I'm very glad to read that. Hegel is equally tough as Heidegger. Its good to know that the videos are making Heidegger's thought accessible. It is, you're right, very dense and difficult -- and it's also hard to know whether one's presentation isn't just replicating that feature of his works!
There is a warmth in these videos that I haven't found anywhere else. Thank you for clarifying Heidegger's thought, this essay was especially difficult for me
These lectures on Heidegger (and all the other thinkers you have covered) are excellent. I really appreciate the depth and complexity that goes beyond the (really good) intros found elsewhere. Especially as it must limit your views and subs to a studious niche. Thanks for the work.
Heidegger is so dense and difficult to sort out and you do an amazing job of making it accessible. I was a bit intimidated and scared off from reading a lot of continental philosophy in school (the one class I ever dropped was one in which we started reading Hegel's Phenomenology of Spirit), and am just rediscovering a lot of it now. You're an excellent explicator of these difficult texts, thanks a ton for these videos, I'm finding them incredibly helpful.
Always glad to turn someone on to a great philosopher -- the book I was citing from is Heideggers "Basic Writings", translated and edited by Krell. There's a newer edition out these days
Thanks! Your third video actually help answer that as well, probably should have waited a bit longer. I'll definitely pick up a copy when I can, because these video lectures have gotten me pretty interested! They don't really teach things like that at the college I'm in, and their book selection is rather limited.
Well, I'd say, as I do in the video -- read Heidegger's On the Essence of Truth and watch the video lecture I did on that. Does truth as aletheia represent a metaphysical dimension underlying any epistemological one? Yes, that's Heidegger's view. But, it does not have to do with contingency (as opposed to necessity)
Yes, brilliant as you say! Thank you. I know it's been said before but, from the little I know, it really does seem to have resonances with early philosophical Daoism. I don't for a moment think Heidegger plagiarised any Daoist thought. Just that the Chinese came up with this sort of thinking over 2,500 years ago. The West may well have got here earlier had it not gone down the propositional/actuality route, but there again that gave us all the knowledge for technology and using up things that we have .... excelled at. That's just my tuppence worth. I've never studied philosophy as such. Just dabbling, in my old age, into the fascinating ways of thinking of some incredible minds helped by good people like you. Thank you very, very much.
@@GregoryBSadler Yes, i'm sure that's true. Still, having read (ie merely dabbled in) some Classical Chinese philosophy I have to say the resonances were striking. To the extent that where they existed ( at some of the deepest levels) I found Heidegger far easier to understand than I thought I would. Of course, I'm sure the excellent lecturer helped a great deal too! Thank you.
Have you read any good applications of this essay (or QCT) by people writing about aesthetics? I’m trying to write a paper on music technology and am having a difficult time finding one particular connection to write about.
Thank you for the video! You explained it wonderfully and have been a fantastic help in my attempts to understand Heidegger. Do you happen to have any videos about his essay Building Thinking Dwelling? I would love to hear your thoughts on that. Thanks!
I do not, and I've got a lot of video work planned before I'd get to that work. That said, I'm happy to do commissioned videos. If you're interested in that, you can email me at greg@reasonio.com. Alternately, if you'd like to have some input into my production process, you can become a Patreon supporter - www.patreon.com/sadler
Does truth, in terms of unconcealment, display ontological concerns preceding epistemological ones? The more superficial, or derivative, truth is centered upon a "contingent" ontology(epistemological), whereas truth relating to "work being done" and opening up a world is an unconcealment, or making more rich/dense, ontology(or categorization of being)? But, any ontology also conceals through its method of categorizing? Trying to wrap my mind around it, and get use to the terminology.. Haha.
fantastic..so appreciative of your efforts and care to give such a thoughtful lecture on heidegger. The part on an earth bringing forth reminds me of Deleuze's ' le fond' or ground when he discusses francis Bacons work. ( logic of sensation) I know early deleuze used the concept of primordiality often, but then he moved to will to power, or geneology of active/reactive forces . I assume Deleuze would criticize Heidegger for exulting forces which may be reactive ( appropriate given his encounter with national socialism) . Substituting primordial with active/passive force, what 'gives' needs the discrimination of the geneologist, what would you say?
Is aleitheia adequately perceived or expressed by its contextualization within a world? Would koinonia be the sharing of the expression of truth? What ensures the proper perception of a truth?
I am searching for Being with a flashlight in a world darkened by forgetfulness. To light one area is to put the rest in shadow. Contrast ("highlighting") implies that which is not highlighted, thus dark. Sounds like Heraclitus. Thank you
to 5:10--how come "form/matter reveals to us the essence of equipment," given that equipment is invisible when in use ("the woman is not aware of wearing her shoes")?
