You're very welcome. I do have more planned for this Existentialism playlist (which will eventually have around 100 or so video lectures, about 35 of which are completed), but right now, I'm working on lectures on Lev Shestov. I'll definitely be doing some of the other essays in the Basic Writings, and some bits of Being and Time. My wife did find the lectures useful -- and in fact found some of her fellow students at EGS already watching my videos
Well, what you're getting with Heidegger's text is the process of thinking it through -- detach a summary from that and I think something may be lost as a result. I'm glad this set of videos has been helpful for making sense of this tough, but important, work
Thank you for your lecture. Existentialism has a very powerful influence on the way I think and act. I do art and your lecture illuminated so many aspects of what is going on while I wasn't aware of it when it feels right. Your lectures provide a relief against so many forces that somewhat dehumanize us. There were times when spirituality through Eckhart Tolle led me to passivity to some degree and other times when Militant Atheism attempted to strip away any chance of being able to alter a human being's course of action but I found where I can reconcile these ideas. Your lectures are a very powerful resource to be able to do so. Just because I personally enjoy the way you educate in your lectures, I will tell you about how I became interested in these ideas. Iraq was the place where I was born and raised. The conditions that Europeans found themselves in are somewhat similar to the chaotic nature I faced after the Wars that took place in Iraq. Thank you so much for doing this.
Thanks so much for uploading these. Really helped me understand the very complex and difficult reading. I still wish that old school philosophy wasn't this convoluted, because I feel that once you grasp an understanding of it, you realise it could have been put more succinctly.
Yes, that's an interesting connection -- not just psychological stances, but relations between people. Now, on Heidegger and Hesiod, I can't say too much. He certainly knew Hesiod, and says things about him here and there -- but I've not read all of Heidegger's massive corpus, and nothing comes to mind where it would be specifically focused on Works and Days
Yep -- that's what (not Heidegger, but people more in psychoanalysis, semiotics, and communication) call being "overdetermined" -- something can be legitimately read, interpreted, understood in multiple ways, typically because it actually does have those varied facets to it.
Well, this is where the Heidegger stuff gets a bit more difficult. . . it's hard to see how many of what we would like to call artworks -- and aspects of which would be illuminated by his analyses -- could fit all of what he says about the genuine artwork. Now, beautiful structures created by workers DO have intentionality, in the sense that phenomenologists use the term -- it's just not an intentionality entirely worked out beforehand, and then strictly applied to the material
You touched upon "the epiphanic moment" and "beauty" in regard to "creation", of course "love" plays a great part in that discussion. And Heidegger is not known to be an ambassador of love. Perhaps not easily usable for didactic purposes, James Joyce's first novel "A Portrait Of The Artist As A Young Man", is a personal favorite in existential, phenomenological, confessional "exercises", and I cannot recommend it enough, especially as a re-read, to those who find existentialism loveless. ;)
Yes, there is not a lot of room for Love in any sort of really significant sense in Heidegger's work -- Care, sure, but not Love in the way that you can see, e.g. Arendt, Scheler, Stein, Marcel addressing it. I will give Joyce a re-read.
Thanks very much for these lectures and the ones on metaphysics and truth. Really helpful and much appreciated as I have really been struggling with the texts alone - hope your wife found them as useful! Do you have any plans for more (I'm particularly thinking the next essays in the Basic Writing book)? And could you elaborate on your very brief criticism of sociology??
Thank you, stunning stuff! I was strongly reminded of Hesiod's Works and Days and the two types strife, "ἐριδων", psychological stances maybe. One which seems close to what we call heuristics and related to dispute, or rift perhaps, and the other to piety and related to wholesome competition. Was Heidegger a fan of Hesiod? "Ποιμένες ἄγραυλοι, κάκ' ἐλέγχεα, γαστέρες οἶον, ἴδμεν ψεύδεα πολλὰ λέγειν ἐτύμοισιν ὁμοῖα, ἴδμεν δ' εὖτ' ἐθέλωμεν ἀληθέα γηρύσασθαι." - Theogony 26-28 :)
Thanks for the series! Could there be a distinction made between works and works "of art"? I'm thinking of people whom create things which happen to be beautiful and "unconceal", yet weren't endowed with any intentionality or particularity. Think of an artists statement thought of before-hand, and those -- which I suspect in modern art at times-- done afterward. Those "works" seem to be as disinterested as a beautiful structure originating naturally, by chance, which still brings awe.
