Martin Heidegger, Being and Time | The Question of the Meaning of Being | Philosophy Core Concepts

Поділитися
Вставка
  • Опубліковано 9 тра 2018
  • Get Heidegger's Being and Time - amzn.to/2IvzAnX
    Support my work here - / sadler
    Philosophy tutorials - reasonio.wordpress.com/tutori...
    This is a video in my new Core Concepts series -- designed to provide students and lifelong learners a brief discussion focused on one main concept from a classic philosophical text and thinker.
    This Core Concept video focuses on the introduction to Martin Heidegger's early work Being and Time, specifically on his discussion in sections 1 and 2, which open up what he calls the "question of the meaning of being". Heidegger argues that there is a genuine question here, one that has been ignored because of a a "dogma" running through Western philosophy since the ancient period. In examining this, he identifies three prejudices that he says stand in the way of this question. He also outlines for us how we can begin to ask this question, and why we need to turn thematically to examining what he terms "Dasein" in order to start to understand and answer this question.
    If you'd like to support my work producing videos like this, become a Patreon supporter! Here's the link to find out more - including the rewards I offer backers: / sadler
    You can also make a direct contribution to help fund my ongoing educational projects, by clicking here: www.paypal.me/ReasonIO
    If you're interested in philosophy tutorial sessions with me - especially on Heidegger's thought and works - click here: reasonio.wordpress.com/tutori...
    You can find the copy of the text I am using for this sequence on Heidegger's Being and Time here - amzn.to/2IvzAnX
    My videos are used by students, lifelong learners, other professors, and professionals to learn more about topics, texts, and thinkers in philosophy, religious studies, literature, social-political theory, critical thinking, and communications. These include college and university classes, British A-levels preparation, and Indian civil service (IAS) examination preparation
    #Heidegger #existentialism #metaphysics

КОМЕНТАРІ • 33

  • @simeaoferreira4491
    @simeaoferreira4491 Рік тому +1

    Since, I am fascinated by Phenomenology/Existentialism, and Metaphysics. This video helps me a lot because of its well explained in Heidegger's concept of Questions of Being.
    Thank you, Dr. Sadler.🙏

  • @iamcaesar6741
    @iamcaesar6741 6 років тому +4

    Thank you so much for creating this video about “Being and beings” it adds more specificity to your other videos about Heidegger and the work of art.

  • @westernman7715
    @westernman7715 6 років тому +8

    Fantastic, Heidegger really went after the fundamental questions. It seems like a religious impulse on his behalf but he does so without any religious language, which is admirable. I've been drawn to his work ever since I heard the great English orator Jonathan Bowden devote a speech to him.

    • @GregoryBSadler
      @GregoryBSadler  6 років тому +4

      Well, you know he starts out in theology.

  • @user-gn6wz9fe1c
    @user-gn6wz9fe1c 4 роки тому +12

    sometimes being do really be like that

  • @daseinbellen
    @daseinbellen 6 років тому

    great lesson, thank you dr. sadler

  • @seanericanderson3666
    @seanericanderson3666 6 років тому +1

    Great job. I love Heidegger.

    • @GregoryBSadler
      @GregoryBSadler  6 років тому +2

      Thanks! There's plenty more Heidegger content coming up

  • @mizubiart6230
    @mizubiart6230 2 роки тому +1

    for something to truly grasp being it must be nothingness itself. how could one even grasp what one is? one is, one never ceases to be, and once one indeed ceases to be one is no longer the inquirer. but it would be lazy thinking to conclude that being is therefore, nothingness. what being is? what being is can only be pointed at its essence, or it could be answered as to that which is. a chair, there, that is. but the being of beings is and only is, and yet were one to define existence would one not be non existent? to truly exist one must be subjectivity. how does one become a non-subject? would this in fact render us then, beyond existence so as not even to enquire, what being is?
    being. it is all encompassing, yet when one seeks closer it is void.
    in nothingness, one is aware of the core of one's being through that anxiety in front of the nothing.
    it seems, one can only feel one's being and one's belonging to the totality of being, or non belonging through abstraction. reflection. the nothing that renders the human existent... the nothingness renders existence.
    and yet heidegger did not in fact want us to negate existence. he wanted us to realise true being. being in truth, openness. the unconcealedness of the enigma. the secret.