Because we're not talking about what is revealed to the user -- but rather what is being revealed to the phenomenologist in the course of the inquiry. Remember too that, for H, form/matter doesn't reveal all of the nature of equipment, just the most prevalent way of looking at it.
Gregory B. Sadler I'm not sure H. is doing "genetic" phenomenology here. within a hermeneutical framework, something can be encountered either as a product, or as a (functioning) piece of equipment, not as both at a time.
How is a lethia, in its hermeneutical conception, unlike the Hegelian dialectic? There seems to be conversation between the dasein and the out there world, which in my mind is similar to the I-other dualism.
You begin talking about the subject around 42:00, btw. You then assert that true understanding of the earth would be meaningless: shouldn't this be the aim of art: the channeling of the eternal now, the pleroma, the ether?
"what is the temple ...doing....?" This account is very interesting. Is the temple a synecdoche for the whole of Being? I would like to read not Otto's book "the Idea of the holy", but something like "the phenomenology of the holy".hmmmm. if thinking is a craft, and this account is a work of that craft, is there a book on how to think phenomenolically like but in contrast to how logic is the formalization and training for reason? Would Plato say that this account is rhetoric? this is very interesting and I must watch it again.
Well, there are some phenomenologists besides Otto who focused on the holy, religion, rituals, etc. Jean Herring, who I'm not sure has been translated, is one of them. Max Scheler, of course. Later on, Paul Ricouer.
I don't get the concept of earth nor why Heidegger brings it up. would you care to explain it with simpler words? I rewinded it a few times but i still don't get it
Well, I'm not sure what to say here. I've tried to break down the Heidegger text and its ideas as far as possible in these videos. Perhaps it might be useful to do a 1-on-1 Google helpout. Here's my listings: helpouts.google.com/115610514266074572098
Smadar Arditi It is confusing to tell the difference between world and earth...I was really with Heidiegger but then he got to this part and I was very confused. For some reason it is easier for me to grasp thing, equipment, work and even concealment and unconcealed but 'earth ' and 'world'?I guess world is the revealed set of connections....and earth is the backdrop of those? It seems like world is a certain perspective of reality and earth is that reality?Maybe like a certain culture in a period of time would be a 'world' but the earth itself that encompasses that culture (and others) would be 'earth'? I could be entirely wrong ...........I hope I'm not. I have to present Heidegger for my aesthetics course so I hope I am grasping the concepts. haha.
Of course, no artists think in that triad way. Artists have a block of cognitive perspective. The objective (work of art) and the subjective (artist) And yet the art-community sees the two as circular. The brutal triad relation. Heidegger brings in the Being and the beings. which are in relation of ontological difference. Being is the relation of existence as how all relate. beings as in relation to make each object what it is. Perhaps' in America something else happens than what Heidegger thinks. Everything is true (as propersition). Or as Freedom. Which will lead us in Truth as 'Truth is Falsehood and the Falsehood is Truth'. Real Art? Thats all about sociology. We can only expect the local art. In fact 'local' is not a word that will be global. But Real Art. Something to think about.
Depends on what you mean by "understand". I would say that he actually did mean for it -- like his other works and lectures -- to be understood. Otherwise, I wouldn't have made the effort to understand his thought myself
![일상 속 기분 좋음 [Proto disco meme]](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/DwmEIaZ7XGQ/mqdefault.jpg)
I'm very glad to read that. Hegel is equally tough as Heidegger.
Its good to know that the videos are making Heidegger's thought accessible. It is, you're right, very dense and difficult -- and it's also hard to know whether one's presentation isn't just replicating that feature of his works!
There is a warmth in these videos that I haven't found anywhere else. Thank you for clarifying Heidegger's thought, this essay was especially difficult for me
Well, this sequence was produced for my wife, who was studying that work at the time, over at EGS in Switzerland
the next installment of what is likely to be a 3-video series on this classic work in metaphysics and aesthetics
These lectures on Heidegger (and all the other thinkers you have covered) are excellent. I really appreciate the depth and complexity that goes beyond the (really good) intros found elsewhere. Especially as it must limit your views and subs to a studious niche. Thanks for the work.
Well, I'm approaching 100,000 subscriptions at this point
Heidegger is so dense and difficult to sort out and you do an amazing job of making it accessible. I was a bit intimidated and scared off from reading a lot of continental philosophy in school (the one class I ever dropped was one in which we started reading Hegel's Phenomenology of Spirit), and am just rediscovering a lot of it now. You're an excellent explicator of these difficult texts, thanks a ton for these videos, I'm finding them incredibly helpful.
