A tremendous discussion, and what a treat and delight to meet and hear Nathan speak! I was just having a discussion the other day with my friend Sebastian on the pathology of “optimizing time,” and boy do I wish I would have had the distinction between “optimizing” and “flourishing”-that’s an excellent framing! What’s defined as “optimizing” today is arguably what is “anti-flourishing,” a perverted inversion which I fear Transhumanism indeed contributes to…I also liked the points on how “our past is in the future,” and also how our openness to being today can transform the meaning of the past. The distinction between “response” and “reaction” was also excellent, and I really like what Nathan said about existentialism being a path versus a focus in Heidegger, which is to say we are to face anxiety and boredom so that we can meet the conditions in ourselves necessary for us to really “get” the question of being. There are some questions we can’t even understand, let alone answer, without preparation-thus the need to face death so that we can be “with being.” Nathan’s points on how limits are needed for creativity were grand. Indeed, there would be nothing to create if there were no limits. Where there are no limits, everything already is, which suggests the tragedy of aiming to live without limits: everything will be finished and boring. And I didn’t know you were writing a book on memory, Johannes! That’s so great! I’ll certainly be looking forward to it! And it never struck me how strange it is that every beer is now “An Original Brew,” as if originality is rare today. Jeez…. To close, I really liked what Nathan said about “seeing a crack in the Matrix”-that was a deep and moving point. Made me think of the power of Mystical Visions in religious thought, and I think that was a really great image to communicate what “glimpsing being” meant for Heidegger. Because of a second, a glimpse, everything is different forever.
It’s great your speakers are so diverse, all approaching Heidegger from different directions. Very enjoyable! I had to stop after fifteen minutes (with a promise to myself to begin tomorrow where I left off.) One comment is needed about the series of courses Nathan took called “Landmark Worldwide.” The name “LW” was coined after the original name EST (Erhard Seminars Training), which came into being in the sixties by Werner Erhard, became defunct in 1984. Although many people like Nathan feel the course transformed them, others felt the course mimics a number of questionable cult-like rules (e.g., bathroom breaks are very restricted, while the seminars themselves can be unreasonably lengthy and often employ overly emotional role-playing techniques.) Needless to say, EST received a lot of bad press in the 1960’s and 70’s That said, one of my favorite authors on Heidegger, Michael E Zimmerman, who wrote the engaging book, “Eclipse of the Self: the development of Heidegger’s concept of Authenticity,” (1982) speaks highly of the “Landmark Worldwide”course if only as a means of applying Heidegger to interpersonal problems. So Nathan’s experience at Landmark is positively corroborated by a recognized Heideggerean philosopher.
Thank you Johannes.
A tremendous discussion, and what a treat and delight to meet and hear Nathan speak! I was just having a discussion the other day with my friend Sebastian on the pathology of “optimizing time,” and boy do I wish I would have had the distinction between “optimizing” and “flourishing”-that’s an excellent framing! What’s defined as “optimizing” today is arguably what is “anti-flourishing,” a perverted inversion which I fear Transhumanism indeed contributes to…I also liked the points on how “our past is in the future,” and also how our openness to being today can transform the meaning of the past. The distinction between “response” and “reaction” was also excellent, and I really like what Nathan said about existentialism being a path versus a focus in Heidegger, which is to say we are to face anxiety and boredom so that we can meet the conditions in ourselves necessary for us to really “get” the question of being. There are some questions we can’t even understand, let alone answer, without preparation-thus the need to face death so that we can be “with being.”
Nathan’s points on how limits are needed for creativity were grand. Indeed, there would be nothing to create if there were no limits. Where there are no limits, everything already is, which suggests the tragedy of aiming to live without limits: everything will be finished and boring. And I didn’t know you were writing a book on memory, Johannes! That’s so great! I’ll certainly be looking forward to it! And it never struck me how strange it is that every beer is now “An Original Brew,” as if originality is rare today. Jeez….
To close, I really liked what Nathan said about “seeing a crack in the Matrix”-that was a deep and moving point. Made me think of the power of Mystical Visions in religious thought, and I think that was a really great image to communicate what “glimpsing being” meant for Heidegger. Because of a second, a glimpse, everything is different forever.
Excellent discussion, thank you Nathan and Johannes.
Thanks, Daniel! I hope to be able to have a dialogue with you one day as well brother.
It’s great your speakers are so diverse, all approaching Heidegger from different directions. Very enjoyable!
I had to stop after fifteen minutes (with a promise to myself to begin tomorrow where I left off.) One comment is needed about the series of courses Nathan took called “Landmark Worldwide.” The name “LW” was coined after the original name EST (Erhard Seminars Training), which came into being in the sixties by Werner Erhard, became defunct in 1984. Although many people like Nathan feel the course transformed them, others felt the course mimics a number of questionable cult-like rules (e.g., bathroom breaks are very restricted, while the seminars themselves can be unreasonably lengthy and often employ overly emotional role-playing techniques.) Needless to say, EST received a lot of bad press in the 1960’s and 70’s That said, one of my favorite authors on Heidegger, Michael E Zimmerman, who wrote the engaging book, “Eclipse of the Self: the development of Heidegger’s concept of Authenticity,” (1982) speaks highly of the “Landmark Worldwide”course if only as a means of applying Heidegger to interpersonal problems. So Nathan’s experience at Landmark is positively corroborated by a recognized Heideggerean philosopher.
Glad you enjoyed the conversation Joseph, and thanks for taking the time to create that context, I appreciate you!