Ah, that's a good distinction I didn't make. Makes me wonder of the seemingly dual-nature of things, such as business practices with games and movies. The product could be seen as a tool for some end(principles of business towards money), while also serving this end by providing something to consume(which could be equipmental, or some work itself). Advertisements are even weirder, feeling more like traps that provide superficial, or fake, meaning (like some car commercials). All very peculiar.
"who shall I be?""what are my factical possibilities?" is it contradictory to choose reason? (use will to justify reason?) to reason to a choice? IS the essence of being there the openness to being, or the intrinsic reason ...or both....and what is the role of the philosophy in this ( the art work as philosophy texts). I want to be open to truth, whether in a book or not. "the north star is my pivot and staff. It rests deep in the earth like a rudder..." thank you
I think I understand 'earth' and 'world a little better in this part. I think i get a little confused because world is apparent but immaterial, and earth is materal, but concealed. X-e.
Would there be any connection with this essay and with Heidegger's "oblivion of Being" and also "de-worlding" (that is as we are technology, our way of being no longer allows a world to unfold but rather becomes purely earth. Sorry I'm trying to articulate the best I can here)? I agree somewhat with Hegel's view of the Death of Art but to go further using Marx's understanding of capitalism and its relation to how art is commodified, however the artist being a slave to a consumerist society still plays a vital role to unconceal the innate structure of ideology (in otherwords disclosing truth). Sorry if I am appropriating Heidegger using Marxist rhetoric here. Thanks again Dr. Sadler for your time in planning, producing, editing this video.
+DualistofG4 Yes, these ideas are connected up with each other in Heidegger's works. Well, Heidegger would himself probably reject that Marxist interpretation, but there is nothing keeping that from being a kind of revealing/unforgetting along those lines, a revelation of the truth of suffering and exploitation. Unfortunately, much of the art that seems to aim at that tends to be pretty didactic, and not very interesting/attractive art
Im going to have to watch all these videos again to really dive in and try to understand this. With this said. This seems to be an explanation that intentionally, or maybe unintentionally, is the greatest argument against contemporary art and particularly conceptual art. So a creation of art has to come and start from the earth and once it takes form and function it enters into the world realm of which its in constant duality or in relation with the earth. When we look at an artwork it should be about the work and not the artist and about the world this artwork has created and indirectly about the earth too. It needs preservers (or an audience) to see its value and also to cultivate its important and thus almost keep it alive. The work almost has to take a life of its own outside of the artist then. Is this not an argument against contemporary art and conceptual art in particular? This art usually starts with artists, at times it might not have any form to contemplate, and since its obsessed with being original it tries to irrationally and impossibly detach itself from and immediate audience or preserver because to be in their level is to do kitsch art. I .
I did read somewhere that Heidegger's favourite painters were Klee and Cezanne. And that some art critics think that Abstract Expressionism has an emphasis on earth whilst Pop Art has an emphasis on world. Says someone who went to an Abstract Expressionism exhibition some years back and just stood in awe in front of some of those paintings. Pop Art doesn't quite have the same effect on me though.😊
Hi there, only now I see this video is over ten years old! Of course this does not matter in this domain. I was wondering if you are familiar with Jung's vision on art? There are quite some similarity's I think, although Jung did not bring about a whole new language to underpin his vision. What I was missing in jung's vision is the role of the 'audience', which Heidegger does include. Both look at art as a process, which I think is fundamental. I know that Jung's vision was completely ignored by the art world, how is that with Heidegger, do you know? Hope to hear from you!
![เปิดใจ "อาจารย์เบียร์ คนตื่นธรรม" อดีตเคยสุดทุกทาง ถ้าใช้หนี้หมดไปบวชแน่ l [Nickynachat]](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/IxeE0xVhy08/mqdefault.jpg)
You're very welcome.
I do have more planned for this Existentialism playlist (which will eventually have around 100 or so video lectures, about 35 of which are completed), but right now, I'm working on lectures on Lev Shestov. I'll definitely be doing some of the other essays in the Basic Writings, and some bits of Being and Time.
My wife did find the lectures useful -- and in fact found some of her fellow students at EGS already watching my videos
Well, what you're getting with Heidegger's text is the process of thinking it through -- detach a summary from that and I think something may be lost as a result.
