Reminder that deconstruction was Heidegger's idea

What is the difference between deconstruction and explaining things?

Nietzsche, Heidegger, and Derrida are all enemies of the Jordan Peterson contingent

Deconstruction = what Jews do
Explaining = what the white man does

reminder that de Man created deconstruction as practised in burger academia

Do people actually think the point of deconstruction and postmodernism is to get rid of "Western" thought?

what should i read as an introduction to derrida and pomo in general and is having read heidegger and nietzsche enough to jump into this?

really hmms the hmm

Bump

Is being and time even worth reading after the introduction?

I couldn't tell you because I haven't read it

this is peak August thanks for ruining the next 5m of my life now I have to try and forget about this

Ebin :^)

citation needed

see

I'm sorta unclear as to your definition of definition of 'deconstruction' bu would someone mind contrasting it with the second half of Plato's union/division concept by which one eventually grows beyond the need for principles? Plato and the Platonists described it in allegorical terms of the destruction of cities and I know Heidegger wrote some magnificent books on the sophist and the republic, so I'm just wondering if even Heidegger would claim the title of 'inventor of deconstructionism' (a small part of a larger philosophy) or if he would attribute this honor to Plato? I'm just unclear on all of this, I'm not supposing anything, just seeking explanation (I said at the beginning that I don't even know what you all mean by deconstruction)

Bump

This is actually true

The point is to subvert, turn it all into itself, and ultimately make it meaningless. This is the jewish modus operandi.

You can find examples of deconstruction in forms of christian theology

>Using Latin
>Romans were the darlings of the Jews
>Judeo-Christianity is spread through Romans and the teachings are in Latin
The absolute state of Veeky Forums

The Romans and jews were bitter enemies and Christianity was an ideological plague jews pushed on Rome to cause its downfall.

State of Veeky Forums indeed with nitwits like you hanging around.

Heidegger's project is to LITERALLY destroy western metaphysics.

Heidegger wants to point out the lack of meaning of the highest western values and teleologies from basically the entire period being Plato and Nietzsche.

He's a more radical Luther who is once again trying to disturb the moral and spiritual order of Europe to replace it with "I'm atheist but spiritual" which is the task of the German race to impose on Europe as the "custodians of being."

Heidegger called deconstruction 'de-struktion'. Literally, unscructuring. Removing the foundations where meaning was believed to lie. Now all meaning is flux. Phallogocentrism is deconstructed/de-strukted.

ok

Except that flux has an insane level of stability. The infinitely complex structure of reality has to be re-framed time and time again, so that we aren't swallowed up by the contradictions in our thinking, but in thought the truth re-affirms itself time and time again.
If you want to define postmodern deconstruction as anything that doesn't have objectively knowable apriori categories, then Hegel and the entire romantic school of thought were bloody postmodernists.

>The Romans and jews were bitter enemies and Christianity was an ideological plague jews pushed on Rome to cause its downfall.

thinking the situation was this simple and calling other people nitwits. fuck off pleb

Heidegger is a hack
Philosophy ended with Nietzsche

It's not that simple, but that's the nutshell version.

>Except that flux has an insane level of stability. The infinitely complex structure of reality has to be re-framed time and time again, so that we aren't swallowed up by the contradictions in our thinking, but in thought the truth re-affirms itself time and time again.

Yeah, nice, deconstruction is really working out to be the ideological back bone of even the meekest of conservatisms....

first off, the jewish elite loved the romans because they basically gave them free reign over Jerusalem without having to worry about invasions. seriously read about how jews were much freer economically under roman law (the idea that jews have a lot of wealth comes from this period because they had access to huge highways to trade and travel through). Second, jews hated christians well into late antiquity. the whole reason why christianity became a thing was because early christ followers still saw themselves as jews, and orthodox jews would slaughter them, hence their exodus to rome. by the time that romans accepted christianity it was no longer a jewish sect at all but a neoplatonic mishmash of mystery school hogwash and a complete remodeling of jewish theology (they literally thought they worshipped a different god). so you legit have no idea what youre talking about and you should go back to /pol/

>He's a more radical Luther who is once again trying to disturb the moral and spiritual order of Europe

Strange how Germans are always compelled to bring Europe towards the abyss. Heidegger did it philosophically. Arguably it began with Nietzsche but Nietzsche, regardless of his 'rightness' was a much more reflective and aware philosopher.

Heidegger, like Derrida, is clever but not genius. Nietzsche is something else altogether.

