To support this work, please consider becoming a Patreon member for this channel at www.patreon.com/SingularSublime where you can obtain transcripts and unedited materials or by providing a one-time time tip through the "Super Thanks" option above. Thank you!
What is your take on the difference between the two? Currently reading the McQuarrie/Robinson after being assured by Dreyfus that it’s the only way to remotely be able to understand Heidegger, but I’m aware this is still an opinion (although an educated one). What would be the benefits of the Stambaugh? Cons?
Anthropology studies beings not Being. Even the collection of all beings doesn't sum up to the Being. Am i right? Even There is no Gestalt or collective wisdom. Being is beyond all the beings whether alone or together?
Is the authenticity and the inauthenticity what Lacan will later use in function and field and seminar 1, to describe full and empty speech? Do these different concepts have any relation or can they play off of each other, regardless of Heidegger’s disdain of psychoanalysis? I am aware that Lacan drew a lot from Heidegger and seeing that these are the two figures you go over.
I believe there is a direct connection between empty speech and idle chatter. The authenticity/inauthenticity distinction as it finds its way in Lacan is interesting and more complex. Lacan addressed the matter in lecture 15 of seminar I (which I discuss in my video on that lecture). In short, for Lacan, there is no authentic being in the world. We are born out of a fundamental alienation that cannot be overcome. This originary inauthenticity is something we see, in different ways and with different terms, from various philosophers critical of Heidegger - the first among them being Emmanuel Levinas. A useful essay by one of the few scholars able to claim expertise in both thinkers is by William Richardson. Here's a link to it: pepsic.bvsalud.org/pdf/nh/v5n1/v5n1a01.pdf
To support this work, please consider becoming a Patreon member for this channel at www.patreon.com/SingularSublime where you can obtain transcripts and unedited materials or by providing a one-time time tip through the "Super Thanks" option above. Thank you!
I am teaching a Continental Philosophy class and these videos have helped immensely with my own understanding and for my students. Good job!
what translation do you use?
I’ve been mostly using the revised version of the Stambaugh translation for the series, though I try to refer to the Macquarrie trans. on occasion.
What is your take on the difference between the two? Currently reading the McQuarrie/Robinson after being assured by Dreyfus that it’s the only way to remotely be able to understand Heidegger, but I’m aware this is still an opinion (although an educated one). What would be the benefits of the Stambaugh? Cons?
Very good, Thank you
Anthropology studies beings not Being.
Even the collection of all beings doesn't sum up to the Being.
Am i right?
Even There is no Gestalt or collective wisdom. Being is beyond all the beings whether alone or together?
Is the authenticity and the inauthenticity what Lacan will later use in function and field and seminar 1, to describe full and empty speech? Do these different concepts have any relation or can they play off of each other, regardless of Heidegger’s disdain of psychoanalysis? I am aware that Lacan drew a lot from Heidegger and seeing that these are the two figures you go over.
I believe there is a direct connection between empty speech and idle chatter. The authenticity/inauthenticity distinction as it finds its way in Lacan is interesting and more complex. Lacan addressed the matter in lecture 15 of seminar I (which I discuss in my video on that lecture). In short, for Lacan, there is no authentic being in the world. We are born out of a fundamental alienation that cannot be overcome. This originary inauthenticity is something we see, in different ways and with different terms, from various philosophers critical of Heidegger - the first among them being Emmanuel Levinas.
A useful essay by one of the few scholars able to claim expertise in both thinkers is by William Richardson. Here's a link to it:
pepsic.bvsalud.org/pdf/nh/v5n1/v5n1a01.pdf
@@SingularityasSublimity thank you for your reply, that was definitely helpful.
Love it
Thank you!
Woah, just found out about this channel. Will watch everything
Thank you for the encouraging words. Hope it continues to be helpful.
Everydayness Vs. primitiveness
I didn't catch your point😢