Martin Heidegger | The Origin of the Work of Art (part 1) | Existentialist Philosophy & Literature
Вставка
- Опубліковано 13 сер 2013
- Get the Heidegger Basic Writings book - amzn.to/2uHiAFp
Support my work here - / sadler
Philosophy tutorials - reasonio.wordpress.com/tutori...
Take classes with me - reasonio.teachable.com/
In this video lecture, we begin examining Martin Heidegger's seminal essay The Origin of the Work of Art. We follow his starting discussion of art, artists, and workwork, and then move into discussion of the often overlooked "thingly" dimension of the artwork. Heidegger then identifies and outlines three prevalent conceptions of a "thing" in western metaphysics. We examine each, and then focus in on the conception of a thing as formed matter, which leads us into the notions of equipment, usefulness, and reliability. We leave off where Heidegger begins to discuss the truth of the artwork.
Images of Van Gogh paintings used in this film are taken from public domain Wikipedia Commons, and are in the public domain
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 video on Heidegger's lecture "The Origin of the Work of Art in Martin Heidegger Basic Writings, available here - amzn.to/2uHiAFp
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
#metaphysics #philosophy #Heidegger
Wish I’d had resources such as these when I was at Uni ; struggling through textbooks with limited tutorials was certainly from a different era. Heidegger’s work still fascinates me and watching your lectures is highly informative and entertaining 👍
Yes, when I was in school, we had textbooks, primary sources, and class sessions, and that was it
Thanks. Glad you enjoyed it
Thanks, Dr. Sadler, for you close reading and unpacking of this dense text by Heidegger. It is a pity I hadn’t watched these videos before as you posted them 7 years ago. I do believe Heidegger’s ideas concerning the origin of the work of art and the happening of truth are still valuable. In fact, there seems seems to be a recent reawakening of interest in his aesthetics.
I reiterate my thanks and send my kindest regards from Spain.
You are very welcome!
Thank you so much! This helped me understand the essay for my aesthetics class! Hope you continue making videos! :)
Yes, I've got many more to come!
Love these Heidegger lectures. I was reading his collection of lectures on technology and poetry. These help me to understand some of his dense text. He can put a lot in a small book!
He certainly can -- glad the lectures are helpful in navigating his language
These videos rock! You've saved my ass this semester. Keep on keeping on!
I certainly will!
Likewise bro.
I'm back to shooting lecture videos in front of the chalkboard -- though I definitely feel the effects in my knee today!
Hey. Great videos on Heidegger and Art. Would you also consider making some videos on Merleau-Ponty and art?
Perhaps down the line. I've got a lot of projects already going at present
Sadler, have you tried an elimination diet to find allergens / inflammatory foods? My hypothesis is that if people have had a lot of antibiotics and mal-processed food, they will lose microbiotic defenses to the various irritants occuring even in the healthiest of foods, things like gluten, lectins, and phytates.
Thank you for the video. I'm from Brazil. Obrigado!
You're very welcome!
Great talk Gregory!
thanks!
Dude, thanks for this video! I'm studying this topic at school and I tried to find some videos about this in portuguese but I have failed. Fortunately I can understand English pretty well, this is the unique video I have found!!
Thanks, thanks, thanks!! I think it's a such difficult topic for a high school student, I would not have understood if you haven't produced this video.
Thank you!
Ericson Pariz.
You're very welcome. I think this is a difficult topic for most college students, so this is pretty good for a high school student!
Hi Dr. Sadler,
Idk if you remember it, but I was in a lecture you gave at Christopher Newport University in (I think) 2011 for their philosophy department’s Plato Survey course. Thanks for posting these lectures. I read this essay my senior year (two years after your lecture) and was looking for a way to re-up my familiarity with the essay without reading the whole work.
I do remember that lecture, and perhaps corresponding afterwards?
@@GregoryBSadler that’s right! Thanks again for making this content more accessible.
I teach part time at present. If you'd like to see more about my work and activities, I'd suggest looking up my LinkedIn or Academia.edu profile
thank you!!! I love this channel thanks for shared us!!!!
