• Quick note - the problem with Youtube videos not embedding on the forum appears to have been fixed, thanks to ZiprHead. If you do still see problems let me know.

Heidegger, Being and Time - where are the Cliffs Notes?

sir drinks-a-lot

Philosopher
Joined
May 19, 2004
Messages
5,729
Location
Cole Valley, CA
Has anyone here studied being & Time, by Martin Heidegger? I am trying to tackle this one, but have mixed feeling on whether it will even be worthwhile or not. I am trying to read some overview material along with the original Heidegger to help things along.

Is there anyone who has studied this that can offer some pointers or an opinion of the work? My initial impression is that he seems to make things unnecessarily complicated, but I also get the feeling that I just might not be "getting it" as of yet.
 
Has anyone here studied being & Time, by Martin Heidegger?

Yes, but only in brief. I could do it next year but decided to go for Wittgenstein instead.

Is there anyone who has studied this that can offer some pointers or an opinion of the work?

It's one of the most important books on philosophy that has ever been written, but he never really finished it. It's half a book. The other half of the project is spread out over the rest of his career.

My initial impression is that he seems to make things unnecessarily complicated, but I also get the feeling that I just might not be "getting it" as of yet.

Keep at it. It's sucks you in slowly. And, yes, read the secondary literature at the same time.
 
Yes, but only in brief.

Did you get anything out of it? I am wondering if there is a key insight that has yet to dawn on me or if, on the other hand, the emperor has no clothes.

I understand that any fundamental insight is not going to come easy, and will require alot of effort, but I'm just trying to determine whether Being & Time will really offer any big insights or if it is just philosophical hype. I've heard a bit from both sides of the fence...


I could do it next year but decided to go for Wittgenstein instead.
When I read (early) Wittgenstein, I found it much easier to understand and was able to get something out of it right away. Not so with Heidegger.
 
Did you get anything out of it? I am wondering if there is a key insight that has yet to dawn on me or if, on the other hand, the emperor has no clothes.

There are several key insights. These revolve around the relationship between Being, time and nothingness.

I understand that any fundamental insight is not going to come easy, and will require alot of effort, but I'm just trying to determine whether Being & Time will really offer any big insights or if it is just philosophical hype. I've heard a bit from both sides of the fence...

It's not easy. I don't think you can get the most out of Heidegger unless you have a pretty good idea what went before. Most specifically, I think you have to have a reasonable understanding of Kant's transcendental idealism, and the arguments between people like Descartes, Locke, Berkeley and Hume. Without those, Heidegger will probably pass you by. If you are not aware of the contents of "A Critique of Pure Reason" by Kant, you won't get the most out of Heidegger.

When I read (early) Wittgenstein, I found it much easier to understand and was able to get something out of it right away. Not so with Heidegger.

OK. I am guessing if you are familiar with Wittgenstein that you already have a familiarity with the things I mentioned above. If so, and you are still having trouble with Heidegger, then you might want to investigate Husserl first.

How do you find the later Wittgenstein? This is more compatible with Heidegger.
 
OK, time for a confession.

I was going to study Heidegger next year, but I changed my options and decided to go for Wittgenstein instead. It's not because I don;t think Heidegger is useful, but I am more interested in Wittgenstein. I think I know what Heidegger is going to tell me. I am not so sure with Wittgenstein.

Where are you coming from? Materialist? Non-materialist? Have a spiritual belief? Don't? Science-biased? Not science-biased? Favourite philosopher? Life agenda? :D

(Apart from drinking a lot, which is a damned good start)
 
OK, time for a confession.

I was going to study Heidegger next year, but I changed my options and decided to go for Wittgenstein instead. It's not because I don;t think Heidegger is useful, but I am more interested in Wittgenstein. I think I know what Heidegger is going to tell me. I am not so sure with Wittgenstein.

I am somewhat familiar with Wittgenstein. Are you going to study early, late, or both?

Have you read Wittgenstein's poker? You might find it an enjoyable read. You won't get much philosophy out of it, but I got some good laughs. The author builds up the physical confrontation between Wittgenstein and Popper almost as if it is a WWE match.

Where are you coming from? Materialist? Non-materialist? Have a spiritual belief? Don't? Science-biased? Not science-biased? Favourite philosopher? Life agenda?

