In Quest of the Human, and of Being - Martin Heidegger | Glimpses Into Existence Lecture 8
Вставка
- Опубліковано 7 вер 2014
- Support my work here - / sadler & www.buymeacoffee.com/A4quYdWoM
Philosophy tutorials - reasonio.wordpress.com/tutori...
Glimpses of Existence Playlist - • Glimpses into Existenc...
Existentialist Philosophy and Literature Playlist - • Existentialist Philoso...
Take classes with me - reasonio.teachable.com/
This is the eighth in a series of twelve monthly lectures in a series on Existentialist Philosophy and Literature hosted by the Kingston Library in 2014. The Existentialist philosophers, theologians, playwrights, novelists, short story writers, and poets covered in this series are: Soren Kierkegaard, Fyodor Dostoevsky, Friedrich Nietzsche, Ranier Maria Rilke, Lev Shestov, Franz Kafka, Martin Heidegger, Jean-Paul Sartre, Simone de Beauvoir, Albert Camus, Gabriel Marcel.
In this lecture, we discuss the life, works, and key themes of the German philosopher, Martin Heidegger
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, click here: reasonio.wordpress.com/tutori...
#Existentialism #Philosophy #Series
I applaud the professor’s patience.
You work with the participants you get
I have been watching you on and off for years now and I'd just like to thank you for your project of articulating often difficult philosophical concepts in a more accessible manner.
You’re very welcome!
Thanks a lot for these lectures/talks, Dr. Sadler. You have an admirable breadth of knowledge and a patience and eloquence to express that in a concise and yet also comprehensive way. Bravo!
You're very welcome!
I have heard you lecture on "The Question Concerning Technology," or maybe it was a M. H. lecture or essay surrounding that work, and it opened Heidegger's mind up to me in a way no one has ever been able to articulate. You are a gifted teacher, Greg. Truly.
Thanks!
the videorecording from the lecture and discussion about Heidegger's thought and works from last weekend
thank you
Is there any particular reason this video is the first in your Heidegger playlist?
What an amazing professor, able to improvise a complex presentation through dialogue in class. Truly architectural vision showing that critical thinking is an art.
Well, I do have notes with me
@@GregoryBSadler What I mean is that although (or because) the presentation is well prepared you are able to allow the students’ questions and comments into the flow and improvise an interaction that leads forth to the content you are presenting. Engaging their questions and comments does not compete with the presentation, on the contrary it enhances it.
@@terrylaguardia6838 Yes, that's my usual approach. Glad you enjoy it
Lovely discussion.
Thanks for posting this. You must be a very busy man to post so many lectures
Yes, there's the lectures, and then my other activities -- writing and research, other content production, philosophical counseling, consulting work. . . .
From a lay persons perspective a lecture series on Heidegger is almost essential as I certainly found reading Being & Time as translated in to English to be painfully difficult without lots of accompanying explenative information. Very much looking forwards to seeing the lecture on Camus...
It's equally tough reading it in German. Down the line, I might do a full series on Being and Time, like the Half-Hour Hegel series I'm currently working on.
That would be superb though I can understand that finding the time for all your videos is probably difficult...
Great video, I'm really loving this series! I was wondering, also, would the thinker Emil Cioran be considered an existentialist? Or maybe just another philosopher of pessimism like Schopenhauer?
Yes, Cioran gets placed into that group by some scholars.
Hello Doctor Sadler and thanks for the conference, it has been very useful in reordering my readings around Existentialism and Heidegger. OTOH, if I may make a humble suggestion: I studied philosophy in France, and over here you're not allowed to interrupt the speaker willy-nilly to bring up mundane considerations about kid's reading habits or whatnot ... You should just plough through your exposé and have people write down questions and ask them all at the end, opening things up to debate. I honestly think it would be more fruitful. I admire your patience and willingness to explain; but for some of us, it might be frustrating to hear you reaching a point we find super interesting, just to be derailed by someone asking you if Schopenhauer lived in the 20th Century.
Thank you and philosophize on!
Glad you enjoy the videos.
We do things very differently over here. I think you can find many videos where there aren't any other speakers
To translate Heideggers's complex language to the level that a non-expert (such as myself) connects to requires not only knowledge but also art. Thanks to Dr. Sadler for the great lecture.
