He's the most powerful of all
>Germans themselves don’t read him out of Holocaust shame so you should do the job
Was zum Teufel hast du grade über mich gesagt, du kleine Schlampe? Du solltest wissen, dass ich meine Ausbildung beim GSG9 als Jahrgangsbester abgeschlossen habe, in mehrere Kommandounternehmen gegen Al-Kaida involviert war und über 300 bestätigte Tötungen habe. Ich bin in Gorillakriegsführung ausgebildet und der beste Scharfschütze im deutschen Bundesheer. Du bist für mich nichts als ein weiteres Ziel. Ich werde dich mit einer nie zuvor gesehenen Präzision vom Antliz dieser Welt tilgen, merk dir meine verdammten Worte. Du denkst du könntest hier im Internet so eine Scheiße über mich erzählen und damit durchkommen? Denk lieber nochmal darüber nach, du Wichser. Während wir uns hier unterhalten, habe ich schon mein geheimes Netzwerk aus Spionen kontaktiert und deine IP-Adresse wird grade rückverfolgt, also mach dich besser auf den Sturm gefasst, du Made. Der Sturm, der das erbärmliche kleine Ding, das du als dein "Leben" bezeichnest, auslöschen wird. Du bist verdammt nochmal tot, Junge. Ich könnte jederzeit überall sein, und dich auf über siebenhundert verschiedene Arten töten, nur mit meinen bloßen Händen. Aber ich bin nicht nur im unbewaffneten Kampf ausgebildet, ich habe auch Zugriff auf das Waffenarsenal der Bundeswehr und ich werde es aufs Vollste ausschöpfen, um deinen elendigen Arsch von diesem Kontinent zu blasen, du kleiner Scheißkerl. Wenn du nur gewusst hättest, was für eine apokalyptische Rache dein kleiner "witziger" Kommentar provoziert hat, hättest du vermutlich dein verdammtes Maul gehalten. Aber nein, das hast du nicht hinbekommen, das wolltest du nicht, und jetzt wirst du dafür bezahlen, du verdammter Idiot. Du wirst in meinem Hass ertrinken. Du bist tot, Junge.
Why don't you come back when you finish it. IQfy is not equipment-for-blogposting
It would help me get the most out of it if I had it alongside me while reading. It's like how people read commentaries alongside the books they read.
This is what I mean, there's German versions but I can't find English ones.
>the Nothing itself nothings.
I see.
Im trying to understand the card effects
I know that Carnap tried dunking on Heidegger for his use of language
I haven't heard of Rorty until now, but afai can see he's been influenced by Heidegger, and Quines definition of being is nonsense
Carnap famously argued that Heidegger's metaphysics was linguistically meaningless. Rorty on the other hand saw Heidegger very positively and integrated him with analytic philosophy into his own philosophy. As for Quine, he famously took down Carnap's own philosophy with a series of very critical arguments. So that's why the card says Heidegger can't take action against analytics if Carnap is in play until Quine or Rorty are in play, because they would cancel out Carnap in different senses (Rorty by directly rehabilitating Heidegger in spite of Carnap, Quine by directly cancelling out Carnap himself).
Thanks for the explanation!
I really have to get into analytical phil more
martin "hide egger" hid so many eggs that the nazis changed his name from hiedegger to hide egger. he would hide eggs in the nazi pariliament. many nazis would be like bro wtf where are all these eggs coming from! and there would be martin just chilling and smoking laughing at the pure win that was unfolding unbeknownst to the nazi parliament members. h e even hid an egg in hitlers bunker and hitler called him was like "bruh ur a savage i know it was you!!!!" and heidegger just chilled and lit up a cigar and said "yeah... lol". next day his office placard was changed to hide egger!!!! history of phil... just another win
Ebin post
And THIS is why you dont read Heidegger in translation.
Heidegger is the orpheic poet who leads his reader along a path to deeper knowledge and to grasping true Being. Its incantation that cant even be taken out of context like Hegel, but works only in the flow pf its context. And for all this you need the intuitive touch of an erudite philosopher and the innate feel of the native German language. If you don’t have both you will notice the current leaving you behind and might run aground totally. He doesn’t write like any Philosopher before him. Stop reading him like one of them then.
And what does that get you?
Reading Heidegger done right?
back to Being and seeing Being from Time. There’s nothing more valuable than that.