You're welcome!
Thank you so much! I understand now!!!
That's fine. This is a Heidegger video. That's more something to let me know about by private message or in a comment on my main channel page
Your wife went to EGS?! Nice! I was accepted there, but I ended up at IDSVA, instead :D I hope that she enjoyed herself! Thanks for making these videos! Some of us IDSVA students watch them often ;)
Indeed she did. She's still working on her dissertation. Glad you enjoy the videos!
Great theme and great speech! (: I really like the way you explain philosophy in a simple, but not simplistic way. Are you currently working as a professor also?
No -- if we're talking about it Aristotelian terms, it is the final causality, the fact that it's quite clearly defined, that makes equipment equipment -- and Heidegger's not against that sort of being, just against taking it as the general type for being.
We're not yet into the aletheic manifestation of truth in the artwork in this video, this far into the text. There'll be more about it in later installations
Honestly, I couldn't really say. Heidegger is often a foil for Derrida, that's for certain. He does reference the Van Gogh shoes thing in The Truth of Painting.
The Derrida I found interesting was mainly the early stuff of On Grammatology, Speech and Phenomenon, Writing and Difference -- then a bit of the much later stuff like Specters of Marx, the Gift of Death, etc.. But, it's been some time since I looked at even that stuff. Perhaps when I've got the time. . . .
You do a great job!
Thanks! It's a lot of work
Simply put, in tools, no efficient causality without there being a final causality -- you make them to do something
I'd love to see some videos on William James especially his religious philosophy.
great video, very helpful
Glad you found it (and the 2 other videos in the series) useful
Is this the book Derrida uses in Into the Bargain (or something to that effect)?
Gregory B. Sadler. I am a philosophy Student from Newcastle, England. I was hoping you might be able to tell me who's translation you are reading from, which publish (a bibliography/ reference would be ideal). Only as it is conflicting with my own copy.
Thanks,
W
+William Prior You see the book in my hand. Basic Writings, trans. Krell
thank you!
You're welcome!
professor if you were a contemporary philosopher, what branch under philosophy would you frequently use for your writings?
I suppose I'd probably be considered a history of philosophy person
Great lecture! You make understanding this essay infinitely easier, so thanks a lot. I'm interested in what you said about Aquinas using the subject/predicate interpretation of things to criticise the ontological argument (around 38 minutes in), but I can't find anything about it online. Do you have any suggestions for where I might find a more detailed exposition of Aquinas' mistake?
Once again, thanks for all the great lectures!
Start with the question and the articles early on in the Summa Theologica about whether God exists - that will get you started
It seems I have this notion that since the final cause as teleology doesn't have to be taken in terms of dasein-being (the for-the-sake-of), H laments how things are increasingly taken that way (thus mangling truth). And tools are the one kind of thing that it is proper to take only that way, as long as you don't confuse that with Being as such. But I mistakenly want to identify tools with efficient causation, probably because I see that as more endemic to modernity..everything in ref. to us.
in hebrew, i would say- אתה מלך!
(= you are the king!)
Hahaha! Of philosophers? That would be a tough job -- like the proverbial "herding cats"!
First thought that the reader must carry from this essay is the orgin (and I will take away also independence). And then in the back we have the thought of thingness, equipment, and existence. It also takes the philosopher in to the thought of philosopher. eg, Thales. The water is the indepenent existence. But let us take water. here we are almost going backwards. In water esennce first gives form sto water. the equipment and thingness seems to be almost an after thought. a shoe is the essence. Therefore provided in the beginning. we constrrut a shoe with the intention of making a tool that we ware. but for a shoe there is the paradoxcal shoe-ness and the material of the leather. We need to understand the circular shoe and the material. Again the reason why Thales is in the forefront of the origin because he is the first philosopher (artist). And water is the most flexiable of the masterial.
You are the half of centrey old. so am I
I only know because I picked up some Derrida For Beginners comic book thing. I on;y understood the premises, but when it actually dug into the work, I was lost (Funny book, though. The conversation was framed by a beret-wearing,cigarette-smoking, French couple that deconstructed itself on the last page).
