Did he close the hermeneutic circle?

Did he close the hermeneutic circle?

is this a math thread?

The point of the cycle isn't the beginning or end of it, but the time spend within it, and the expreience derived therefrom.

>tfw heidegger reinterpreted total reality taoism and zen in the most boring way possible so it wouldn't count as religion
this is why the west can't have nice things

>tfw Heidegger actually took us beyond Being in a way no Eastern esotericism could

looks like that normie meme of the guy looking at another girl's ass and the girlfriend angry but without the girlfriend

only he didn't

What's with that face? Is that sheets of LSD he's carrying?

I know it's a b8 question, but come on....

also
>'heidegger reinterpreted 'total reality' from eastern religion'
>'Heidegger took us BEYOND Being'
(dis nigga literally said BEYOND Being)

why are u guys so stupid and uninformed? Know I remember why I swore off Veeky Forums.

*Now

In my defense, total reality is the accepted translation of the Quanzhen sect.
And I am quite heavily intoxicated.

didnt schiller end heidegger also heidegger is a manlet

kant was like 4', explains why he couldn't reach the things in itself

kek
#fuckkant

>makes fun of the idea of "BEYOND Being"

>Hasn't read Plotinus

that could actually be true, please elaborate

so it's closed isn't it

There is no such thing as beyond being. All the actions you take in your day to day life, conscious or not, is part of being.

He couldn't even complete the system of German Idealism, how do you think he'd solve the hermeneutic circle?

I have read fucking Plotinus, you idiot. The whole heideggerian project is to rid thinking of that sort of ontotheology that Plotinus is a prime example of. Are you incapable of reading statements in their context? Or maybe you just have no clue about Heidegger?

doesn't change the fact that it is extremely reductionistic and highly problematic to say that Heidegger's thought is simply and just a 'revision' of eastern thinking; especially given that his interest in the east came rather late in his life/career, and that their is no scholarly consensus on the relationship of his thinking to this interest.

*there

Isn't Heidegger's point, crudely stated, that there is no closing of the system (Hegel), no absolute knowledge; the circle remains open?