Always glad to turn someone on to a great philosopher -- the book I was citing from is Heideggers "Basic Writings", translated and edited by Krell. There's a newer edition out these days
My "Basic Wrirtings" is so beat up.
Mitchell Kato ; mine too ; it’s a lifetime’s pursuit.
You're very welcome -- and I do when people let me know, so, Thanks!
Awesome, amazing series Greg! So enlightening and helpful. Some of your best videos yet!
VoidOfNihil9Suicide9 Thanks!
Another great video Gregory. Love the detail.
Thanks!
Thanks! Your third video actually help answer that as well, probably should have waited a bit longer. I'll definitely pick up a copy when I can, because these video lectures have gotten me pretty interested! They don't really teach things like that at the college I'm in, and their book selection is rather limited.
Glad it was helpful
Well, I'd say, as I do in the video -- read Heidegger's On the Essence of Truth and watch the video lecture I did on that.
Does truth as aletheia represent a metaphysical dimension underlying any epistemological one? Yes, that's Heidegger's view. But, it does not have to do with contingency (as opposed to necessity)
Yes, brilliant as you say! Thank you.
I know it's been said before but, from the little I know, it really does seem to have resonances with early philosophical Daoism. I don't for a moment think Heidegger plagiarised any Daoist thought. Just that the Chinese came up with this sort of thinking over 2,500 years ago. The West may well have got here earlier had it not gone down the propositional/actuality route, but there again that gave us all the knowledge for technology and using up things that we have .... excelled at.
That's just my tuppence worth. I've never studied philosophy as such. Just dabbling, in my old age, into the fascinating ways of thinking of some incredible minds helped by good people like you.
Thank you very, very much.
I think one can find connections with all sorts of other traditions if one looks, not just Daoism
@@GregoryBSadler Yes, i'm sure that's true.
Still, having read (ie merely dabbled in) some Classical Chinese philosophy I have to say the resonances were striking. To the extent that where they existed ( at some of the deepest levels) I found Heidegger far easier to understand than I thought I would.
Of course, I'm sure the excellent lecturer helped a great deal too! Thank you.
Thank you so much for posting!
You're welcome!
Great! Needed this.
Have you read any good applications of this essay (or QCT) by people writing about aesthetics? I’m trying to write a paper on music technology and am having a difficult time finding one particular connection to write about.
Such an intresting topic! Have you found what you were looking for? Also, I'd love to read the paper if possible.
Thank you for the video! You explained it wonderfully and have been a fantastic help in my attempts to understand Heidegger. Do you happen to have any videos about his essay Building Thinking Dwelling? I would love to hear your thoughts on that. Thanks!
I do not, and I've got a lot of video work planned before I'd get to that work.
That said, I'm happy to do commissioned videos. If you're interested in that, you can email me at greg@reasonio.com.
Alternately, if you'd like to have some input into my production process, you can become a Patreon supporter - www.patreon.com/sadler
Great video!
Would you say that there can be applied semantic conepts of representation and truth to works of art, according to Heidegger?
I think Heidegger articulated the ideas he wanted in the work.
Does truth, in terms of unconcealment, display ontological concerns preceding epistemological ones? The more superficial, or derivative, truth is centered upon a "contingent" ontology(epistemological), whereas truth relating to "work being done" and opening up a world is an unconcealment, or making more rich/dense, ontology(or categorization of being)? But, any ontology also conceals through its method of categorizing?
Trying to wrap my mind around it, and get use to the terminology.. Haha.
wonderful lecture!! thnks!!
You're welcome!
fantastic..so appreciative of your efforts and care to give such a thoughtful lecture on heidegger.
The part on an earth bringing forth reminds me of Deleuze's ' le fond' or ground when he discusses francis Bacons work. ( logic of sensation) I know early deleuze used the concept of primordiality often, but then he moved to will to power, or geneology of active/reactive forces . I assume Deleuze would criticize Heidegger for exulting forces which may be reactive ( appropriate given his encounter with national socialism) . Substituting primordial with active/passive force, what 'gives' needs the discrimination of the geneologist,
what would you say?
Glad you enjoyed it. I tend to think criticizing Heidegger for his Nazi connections is, at this point, a bit too easy.
Is aleitheia adequately perceived or expressed by its contextualization within a world? Would koinonia be the sharing of the expression of truth? What ensures the proper perception of a truth?
I am searching for Being with a flashlight in a world darkened by forgetfulness. To light one area is to put the rest in shadow. Contrast ("highlighting") implies that which is not highlighted, thus dark. Sounds like Heraclitus. Thank you
You're welcome!