And then this distorted conception of equipment (again, as efficient causation comes to the fore in modernity, tacitly or otherwise) is taken to be something like the general structure of Being. So everything is incorrectly taken in terms of human dasein's purposes, and even artworks are thought of as sort of like dasein in a sense "using" Being to represent the truth of beings? And he's going to say it's more the other way around?
Thanks for another great lecture. I couldn't stop listening very intriguing philosophy. I was wondering if you have any lectures a Judaic philosophy or texts, such as The Bible(Torah), Talmud, and Maimonides, etc...
Id recommend you check out Dr. Henry Abramson’s channel on UA-cam, he’s an historian by training, but on his channel he covers a range of topics related to Judaism, including those you listed in his various lectures.
@@annascott3542 Thanks!
So to put in Aristotelian terms, is it right to say that H dislikes how modernity (and perhaps neo-orthodox Protestantism) stresses efficient causation (as the final cause fell out)?So things being less fixed in their essences causes the artist to be fancied as the "God" of the artwork, the source of its being, whereas "real" artwork calls attention to the "alethic" way things are actually given to us.And tools show how a thing's being can be distorted when consciously thematized?
Excelent as always, professor. However, I do not have the seriousness necessary to study philosophy - it became so hard to keep the pace once I noticed the "work o FART" in the board hahuahuua
=/
You would probably love the "Celebrity Jeopardy" skits then
Yes, that sounds rather Derridian
Dr Sadler, is there a transcript of parts 1 and 2?
If UA-cam didn't generate it, then no
I see it right there on this one. You know that you go to the video description to see transcript, right?
Thanks for the swift response. Do you mean the book: Basic Writings? Otherwise no, I don't see a transcript of your commentary.
@@mmccoig Then you're not following the basic instructions, are you, and you're wasting my time as a result. Look at the video description
"Can anyone set themselves up as an artist?" All I can think of is poor, poor Squidward. Nope, not everyone can be an artist haha.
Thanks for the lessons. These are very useful.
You're welcome!
Perhaps Squidward just didn't find his proper medium
13:09. Círculo hermenéutico. Para saber si A es Z necesitamos saber qué es Z, pero para saber qué es Z necesitamos saber en qué (A, B, C...) se manifiesta Z (epagogé)
Спасибо вам за замечательные лекции по философии Мартина Хайдеггера.
Heidegger is ART
Bringing a third term of "Art", that is necessarily a priori to the artist and the creation demeans both the creator and the creation. Such categorizations certainly come from those who do not create, but merely think about creating. Art is not a popularity contest. If we are all artist than none are, thus there is no art. The argument is self defeating. This is very close to describing art as a noumenon (thing in itself), which I find ironic coming from the phenomenological Heidegger.
Interesting perspective. One could likely say the same sort of thing about a priori pronouncements about works of philosophy and those who create them. . .
+History of Ideas - ReasonIO I am still working this all out. I need to think this through further. I did not expect you to respond so fast...lol
are you still active?
ua-cam.com/video/kSnxvnrCHLw/v-deo.html
"how do essences become essences?" In the reflexivity of artist and art, a third term is necessary. interesting....how does this map to reason and self-identity....I do accept "thinking as craft" .... a thing is ens: a discrete, non contiguous self-bounded and self identical entity. ( yes, petitio...). Esse is not a thing, as it is unbounded. The vorhandenheit was taken as primary instead of the zuhandenheit of the tools in our umwelt. The individual human subjectivity becomes the prime example of being, not the abstract presence-at-hand of a broken hammer... substance as ens is the completion of all properties, but none of any of each. "Hypokeimenon" is the integrity and essence of the substance, which for hiedegger is not the thing, but in Dasien's practical lived world, active unself-awareness is the substratum for any "thing". the hypokeimenon is sorge. With this return to the "things" themselves, humans can have a cosmos again. ..."knives and cups" suddenly I am thinking of Aristotle's four causes...and there you said it...HEY! My old hiking boots! reliability = constancy through time= that which always is and never changes( in contrast to that which always changes, and never is). Art is a window on the world as disclosure (a-lethia). Thank you
You're welcome!
