Friday, May 06, 2011
In-der-Blog-sein
Battle Red explains moronicy.
Because he was a little more on. Geddit? Ar! Ar! ¶ 12:51 PM
Battle Red explains moronicy.
Heidegger was a moron. Simple as that. I'm not just talking about his affiliations with National Socialism, although there is plenty of room for agreement on that simple premise. That's not enough, however, for me to classify him as a moron. A lot of otherwise intelligent people got roped into that particular scam, so I'm not going to give him demerits for that.So, Heidegger and Husserl were walking along the top of a cliff, and Husserl fell into the abyss. Why didn't Heidegger fall?
But Heidegger was still a moron. How could one read Being and Time and come up with the opposite conclusion? Even the most perfunctory treatment must lead the reader to this judgment. I mean, even Husserl noted that the creation of the concept of dasein was primarily a distraction from the essential challenge posed by phenomenology and not much more than a glorified exercise in philosophical anthropology. And don't get me started on the neo-Kantian critique. It's just too trenchant to get into here.
Because he was a little more on. Geddit? Ar! Ar! ¶ 12:51 PM
Comments:
<< Home
ROFL, oooufff that was a dangerous gag mate!
Though I have often come across the sentiment from people who are frustrated with B&T that "it's a load of nonesense". To them I say "read a decent commentary and have patience, it makes perfect sense to the rest of us".
Though I have often come across the sentiment from people who are frustrated with B&T that "it's a load of nonesense". To them I say "read a decent commentary and have patience, it makes perfect sense to the rest of us".
Didn't I hear someplace that a little knowledge is a dangerous thing? This qualifies as a little.
Dunno the details of the Heidegger/Husserl falling out, but I suspect that it was a bigger story in Deutschland than would any falling out of two philosophers be in the U.S. Or maybe just more interesting at the time than goose-stepping.
Dunno the details of the Heidegger/Husserl falling out, but I suspect that it was a bigger story in Deutschland than would any falling out of two philosophers be in the U.S. Or maybe just more interesting at the time than goose-stepping.
"Even the most perfunctory treatment must lead the reader to this judgment."
I think by "even" what is meant is "only".
I think by "even" what is meant is "only".
Texass Dasein. Bernhard's satires of Heidegger were uh more on the money. This is like some jock quatsch
There are naive continentalists, however, who are convinced that via his ontology Heidegger refuted all previous philosophy--Cartesian,neo-Kantian, hegelian-marxist etc--if not western science itself.
IMHE Heidegger doesn't exactly refute Descartes' Cogito (or relatedly, Fregean analysis)--he may re-position it (or per phenom. types, "brackets" it), and discuss its limitations. But a refutation there is not--similarly his response to the analytical fiends (not that I wd presume to defend Carnap). Shortcomings there may be (what is "death" in a logical equation)--but the conty. response is rarely conclusive, but something like Kant's critique of Hume--ie, insisting on metaphysical givens (ie, a priori)--but not technically a disproof.
There are naive continentalists, however, who are convinced that via his ontology Heidegger refuted all previous philosophy--Cartesian,neo-Kantian, hegelian-marxist etc--if not western science itself.
IMHE Heidegger doesn't exactly refute Descartes' Cogito (or relatedly, Fregean analysis)--he may re-position it (or per phenom. types, "brackets" it), and discuss its limitations. But a refutation there is not--similarly his response to the analytical fiends (not that I wd presume to defend Carnap). Shortcomings there may be (what is "death" in a logical equation)--but the conty. response is rarely conclusive, but something like Kant's critique of Hume--ie, insisting on metaphysical givens (ie, a priori)--but not technically a disproof.
Husserl was jewish, for one (Frege detested Husserl).
Haven't some argued MH purged the phenomenology (as part of "the turn") and ...Kantian elements of SZ, as he returned to the ancient greeks?? Or something of the sort.
I find it interesting some jewish scholars seem to find Heideggerian ontology congenial when MH's thinking, at least the later, seems completely opposed to the old testament. Then, the Fregean analysis was ...quite hellenic in spirit as well (tho perhaps via...plato and pythagoras, rather than poets, or heraclitus, etc)
Frege vs. Heidegger--the final show down.
Haven't some argued MH purged the phenomenology (as part of "the turn") and ...Kantian elements of SZ, as he returned to the ancient greeks?? Or something of the sort.
I find it interesting some jewish scholars seem to find Heideggerian ontology congenial when MH's thinking, at least the later, seems completely opposed to the old testament. Then, the Fregean analysis was ...quite hellenic in spirit as well (tho perhaps via...plato and pythagoras, rather than poets, or heraclitus, etc)
Frege vs. Heidegger--the final show down.
Husserl was baptized into the Lutheran faith in 1886. He was only a Jew according to Nazi biology/ideology, which did not recognize conversions.
Post a Comment
<< Home
