/lit/ - Literature

>>11122355
Why do you want to read Heidegger?

You have to read the Greeks to be able to understand even the basics of Heidegger. You must also read Kant, Hegel, Nietzsche, and Husserl.

>>11122358
he says it in his op. of course posters of frivolous girl pics wouldnt bother to read

>>11122355
>my goal is to understand what is being,
Being*

Read articles on heidegger

>>11122355

If it's any help, I learned all I know about Heidegger from this picture.

>>11122355
If you don't intuitively inderstand what is meant by the word "being" you're probably retarded

>>11122358
Because I am recovering from a long addiction, and I realize every day how absurd everything is when I am not sedated. I am confronted and overwhelmed by anxiety and rage with the very thought of my existence, how unlikely it is and how I waste my potential. And also how out touch with reality I am, it's like I am drunk all day, stuck in though patterns, and I don't understand the connection between them and the real world, so I think his critique on dualism will be helpful. I also don't like materialism, as it contributed to my state of "out-of-touchness";
I also like his name

>>11122438
Heidegger is borderline nihilistic don't think being-towards-death is gonna really help you. You are thrown into a frame of intelligibility you are constitutively obligated to care about because your life is nothing but the event if its own nothingness as you hurtle toward the absolute horizon of death, etc.

>>11122371
Thanks anon
>>11122399
I am doing that
>>11122420
If it is self evident, why would Heidegger write a book on it?

>>11122463
seems comfy

>>11122355
>I don't want to read any Greeks or other works

then you're in trouble my friend

>>11122467
>If it is self evident, why would Heidegger write a book on it?
Being able to express an idea through language has certain benefits, particularly in the field of philosophy.

>>11122576
As far as I understand, that was precisely the opposite of his goal. Being is not an entity.

>>11122638
>Being is not an entity.
and where, exactly, did I ever say otherwise?

>>11122650
You suggested that you can articulate being with language. That makes being an entity

>>11122652
no, that's retarded. where did you read that

>>11122670
you literally typed that dude

>>11122680

>That makes being an entity
I mean this, not the other part. where did you read that being able to articulate something with language is enough to make that something a being?

Masterwork satire of that retard from /b/ who wanted to into Nick Land without reading any other philosophy

>>11122686
being able to articulate something with language is enough to make that something a entity. If the thing is a being it cannot be articulated into language, rather, experienced

>>11122690
I don't even know who this is..

>>11122652
not the guy you are replying to but i dont think that follows. that i can identify something with language doesn't make it an entity. 'speed,' to make a random example, isn't an entity, but i am still expressing it as an idea through language

>>11122717
Maybe speed is a entity

>>11122701
Its the same exact thread but about Nick Land.
>how to into Nick Land without reading Greeks
If this isnt satire then you're a fucking retard and should die promptly

>>11122725
go to bed, plato

>>11122355
>I wonder if I can understand his works just by life experience
Ive never seen empiricism BTFO so fucking hard, and unintentionally. Bravo brainlet anon

>>11122355
>I don't want to read any Greeks or other works
yikes!
But seriously, I was in the same boat until I was in an incredibly awful situation and read pic related to avoid killing myself. I found it a good, consider introduction to early greek thought and gave me a greater interest and appreciation in Greek thought. From my understanding, Heidegger was greatly influenced by Heraclitus and Parmenides, so it may help you. I hear there is a good lecture Heidegger gave on Heraclitus that is out there on the internet, so check that out as well. I hope to read Being and Time myself one day.

>>11122355
>what is being

This is the exact kind of thinking that Heidegger sought to criticize and rethink. With Being and Time Heidegger wants to understand being as a phenomenon, how it unfolds into its fullness.

You also need to read the Greeks before you even think of reading Being and Time.

>>11122355
Just admit that you only want to read it for psued points and we'll help you out

>>11122371
why do you think this is so?

>>11122355
>How I get into reading Heidegger?

Knowing some Aristotle is useful to know what Heidegger was fighting against but it's just the part where Aristotle is breaking things down into the ten categories (following Plato).
Just be familiar with they are:
http://philofbeing.com/2009/07/aristotle%E2%80%99s-ten-categories/

When you pick up Being and Time read this along with it:
https://www.amazon.com/Heidegger-Introduction-Richard-Polt/dp/0801485649/

It's like a guide that doesn't assume you have a deep philosophical background but you want to understand what is going on.

>>11122995
because philosophy is a tradition.

>>11122781
doesn't reading the Greeks as a prerequisite to understanding B&T, go more to appreciating the gravity of Heidegger's break from traditional ontological thought rather than it being necessary to understand that ontological truth can only be accessed through a phenomenological investigation of our everydayness?

I have only seen folks on here proclaim, simply that you must read the Greeks first before engaging B&T without giving a thoroughing explanation of why it is absolutely necessary.

>>11123066
are you familiar with Lee Braver's "Heidegger"?

>>11122995
philosophy is its history

>>11123134
i bit. everything is history, so what?

>>11123258
Did you think this was a smart comment?

>>11123258
what about what?

>>11123283
my comment or the comment i replied to? anyways they were both not smart

>>11123122

I haven't read it, why do you ask?

>>11123122
>>11123431

I'm reading through the first pages of Bravers book on Amazon, so far it's very well written. Could easily be recommended along with Polts book and it covers more than Being and Time.

>>11123111
I think you are right but in some ways having knowledge of the greeks for example might deepen the understanding amd experience of being and time. I haven't read any big philosophical texts except a few but when I'm done with my reading quest for self empowerment and so on I will start with the greeks amd go bottom up from there just because I belive being confronted with some of these ancient authors has an tremendous effect on your being

>>11122355
you're a fraud.

>>11123502

That doesn't make sense. He's made no claims about himself, he's asking for advice.

>>11123111
Well for Heidegger, the Greeks were closest to the truth, namely Heraclitus. For him, philosophy after the Greeks forgets the question of being, hence his desire and effort to summon an original way of thinking, that is, a way of thinking which heeds the question of being.

Reading the Greeks is essential to understanding Heidegger. Specifically Being and Time.

>>11123616
>Well for Heidegger, the Greeks were closest to the truth, namely Heraclitus.

Parmenides*

Heidegger is pretty damned recent in philosophy, and like most recent philosophers he relies on a long tradition which leads up to his interpretations.

Probably your best bet is going to be reading the Greeks, or at least Plato, then reading the philosophers who influenced Heidegger (Hussurl, Hegel, Kierkegaard, Kant etc.). That's a really baby-step way to teach it but I think that if you really want to be self-taught in philosophy you're going to have to hold your own hand a bit.

>>11122355
Read ‘Hegel, Heidegger, and the ground of History’ by Michael Allen Gillespie.

Also read Heidegger’s ‘What is Called Thinking’

>>11122697
Oh look, another retard that can't tell signified from referent.

>>11122781
>being as a phenomenon

>>11122576
Also because being gets passed over therefore Dasein is not usually privy to the self-evident in its average everdayness