More or less materialist, science based, no spiritual belief. Which is why I don't want to read materialist, science based stuff. I enjoyed Kuhn, Popper, Feyerabend, and Lakatos, but want to dip into some of the Continental Stuff. I tried Lacan, but am convinced he is a hoax.

Don't really have a favorite, but enjoyed Wittgensten and Bernard Lonergan.
 
I am somewhat familiar with Wittgenstein. Are you going to study early, late, or both?

Both

Have you read Wittgenstein's poker?

No, but I am aware of the story that inspired the title.

More or less materialist, science based, no spiritual belief. Which is why I don't want to read materialist, science based stuff. I enjoyed Kuhn, Popper, Feyerabend, and Lakatos, but want to dip into some of the Continental Stuff. I tried Lacan, but am convinced he is a hoax.
.

If you want to know why Heidegger is relevant you might pop over to the thread on what is the difference between science and materialism. There you will find Paul asking questions like "What is Being? Is it a thing? What is isness?" Heidegger's book is an exploration of what Being is - "What is the Being of being?" So while I can't tell you what Heidegger has to say, I can tell you why somebody needs to say it.

http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/showthread.php?t=54975&page=10
 
Immanuel Kant was a real pissant
Who was very rarely stable.

Heidegger, Heidegger was a boozy beggar
Who could think you under the table.

David Hume could out-consume
Wilhelm Friedrich Hegel, [some versions have 'Schopenhauer and Hegel']

And Wittgenstein was a beery swine
Who was just as schloshed as Schlegel.

There's nothing Nietzche couldn't teach ya
'Bout the raising of the wrist.
Socrates, himself, was permanently pissed.
Full song here
 
Dear Sir-Drinks-A-Lot,

Not only do I hope that you will some day change your 'handle' due to the appropriate reasons, but I hope you will read Richard Tarnas' The Passion of the Western Mind.

Here's a snippet from the book. Read post #29: http://206.225.95.123/forumlive/showthread.php?p=1560083#post1560083

I have found that reading about philosophy is better and more rewarding than reading the philosophical works themselves (especially as an intro. to philosophy). What you (we all) need more is what Tarnas' book has to offer than what in-depth individual works of philosophy can teach us, IMHO.
 
Okay, here's something deep for ya. "Nothingness is eternal!" Do I get money now?
 
This Book Is Simpler

Heidegger's books are not all as massive as "Being and Time." I wrote the following after reading just the short introduction. Can I recommend you start with smaller works. Just an idea.-Ron Price, Tasmania.
_______________________________

A SWEET PERFUME

This is a poetry which memorializes a particular religious tradition as well as my society and my life. It is a poetry which grows out of the events of these three categories of my experience. I like to think that this poetry reaches into the truth of this experience and responds to the appeal of its presence in my memory and imagination. I know from more than twenty-five years of writing this prose-poetry that it holds itself open to the very stuff of my living, the dwelling of my inner and outer self and the happenings of my religion and society. I have come to see my prose and poetry as equally poetic; indeed, in some ways they are interchangeable. I like to think, too, that there is in my writing a purity, a thickness and a solidity that is itself a human activity like singing, thinking, cooking or reading among so many other forms of doing. My writing, my poetry, is an expression of my own way of living, my modus operandi, modus vivendi, my style and content of thinking, how things occur to me, how I see things happen, how they move and have their being, their presentness, their being and existing. -Ron Price with thanks to Martin Heidegger, "Introduction," Poetry, Language, Thought, Harper and Rowe, NY, 1971, pp. ix-xxii.

When these ideas became accessible
in the introduction to that small book,
I was on my way to South Australia
with the commemoration of the 50th
anniversary of His passing, the inception
of the Formative Age of a new Dispensation
and the birth of an Administrative Order--all
on the horizon. There was a sweet perfume
of victory in the air back then and we tasted
it again in that dry dog-biscuit of a town in
the malee of South Australia. A new horizon,
bright with intimations of thrilling developments,
charged with meaning, half-sensed, half-seen
through my young eyes, laying bare special
challenges as I tried to seize opportunities
unique in human history to radiate a message
to the many seekers among my contemporaries.1

1 "Letter to Baha'i Youth in Every Land," The Universal House of Justice, 10 June 1966.

Ron Price
22 January 2007
 

Back
Top Bottom