Great
to 5:10--how come "form/matter reveals to us the essence of equipment," given that equipment is invisible when in use ("the woman is not aware of wearing her shoes")?
Because we're not talking about what is revealed to the user -- but rather what is being revealed to the phenomenologist in the course of the inquiry. Remember too that, for H, form/matter doesn't reveal all of the nature of equipment, just the most prevalent way of looking at it.
Gregory B. Sadler Form/matter reveals, in the course of the inquiry, the thing as a product (=something made), not as equipment.
Gregory B. Sadler p.s. Although sometimes H. seems to equate equipmental quality with form, which is somewhat confusing.
sure -- not least because products often are equipment
Gregory B. Sadler I'm not sure H. is doing "genetic" phenomenology here. within a hermeneutical framework, something can be encountered either as a product, or as a (functioning) piece of equipment, not as both at a time.
How is a lethia, in its hermeneutical conception, unlike the Hegelian dialectic? There seems to be conversation between the dasein and the out there world, which in my mind is similar to the I-other dualism.
You begin talking about the subject around 42:00, btw. You then assert that true understanding of the earth would be meaningless: shouldn't this be the aim of art: the channeling of the eternal now, the pleroma, the ether?
I guess it depends on what you take the "Hegelian dialectic" to be
"what is the temple ...doing....?" This account is very interesting. Is the temple a synecdoche for the whole of Being? I would like to read not Otto's book "the Idea of the holy", but something like "the phenomenology of the holy".hmmmm. if thinking is a craft, and this account is a work of that craft, is there a book on how to think phenomenolically like but in contrast to how logic is the formalization and training for reason? Would Plato say that this account is rhetoric? this is very interesting and I must watch it again.
Well, there are some phenomenologists besides Otto who focused on the holy, religion, rituals, etc. Jean Herring, who I'm not sure has been translated, is one of them. Max Scheler, of course. Later on, Paul Ricouer.
Great video. I just can't for the life of me understand the later Heidegger.
I don't get the concept of earth nor why Heidegger brings it up. would you care to explain it with simpler words? I rewinded it a few times but i still don't get it
Well, I'm not sure what to say here. I've tried to break down the Heidegger text and its ideas as far as possible in these videos. Perhaps it might be useful to do a 1-on-1 Google helpout. Here's my listings: helpouts.google.com/115610514266074572098
Smadar Arditi It is confusing to tell the difference between world and earth...I was really with Heidiegger but then he got to this part and I was very confused. For some reason it is easier for me to grasp thing, equipment, work and even concealment and unconcealed but 'earth ' and 'world'?I guess world is the revealed set of connections....and earth is the backdrop of those? It seems like world is a certain perspective of reality and earth is that reality?Maybe like a certain culture in a period of time would be a 'world' but the earth itself that encompasses that culture (and others) would be 'earth'? I could be entirely wrong ...........I hope I'm not. I have to present Heidegger for my aesthetics course so I hope I am grasping the concepts. haha.
@@eartianwerewolf this is exactly what I thought it meant
Thanks! I know now who´s fault it is, that museums don´t need bathrooms...element of choice-.-
Of course, no artists think in that triad way. Artists have a block of cognitive perspective. The objective (work of art) and the subjective (artist) And yet the art-community sees the two as circular. The brutal triad relation.
Heidegger brings in the Being and the beings. which are in relation of ontological difference. Being is the relation of existence as how all relate. beings as in relation to make each object what it is.
Perhaps' in America something else happens than what Heidegger thinks. Everything is true (as propersition). Or as Freedom. Which will lead us in Truth as 'Truth is Falsehood and the Falsehood is Truth'.
Real Art? Thats all about sociology. We can only expect the local art. In fact 'local' is not a word that will be global. But Real Art. Something to think about.
As someone who teaches artists, I'd say that any "no artists" or "all artists" statements are usually off-base
@@GregoryBSadler The dogma of artist and artwork is there. Like two plus three is five. the artist must accept the medium.
@@mitchellkato1436 Sure. Good luck with your studies
@@GregoryBSadler A theory of Good luck will be intersting. I am sure Mark Twain will provide us with that .
@@mitchellkato1436 It''s my polite way of saying that this conversation has been a waste of my time, and wishing you well as we go separate ways
... then again... I'm not sure Heidegger meant for this essay to be "understood"!
Depends on what you mean by "understand". I would say that he actually did mean for it -- like his other works and lectures -- to be understood. Otherwise, I wouldn't have made the effort to understand his thought myself
Would you consider yourself a genius? just curious
No.
Yeah I don't really know what genius means, or what your response entails but your still really smart!
too many analogies.
That's unfortunate for you, I guess