HEIDEGGER PART 1 BY GEORGE PATTISON
ฝัง
- เผยแพร่เมื่อ 18 ธ.ค. 2011
- Complete videos are available on the St John's Timeline, which was relaunched in Autumn 2021. It comprises of over 200 full videos with improved subtitles from leading philosophers and theologians. You can subscribe for £22 (£15 concessions) per year. Institutional subscriptions are also available. stjohnstimeline.org/
As interpreted here Dasein appears to be graspable. The Professor's eloquence on his subject is admirable.
Wonderful and insightful. Thank you St John's for putting these up, and thanks George Pattison for the great overview here.
thanks! Heidegger was in the world, he left a legacy, he left the world.So he is there.
Given that Professor Pattison is attempting the impossible, a comprehensive overview of Professor Heidegger's work in under 50 minutes, this presentation is worth viewing if you're new to Heidegger. That said, I think I've spotted two errors in the presentation. Or rather than call them errors, they are over simplification to the point they they mislead.
1. When Professor Heidegger speaks of “death” (an existential phenomenon of dasein), he’s not talking about croaking, or what happens when the body fails (present-at-hand), he called that perishing. Death is always with dasein, not something that happens at a so called clock tick (present-at-hand) “end”. excerpt: {@07:09 (HEIDEGGER PART 2) we haven't yet lived all our possibilities these still lie ahead of us how can we live as a whole and then something else and that is of course all of us are going to die}
2. The Augenblick isn’t a snaps shot or time slice. In both Heidegger’s and Kierkegaards writings, an Augenblick can take decades to unfold. excerpt: {@11:49 (HEIDEGGER PART 2) using a term he borrows from Kierkegaard calls the moment of vision [Die Augenblick] the moment in which translates literally as the gaze of the glance of the eye the moment in which we look around we see ourselves we see our lives for what it is }
good points Donald! rather excellent in fact 👍 if i may only add one more to complete your fine liste, the third (error spot)
3. Can one even imagine a piece of more second hand talk more idle than what the polite professor says he thinks most people think at 5:01 about the french antinazionalist author himself “sometimes even perhaps rather, styupid ?” 🤔
Pst, you ever manage to get in touch with the good professor? 🧐
Oh yeah that 6 on heroin and it said something like that
An engrossing and excellent presentation of Heidegger's thinking.
15:18 “do we even know what the question of being means?”
When I read Plato’s Parmenides, I believe at the end of the 1st hypothesis, it says what NOTHINGNESS itself is. Which if correct or approximately right, is the opposite to being.
Very strange Hannah Arendt didn't show up in this introduction. Her Dasein in his life was crucial.
Disappointing not to have the full interview...I appreciated the professor's unusual interpretation of "Dasein"
part 2 th-cam.com/video/oKKZvgxSRow/w-d-xo.html
It is hard to talk about 'Being' to a population of non-adults addicted to electronic devices and to 'Self'.
True....but all the more important
I imagine it is especially so for individuals with a bigoted, broad brush impression of the population they wish to talk to. It’s almost as if didactic competence requires a certain element of empathy that eludes people like… well, you.
@@addammaddyou can have empathy for people and still call a spade a spade.
Pattison at 17:00 introduces the term Dasein in the best way I have ever encountered. Don't miss this, it will unlock a much deeper understanding.
Video ends at 16:04 ..?
Thank you for this educational content.
Good stuff.
I am, therefore I am?!
You were therefore you are no more
I agree. Sorry for the misunderstanding.
What a handsome man .
Hmmm, maybe if it was Ryan Gosling giving us an exposition on Heidegger....
If philosophers who deal with basic metaphysical questions are reduced to mere sociological and political products of their time and judged by that - like too many are doing with Heideggers connection to nazis 1933, then there is no more philosophy, and it simply confirms Heideggers critique om modern Europe. Then one also question Sokrates, who was clearly against democracy, an understanding that opposes clearly our whole western civilization today.
If someone tries to reduce Heideggers thinking and contribution to a support to nazism then those who claim that are not qualified to comment on philosophy because they do not understand what it is and which relevanse it has. They should simple do their sociology.
So many people were relatively innocently sympthazing with nazism in the beginning of 1930' s and later taking distance.
Whatever connection and wrongdoing Heidegger did with nazis was already processed in the german academical field after the war and Heidegger was reinstated as a lecturer in Germany. So once and for all this issue is processed and done, and if one cannot digest or accept that, one may consider one is a victim of the concept of eternal hell and condemnation, which unfortunately very much rules the very nonphilosoohical culture of political correctness of midern times, which Heidegger warned against: The end of philosophy, not more profound thinklng, depp questioning, just cybernetics of on-off, correct or condemned.
Cool thumbs bro
Like jaco pastorious
Philosophy doesn't have to be boring. It can deal with important issues rather than trivia, and it can be about real things rather than fantasies.
Heidegger is my mother
🕶️
Well, there are plenty of cartoons on You Tube, so why grumble?
I agree you didn't need to talk for so long about Heidegger's life (stuff anyone can look up if they're interested). So why did you?
Then why did you listen?
Streets are murmuring that my gerontophilia may be returning with the violent force of the repressed I fear 🥵😈 help
"Only a god can save us" sounds fascist to me.
Not wishing to come across as a philistine; nevertheless I can't but feel at times what is being explained and imparted as some great revelation the philosopher has to say about the human condition, is no more than the "bleeding obvious"! (Wittgenstein included). Maybe philosophy is not for me- just a thought.
Philosophy, I guess, is the means by which one arrives from "bleeding obvious" premises to flabbergasting conclusions or questions. Many of Heidegger's insights might at first glance seem "trivial." However, they imply profound critical entry points to modern sciences, the criteria for how we understand truth and reality, and the basis upon which we may thematize our existence as a temporal "movement" indistinct from the world that we live in. For instance, we often forget the latter when we think we can denote our own opinions "subjective" or thematize our being as a "peculiar thing", rather than as a being in a world wanting to unfold its being. Many of the distinctions fundamental to our (Western) culture is at stake here: inner vs. outer, spirit vs. body, mentality vs. physique, self vs. others, time vs. space, opinion vs. fact, truth vs. belief, ontology vs. epistemology, subjective vs. objective. All these are revisioned and "deconstructed" in, or can be done so by extending the explicated reach of, Being and Time. To me, that is much more than just stating the "bleeding obvious." It is pulling the rug from under the premises of our existence so as to reveal how these premises play themselves out for us in our lives, and how we might live our lives differently in the light of this revelation.
I would have agreed with you until recently. I've been exposed to Theravada Buddhism and I find it more fulfilling than Western Philosophy including Heidegger.
Early Heidegger's philosophical anthropology (fundamental ontology) has a lot in common with Buddhism but Heidegger moves beyond that investigation in the 30's delving more into his take on Absolutism.
Who has impacted more people with their writing, (1) Heidegger, Martin or (2) Heidi-Spyri, Johanna? According to Wikipedia: "Heidiland, named after the Heidi books, is an important tourist area in Switzerland, popular especially with Japanese and Korean tourists." Is there a Heideggerland in southwest Germany for tourists that is equal in popularity and with such multicultural appeal?
In addition to what was said: what happens when two blatantly obvious propositions contradict eachother? For me, if there's one thing it can do (P) it's to pull the floor out from under the seemingly obvious.
The magic happens in the gaps between different systems of thought. When you can use two opposing systems to see some hidden truth that’s where two different opposing “common sense” ideas fight it out and u get some perspective on the problem
There's no understanding of Heidegger here.