I have been reading Heidegger for the past few months, starting from "Sein und Zeit" (the English translation, though. So far, it appears that it is almost impossible to de-couple "Sein und Zeit" from what we know from human psychology. What he refers to reminds me of the concept of "optimal experience" (commonly known as the state of flow) developed by "Mihaly Csikszentmihalyi." My understanding of the concept of "Dasein" is a combination of "being present/mindfulness/awareness" found in many Eastern philosophies and the more modern concept of "Optimal Experience."
My question is: is it accurate to say that what Heidegger means by "Dasein" is essentially a psychological state ?
Thanks again for your great content,
greetings from Germany
To answer your question: No
I'm wondering if you've got a video/lecture that discusses the idea of how to distinguish between the two.
@@GregoryBSadler
@@quantummath Don't need one. Dasein isn't just "human psychology" or a "psychological state", whatever that's supposed to mean.
Here's my advice for you: read and study Heidegger closely, and don't try to force connections
Hello dr.sedler thank you for helping me understanding western philosophy better than before. I just started this lecture series on Hiedegger because i was interested in his influence on Iran revolution 1979. I would love to hear your opinion on this matter. I believe Dr.Ali Mirsepassi is a great start because i just started reading his books. I'm more like a philosophy enthusiast. And i wanted to hear the opinion of an expert like you on the errors of Ahmad Fardid reading of Hiedegger.
Thank you sir for being such a great teacher.
Glad that the videos have been helpful for you.
I have no idea who those two authors you mention are. There are literally thousands of people out there writing on Heidegger
@@GregoryBSadleractually i'm Iranian and those two are Iranian writers (Fardid lived around 1950s and the other one is working in NYU). Honestly i just found out they exist and it was a long shot anyway. As you know (or may not know) there's a revolution happening here and if you could talk to another professor who knows about those two (or maybe talk to prof.Mirsepassi himself), i believe it'd be worthwhile. because I couldn't find anything on this subject anywhere except Mirsepassi's books.
And thank you sir for answering so quickly.
Could you give me some advice on some articles or books from analytical philosophers critical of Heidegger?
I think you can easily google search that
My god were those yentas eager to get their opinions in.
thats how u learn
Makes it hard to listen to.
Dude. I was thinking in my head "these f***ing yentas" and then I see your comment. Haha.
God I love Heidegger...excellent discussion
It was indeed a good crowd
You mentioned Max Scheler in this video, what exactly was his weird mixture (in religion I mean)? I've been interested in him as well, and he seems like a very interesting figure.
His "weird mixture" comes after he leaves the church, very late in his work and career -- a kind of eclecticism taking from assorted religions, but particularly Buddhism and (still) Christianity.
If you're interested in him, I'd say start with his piece on Ressentiment -- it's short, builds off of but criticizes Nietzsche, and hits on some important ideas of his
Heddigger's difficultly seems to be intentional and not in a pretentious way necessarily. Similar to how Hegel wrote The phenomenology of spirit with the expectation that the reader has a background in philosophy, or how Goethe wrote Faust part 2 with the Expectation that the reader has knowledge of antiquity. Heddigger seemed to expect the reader to engage with his vast and multifaceted nomenclature as a way of breaking down our habitual modes of being.
Yes, that's clearly enough the case to me. Hegel's a bad writer, though. Heidegger is a decent one
Dr Sadler, I have been watching the TedTalk series, "Brave Neuro World" on Netflix and there is a presentation by Pawan Sinha (episode 10). Sinha has been working with blind children in India. In the cases where he is able to cure the children he goes on to track the development of the child's capacity to perceive the world in the way we all do (discerning objects from regions of colors and shapes). It struck me that much of what he has discovered could have been predicted by someone familiar with Heidegger's existential analytic of Dasein just as Dreyfus was able to predict the failures of early AI research.
Well, that's quite possible.
Iain McGilchrist, in his 'The Master and His Emissary: The Divided Brain and the Making of the Western World', devotes one of the chapters to a discussion of the relevance of Heidegger and phenomenology to the findings of neuroscience on how the brain constructs our perceptions of the world.
Argh! Why is it so difficult for me to return to Sartre after spending substantial time reading Heidegger?
I love Sartre, but it feels like returning to an inner city playground after having had an all-expense-paid trip to Disneyland.
And yes I bear full responsibility for my choosing to post this.
Curse you Martin Heidegger, and the buttery smoothness (albeit dense and difficult at times) of your existential writings.