I'm glad this set of videos has been helpful for making sense of this tough, but important, work
This is the best job teaching this difficult essay I've ever seen, Dr. Sadler. Well-done, sir!
Finishing up the 3-lecture series about this classic essay in metaphysics and aesthetics
Thank you for your lecture. Existentialism has a very powerful influence on the way I think and act. I do art and your lecture illuminated so many aspects of what is going on while I wasn't aware of it when it feels right.
Your lectures provide a relief against so many forces that somewhat dehumanize us. There were times when spirituality through Eckhart Tolle led me to passivity to some degree and other times when Militant Atheism attempted to strip away any chance of being able to alter a human being's course of action but I found where I can reconcile these ideas. Your lectures are a very powerful resource to be able to do so.
Just because I personally enjoy the way you educate in your lectures, I will tell you about how I became interested in these ideas. Iraq was the place where I was born and raised. The conditions that Europeans found themselves in are somewhat similar to the chaotic nature I faced after the Wars that took place in Iraq.
Thank you so much for doing this.
Thanks so much for uploading these. Really helped me understand the very complex and difficult reading. I still wish that old school philosophy wasn't this convoluted, because I feel that once you grasp an understanding of it, you realise it could have been put more succinctly.
Yes, that's an interesting connection -- not just psychological stances, but relations between people.
Now, on Heidegger and Hesiod, I can't say too much. He certainly knew Hesiod, and says things about him here and there -- but I've not read all of Heidegger's massive corpus, and nothing comes to mind where it would be specifically focused on Works and Days
Yep -- that's what (not Heidegger, but people more in psychoanalysis, semiotics, and communication) call being "overdetermined" -- something can be legitimately read, interpreted, understood in multiple ways, typically because it actually does have those varied facets to it.
Well, this is where the Heidegger stuff gets a bit more difficult. . . it's hard to see how many of what we would like to call artworks -- and aspects of which would be illuminated by his analyses -- could fit all of what he says about the genuine artwork.
Now, beautiful structures created by workers DO have intentionality, in the sense that phenomenologists use the term -- it's just not an intentionality entirely worked out beforehand, and then strictly applied to the material
You touched upon "the epiphanic moment" and "beauty" in regard to "creation", of course "love" plays a great part in that discussion. And Heidegger is not known to be an ambassador of love. Perhaps not easily usable for didactic purposes, James Joyce's first novel "A Portrait Of The Artist As A Young Man", is a personal favorite in existential, phenomenological, confessional "exercises", and I cannot recommend it enough, especially as a re-read, to those who find existentialism loveless. ;)
For this 3 hours of enlightening, thank you!
You're welcome!
Thank you so much for these insightful lectures! Very helpful!
You're welcome
What a great series of lectures. Thank u for ur time and knowledge
You're very welcome!
Yes, there is not a lot of room for Love in any sort of really significant sense in Heidegger's work -- Care, sure, but not Love in the way that you can see, e.g. Arendt, Scheler, Stein, Marcel addressing it.
I will give Joyce a re-read.
One of your most difficult videos, but one of your most rewarding. Like Finnegan's Wake. :-D
Hopefully, this one brought the other two together
Thank you for these videos. You have broadened my perception of the would I live in :)
Glad to read it
Thanks for posting this, really helped me.
You're very welcome!
Thanks very much for these lectures and the ones on metaphysics and truth. Really helpful and much appreciated as I have really been struggling with the texts alone - hope your wife found them as useful! Do you have any plans for more (I'm particularly thinking the next essays in the Basic Writing book)? And could you elaborate on your very brief criticism of sociology??
Thank you, stunning stuff! I was strongly reminded of Hesiod's Works and Days and the two types strife, "ἐριδων", psychological stances maybe. One which seems close to what we call heuristics and related to dispute, or rift perhaps, and the other to piety and related to wholesome competition. Was Heidegger a fan of Hesiod? "Ποιμένες ἄγραυλοι, κάκ' ἐλέγχεα, γαστέρες οἶον, ἴδμεν ψεύδεα πολλὰ λέγειν ἐτύμοισιν ὁμοῖα, ἴδμεν δ' εὖτ' ἐθέλωμεν ἀληθέα γηρύσασθαι." - Theogony 26-28 :)
I greatly appreciate this video.
Glad to read it!