And what did that get you?
in dilettante terms: a sense of being and sublime philosophical insight upon great deeply rooted cultural depth
How is that any different from looking at plants grow? All plants start off as seeds Soon afterward a small, light green stem emerges ftom the ground along with some tiny, immature buds. As the plant grows more, so does the bud, which eventually becomes a beautiful, fragrant fruit with seeds of its own in it. When the winter comes, the plant's leaves fall and the fruit drops. It turns into some dry, woody branches projecting off a thick trunk deeply rooted into the ground, but that is not totally dead.
After many years, the plant may wither and die at last, never to bring forth any more green leaves and delicious, colourful fruit.
You really don't need the German language to understand history, poetry, or nature, do you?
Just say you're a monolingual philistine and move on
Ich kann 4 Sprache sprechen, aber ich denke das es nicht notwendig sei Deutsch oder eine andere bestimmte Sprache zu lernen um Weisheit oder eine ästhetische Würdigung zu ergreifen.
lol
Natürlich hast du recht, aber wenn du es vorhast jeden Tag mit diesen Philosophen oder Schriftstellern zu beschäftigen, was schadet es dann, ihre respektive Sprachen zu lernen um das Beste aus ihnen herauszuholen?
Es gibt eine Vielfalt an Gründen eine Sprache zu lernen, auch wenn du keine Absichten hast Literatur zu lesen
Ne, falsch!
Da ist eine tiefe für ein Gefühl in deutschen Wörtern, das nicht nachgeahmt werden kann indem man das fremde Wort an seine position im Gebrauch setzt. Und wenn es ins ‘Abstrakte’ geht, braucht man das intuitive Gefühl wie die Wortbausteine zusammen fungieren oder was die prä- und suffixe bedeuten (wer alt-griechisch gelernt hat weiß, wie schlecht 1 zu 1 diese und präpositionen zu übersetzen sind). Doch legt der Herr Bindestriche-in-Wörter-stecken großen Wert darauf. Wer dies nicht nachvollziehen und schätzen kann, hat Heidegger nicht verstanden.
Wenn Heidegger einem ein Wort näher zu bringen versucht, dann beginnt er immer mit den kleinsten wendungen und aus dem Alltag bekannten Vergleich. Das kannst su nicht übersetzten; nur in einer Fußnote dem Angelsachsen erklären was Heidegger mit seinem “durch-sichtig, ver-fallen, heim-lich, usw.” meint.
Schaut eich doch einfach mal eine Übersetzung an. es wäre schrecklich das mit wirklichem Heidegger lesen gleichzustellen.
Wir sind grundsätzlich einverstanden, aber das was du gesagt hast, gilt meiner Meinung nach nur für Heidegger und vielleicht Hegel. Man kann z.B Nietzsche auf Englisch lesen, ohne dass ihm etwas Bedeutsames fehlt, aber natürlich fehlt ihm das Wichtigste an Nietzsche; nämlich sein Beherrschen der deutsche Sprache und seine unmenschliche Fähigkeit, die deutsche Sprache an ihre Grenzen zu stoßen. Naja wenn es darum geht, die Werke Hegels und Heidegger zu lesen, denke ich, dass man auf Jeden fall das Können besitzen muss, Deutsch zu lesen, um ein nicht-oberflächliches Verstehen zu entwickeln.
Ich komme aus der Schweiz, aber wohne in Genf deshalb ist Deutsch nicht meine Muttersprache, Entschuldigung im Voraus kek.
dein Deutsch ist einwandfrei, Junge.
Ad Nietzsche: Ich glaub nicht du kannst einem Japanern Nietzsche geben egal ob auf Deutsch oder übersetzt. Da liegt das Problem eher, dass ein Japaner aus dem gezielten Publikum des Prediger Nietzsches fällt und daher ein Großteil N. an ihm verloren ist. Dann ist es weniger die Sprache die fehlt, sondern dass der Japaner gar nicht Deutsch in Leib und Seele ist. Nietzsche hat für Deutsche geschrieben und andere Völker durften sich halt dran ergötzen und den allgemeinen Scheiß dann auch so gut es geht auf sich selber wenden.
Does anyone have anymore of these mtg philosopher cards? It'd be fun to play a custom set with all of these
Not sure if Hub is a thing or what it refers to, but depending on the presence of the "scientist" in blue this could be good?
Lots of different versions of this one, for some reason...