One last remark: Heidegger set the existential bar so high the thinness of air gave Sartre Nausea.
It's a reaction that makes sense to me
Gregory B. Sadler Did Sartre knowingly use Heidegger's ideas for his cartesian purposes or did he simply misread him? I thought that was exactly what Heidegger was moving away from.
I think that Sartre, like many philosophers, took from his predecessors what he thought they got right, disregarded or criticized what he thought they got wrong, and incorporated all of it into his own perspective.
Well, if you're interested in something a bit more substantive, I'll be starting a 12-week online 3-credit course with Oplerno on Existentialist Philosophy and Literature.
It begins Feb 1. We'll do one week on 11 main thinkers, including Heidegger
Do you play Dungeons and Dragons?
+Eternal Return I did, as a kid. Given the workload I currently have, when would I ever find the time to play any role playing game?
You kind of have the aura of someone who does or used to play Dungeons and Dragons.
Why are Heidegger's views considered anti-humanist? Does he believe that humans aren't completely free? Are we controlled by outside forces in some ways? I'm trying to understand Heidegger by comparing him with Sartre and their views about existence. I've heard that Sartre misinterpreted Heidegger's work as being humanist. Help me understand please.
It's got nothing to do with whether humans are free or not. Heidegger simply thinks that humanism is wrongheaded. Sartre doesn't, and argues that Existentialism is a humanism, in a lecture by that same name.
Take a look at Heidegger's Letter on Humanism -- that's where he stakes out his position
Now, I know Heidegger was an atheist, but was he an atheist until death. I heard he converted over to Catholicism just before his death, but I don't know about the validity of that, hence why I'm asking you did he?
I don't know anyone who knows.
Bergson was reputed to have had a death-bed conversion as well.
Gregory B. Sadler Heidegger grew up Catholic but later (around the time of his marriage to his protestant wife) rejected the dogma of orthodox Catholicism. As far as I know he continued in his faith until his death. See The Cambridge Companion to Heidegger's Being and Time. The essay by Alfred Denker, "Martin Heidegeger's Being and Time a Carefully Planned Accident?" includes quite a bit of biographical info. For an actual biography I suggest Martin Heidegger by George Steiner. Steiner goes into some of Heidegger's "meta-theological" thinking of his later writings (poetry as naming the holy, es gibt, thinking as thanks, the fourfold.)
Just checking out your material. I tend to not be so kind to Heidegger and his Nazi connection, because he redefined truth in a way that allowed the Nazi party to transform its character into something very bad. As you said, he transformed philosophy, for better or worse. We still see its roots today in the whole fake news debate. In his worldview, 2+2= whatever the party says it is. There is value in his writing, and I don't mean to say he is an evil person, just that his philosophy was the product of Rousseau's idealism and German nationalist philosophy into what Nietzsche feared it would be. Even Kant foreshadowed this in his moral critique, it had a very authoritarian streak, that you might even root into Spinoza's ethics.
I don't think there's a line to be traced from Heidegger to fake news
I will continue to look through your analysis. You are certainly better informed as to his research than I am. That said, I'm skeptical of post modernism, my impression is that it is a form of radical empiricism. That could be a misunderstanding on my own part. Heidegger is complicated.
I consider him to be on the other side of the debate in regards to linguistic philosophy. That he follows in the footsteps of Hume, that knowledge can only be rooted in experience. When I point to Spinoza, I look to his theory of freedom. That, as Russell argues, that Spinoza advocates that freedom is the ability to choose to obey the law. I see this tradition continued in Kant, and the law to advocate freedom. he uses the term in the sense of Spinoza. Nietzsche refutes this definition of freedom, calling Spinoza the last true Christian. In turn defining freedom as the will to power. You combine this with the social contract, and the natural state of man, and it leads to Heidegger.
A dialectic synthesis that in the natural state, man is driven to understanding by an innate will to power, that truth is dictated by experience, and that the state serves as the ultimate arbiter of justice. This in turn defines our conception of truth. In this regard, our subjective understanding of the world is derived from the mandate of the state and its definition of the greater good.
If you could point me in a better understanding, it would be most helpful. I always reserve the right to change my mind. (and I do see the irony that I'm deconstructing his arguments to reinforce my own anthropological views)
Please ladies, quiet down!!
You’re close to ten years too late for that