    • @yusefnajm3648
      @yusefnajm3648 Рік тому

      Do you mean that we can't grasp the Being in itself? Are there any Being in itself at all?

  • @tuomasansio
    @tuomasansio 6 років тому +1

    Hey Prof. Sandler, nice to see you talk about Heidegger. I have one question, not too related to the topic but I'll still ask it: have you read anything from Herman Dooyeweerd, and if, how do you like him?

    • @tuomasansio
      @tuomasansio 6 років тому

      Actually he has kind of a similar goal with Heidegger. He wants to dig out the forgotten presuppositions and axioms that lead philosophic thought.

    • @GregoryBSadler
      @GregoryBSadler  6 років тому +2

      I read some of his work when I was doing a lot of research on the French Christian philosophy debates of the 30s (which involved a few secular rationalists, a few Reformed Protestants, and a lot of Catholic thinkers) and the Francophone Reformed debates on the same subject in the 40s and 50s. There were also some discussions about the topic going on in Dutch Reformed circles, and Dooyeweerd was a major presence in those - similar in importance to Roger Mehl in the Francophone Reformed debates.
      It's Sadler. . .

  • @JW-rm3ci
    @JW-rm3ci 3 роки тому

    I understood about 20% of what was said. But I'll watch the prior videos now...

  • @riley_4630
    @riley_4630 Рік тому

    Thank you for this video! Quick question, which one of his essays were you quoting from? I am writing about him in a philosophy paper and would like to use some his quotes you brought up!

  • @ingilizcehazrlk9134
    @ingilizcehazrlk9134 6 років тому

    Montesquieu? Could you do video about Persian letters?

    • @GregoryBSadler
      @GregoryBSadler  6 років тому +2

      ua-cam.com/video/vkXKtxleGA8/v-deo.html

  • @Shushubearwhoo
    @Shushubearwhoo 6 років тому +1

    so basically being is not a thing (a noun). what's more important is the 'is'. or the verb part. being is doing not having? am I misfiring here or is this the guts of what you're saying?

  • @Lazergaz
    @Lazergaz 6 років тому

    Great video, I intend to work my way through Sein und Zeit this summer, so this really helped.
    I think the video would look better if the calkboard is more centered, there is very uch white space above and doesnt look too good, in my opinion

    • @GregoryBSadler
      @GregoryBSadler  6 років тому

      Yeah. . . I shoot pretty much all my videos that way, and I don't anticipate changing it. You're the first with that complaint. Glad you enjoyed the content

  • @bodywithoutorgans3942
    @bodywithoutorgans3942 6 років тому

    You can really hear the influence of Husserl in Heidegger's comments on Questioning as a form of seeking. Husserl's whole thing about intentionality, that consciousness was always consciousness of something. You could even think of Being and Time as a protracted attempt to "bracket" the concept of being.
    My understanding of phenomenology has gotten rusty and a little dull over the years. Circa 2010 it was razor sharp. I still only made it through the 1st volume of Husserl's Logical Investigations. Going back and tackling the whole thing again was a long term goal of mine for quite a while.

    • @GregoryBSadler
      @GregoryBSadler  6 років тому

      Well, I think there is definitely some influence, but Heidegger is definitely going off and doing his own form of phenomenology.

  • @kodriax4747
    @kodriax4747 4 роки тому

    Will knowledge in cognitive neuroscience make a better phenomenological system for Heidegger by finding neural correlate for every concept in phenomenology? For example, linking object perception to 'being'.

  • @TheAlfredo094
    @TheAlfredo094 4 роки тому

    Why the fuck did Heidegger write so obscurely instead of talking like this?