I am glad you can tolerate my "word salad", which is like one half of a phone conversation of responses to your video. I will not do this every time ( as to avoid gibberish) but to indicate what is not disclosed in my "thank you"'s. And you deserve to be thanked for the work that you do. Regarding my ownmost possibilities, I have a debate happening between the stoics and Hiedegger, thus I am driven to understand each more.
No -- this is actually quite interesting. It's like a summary of the piece and video, with your own reflections and responses thrown into it.
You might consider actually starting a blog, for the ongoing Heidegger-Stoic stuff. Later on, when I've freed up some time, let's actually chat about that idea
Thank you for helping to explain Heidegger, who i was cautious about for his apathy about Nazis. You always make philosophy fun. We disagree on Art theory, as all animals are artists if they create and there is an observer. Art exists in nature, it is not even dependent on artifice, but seeing design or beauty in something.
Glad you found the video useful
I hope everyone who voted positive to this got an A in their class... otherwise H is nonsense!
*claps*
+Alice Geronzi Thanks!
TLDR: I don't compare myself to the artistic greats (though I was only in my mid-teens when I was being noticed by the artistic community when I rejected them - so who knows?). If you've ever heard the way physicist Richard Feynman talks about his disgust for the elites in the world of science: his disgust for the focus on "epaulettes" rather than the focus on the actual work to be done in physics. That's the same kind of disgust I felt for the art world - only I felt like that's all the art world was about. And I infact chose to study subjects like physics instead of art precisely because of that.
I don't want to spam. But I need to let this out otherwise I am going to probably break something (I should really just writ ethis in a diary - I can copy it...). This subject makes me feel violent. Really pretty angry. I have a degree in Engineering Design - so, y'know, I guess it's okay that I am pretty aware of the ideas being discussed already. I had in fact responded to a subject on suicide in such kind of language as is being discussed in this video - which is why I am exploring Heidegger now (as a way of exploring an expert opinion rather than trying to work it out myself). I was apparently really good at art while at school. But I became really disillusioned with it. I got noticed. Without asking for it, I was being offered all kinds of really prestigious opportunities in the art world. I was from a disadvantaged background - and these artistic opportunities were the only things being offered to me. Nevermind I was getting top grades in maths, science and design and technology - from which nothing was being granted to me at all (I would have to work hard like everybody else). I couldn't relate to the well-to-do people in the art world - middle class people predominantly - offering me opportunities. What really got under my skin though was that I was being asked to apply the same methods I would use in my design and technology studies to my artistic studies - when I felt that was completely against the very way I was trying to produce art: I had been drawing thousands of pictures each year from an early age. There was actually no artistic technique my art teacher could teach me - I had already taught myself more than she knew... Quite a claim I know but, that's the truth I swear. I didn't need to do "preparatory work" or apply "product design" methods - that I was learning in design and technology anyway (though actually my teachers were so poor I had to interpret the syllabus myself and teahc myself the stuff - otherwise I'd learn nothing).
Art was an attitude to me - something that would be broken by interference from my art teacher (it felt like she was taking me away from the creative space much like somebody stopping an athelete from running when they were operating at their peak).
I honestly had more respect for those who struggled at art in my class than I had for my art teacher (and her connections of people in the art world). I felt she should be helping those in class (as I did - who would later go onto study art... thanking me for helping them) rather than buttering up to me.
I was completely disgusted by the art world. And totally rejected the whole ethos I was exposed to. It sickened me to the core. I barely did any art again.
I don't compare myself to the artistic greats (though I was only in my mid-teens when I was being noticed by the artistic community when I rejected them - so who knows?). If you've ever heard the way physicist Richard Feynman talks about his disgust for the elites in the world of science: his disgust for the focus on "epaulettes" rather than the focus on the actual work to be done in physics. That's the same kind of disgust I felt for the art world - only I felt like that's all the art world was about. And I infact chose to study subjects like physics instead of art precisely because of that.