Thanks for the series! Could there be a distinction made between works and works "of art"? I'm thinking of people whom create things which happen to be beautiful and "unconceal", yet weren't endowed with any intentionality or particularity. Think of an artists statement thought of before-hand, and those -- which I suspect in modern art at times-- done afterward. Those "works" seem to be as disinterested as a beautiful structure originating naturally, by chance, which still brings awe.
Ah, that's a good distinction I didn't make. Makes me wonder of the seemingly dual-nature of things, such as business practices with games and movies. The product could be seen as a tool for some end(principles of business towards money), while also serving this end by providing something to consume(which could be equipmental, or some work itself). Advertisements are even weirder, feeling more like traps that provide superficial, or fake, meaning (like some car commercials).
All very peculiar.
"who shall I be?""what are my factical possibilities?" is it contradictory to choose reason? (use will to justify reason?) to reason to a choice? IS the essence of being there the openness to being, or the intrinsic reason ...or both....and what is the role of the philosophy in this ( the art work as philosophy texts). I want to be open to truth, whether in a book or not. "the north star is my pivot and staff. It rests deep in the earth like a rudder..." thank you
You're welcome!
I think I understand 'earth' and 'world a little better in this part. I think i get a little confused because world is apparent but immaterial, and earth is materal, but concealed. X-e.
Would there be any connection with this essay and with Heidegger's "oblivion of Being" and also "de-worlding" (that is as we are technology, our way of being no longer allows a world to unfold but rather becomes purely earth. Sorry I'm trying to articulate the best I can here)? I agree somewhat with Hegel's view of the Death of Art but to go further using Marx's understanding of capitalism and its relation to how art is commodified, however the artist being a slave to a consumerist society still plays a vital role to unconceal the innate structure of ideology (in otherwords disclosing truth). Sorry if I am appropriating Heidegger using Marxist rhetoric here. Thanks again Dr. Sadler for your time in planning, producing, editing this video.
+DualistofG4 Yes, these ideas are connected up with each other in Heidegger's works.
Well, Heidegger would himself probably reject that Marxist interpretation, but there is nothing keeping that from being a kind of revealing/unforgetting along those lines, a revelation of the truth of suffering and exploitation.
Unfortunately, much of the art that seems to aim at that tends to be pretty didactic, and not very interesting/attractive art
Im going to have to watch all these videos again to really dive in and try to understand this. With this said. This seems to be an explanation that intentionally, or maybe unintentionally, is the greatest argument against contemporary art and particularly conceptual art. So a creation of art has to come and start from the earth and once it takes form and function it enters into the world realm of which its in constant duality or in relation with the earth. When we look at an artwork it should be about the work and not the artist and about the world this artwork has created and indirectly about the earth too. It needs preservers (or an audience) to see its value and also to cultivate its important and thus almost keep it alive. The work almost has to take a life of its own outside of the artist then. Is this not an argument against contemporary art and conceptual art in particular? This art usually starts with artists, at times it might not have any form to contemplate, and since its obsessed with being original it tries to irrationally and impossibly detach itself from and immediate audience or preserver because to be in their level is to do kitsch art. I
.
Yes, this would provide one (of many) arguments against some types of (and perspectives on) contemporary art
I did read somewhere that Heidegger's favourite painters were Klee and Cezanne. And that some art critics think that Abstract Expressionism has an emphasis on earth whilst Pop Art has an emphasis on world.
Says someone who went to an Abstract Expressionism exhibition some years back and just stood in awe in front of some of those paintings.
Pop Art doesn't quite have the same effect on me though.😊
Hi there, only now I see this video is over ten years old! Of course this does not matter in this domain. I was wondering if you are familiar with Jung's vision on art? There are quite some similarity's I think, although Jung did not bring about a whole new language to underpin his vision. What I was missing in jung's vision is the role of the 'audience', which Heidegger does include. Both look at art as a process, which I think is fundamental. I know that Jung's vision was completely ignored by the art world, how is that with Heidegger, do you know? Hope to hear from you!
I have read Jung, don't take him seriously, and tend to dislike his fans
@@GregoryBSadler Thanks for the quick reply. Any ideas on Heideggers influence on the people calling themselves art experts?
@@daanvangeijlswijk7787 He's influenced some, and not others. No idea what you want to ask about with that very general question
@@GregoryBSadler I am trying to see how philophy and art influence eachother in the period after WOII.
@@daanvangeijlswijk7787 Then you have a lot of reading and research ahead