Nah dude, jews don't love anyone but themselves. I can't tell what perspective you're coming from--jewish, Christian, or other--but regardless you're generally off-base. Jews are the spreaders of universalist ideology, be it Christianity, communism, or liberalism, and they do this for reasons that are as equally beneficial to their own group interests as they are harmful to those of others. The Romans handed the jews their asses for years and the jews got back at them by infecting them with this slave ideology, and the west has been toiling under it, and the modern versions of it mentioned above, for centuries since. I recommend taking a deeper dive into the JQ so you'll better understand the macro phenomena of what we're talking about.

>Now all meaning is flux.
how is not productionist metaphysics the dominant philosophy in the West?

im an atheist and couldnt give a fuck about western or jewish ideologies. but i do study late antiquity roman systems so i can tell you from an academic point of view, you are wrong. jews arent like conglomerate you fucking retard, they fight among themselves just as much as they fight other ideologies. the idea Christianity was pushed by jews is ludicrous and belongs to /x/. just by studying the spread of christianity, i can tell you they didnt know what the fuck was going on until 400 AD. some of the early christians tried to mix mithras culture with christ. there were literal christian sex cults. it was in no way an organized ideology, and the bible only formalized thousands of different sects that developed independently. there is absolutely no proof for what you are saying other than pseudo-history and antizionist conspiracies

First of all, you need to use proper grammar if you expect others to take you and what you have to say seriously. Ranting in the format one would expect in a text message from a 14 year old girl lends little credibility to what you have to say.

>jews arent like conglomerate

Jews have remained a cohesive unit while living in other people's lands for thousands of years. Do you know how they've been able to do that? By thinking and acting like a conglomerate. Write like an adult and make an attempt to think logically and you'll embarrass yourself less in the future.

Dude, the problem isn't the philosophical framework, it's the fact that power-hungry ideologues use the process of deconstruction to destroy peoples belief in their own individual power to find the truth and make them bow to dogma.

They claim that since any position can be critiqued, and we can't establish an objective framework for proving that one is superior to another, we can't even decide which culture we want to belong to, what beliefs we should hold as rational beings. The idea of rationality is just a spook, something we use to hide our true nature as bundles of inter-subjective power-relationships an language games from ourselves.
Now, after they have made people acknowledge that they are incapable of making judgements about what is real and what is not, they introduce an exception to this rule, and proceed to construct a narrative that explains everything using this exception as its basis. That exception, they will claim, is science. Science carefully excludes subjectivity from its process to extract the objective facts, the unquestionable truths of life. And then you get shit like Adornos fascism scale and Marx idea that the communist revolution is an inevitable fact based on the scientific analysis of economy.

What exactly is plague-like about Christianity?

No, philosophy just got restarted by Nietzsche.

>still thinks Heidegger was pomo

It was designed to upend societal/aristocratic/classical norms and values by doing precisely what Nietzsche diagnosed in Genealogy. It pits the weak against the strong and promotes a universalist morality over a tribal/people/traditional based kind, thus allowing space for jews to carve out a niche and more easily exploit from within. The same strategy of using the weak/proles/minorities to diminish the power of the men historically in charge of defending the nation is also present in the similar jewish-led ideologies of communism and multicultural liberalism. As Nietzsche said, jews lead the slave revolt. It's an ethnic strategy they've been employing for who knows how long.

>It was designed to upend societal/aristocratic/classical norms and values by doing precisely what Nietzsche diagnosed in Genealogy.
hmm interesting, let's see where this argument is headed.
> thus allowing space for jews to carve out a niche
goddamnit why did I even start reading this. fuckin /pol/ is why we can't have anything nice around here.

I've never posted on /pol/. Did you have anything of substance to add?

Only that antisemitism is even worse than an ideology; it's a pathology. Have fun sorting that out.

...

>unironically posting pictures of Stefan Molyneux

>this whole exchange

it's like all you've ever encountered is Veeky Forums

Jews have for millennia caused problems wherever they've gone, and this has led to countless expulsions. To oppose jews is thus as normal as the setting sun and there's no excuse for you or anyone else in the internet age to not learn the details about why that is.

>Heidegger's project is to LITERALLY destroy western metaphysics
citation needed

He de(struktured) it in order to get to the root of it (The Greeks). Philosophy was at a dead-lock with Husserl getting stuck at the Enlightenment and with the puerile negativity of Nietzsche. The comparison to Luther is rather apt though, considering both of them rejected the Latins.

he dynamited ontology. thats literally it.

The root (aka pre-Socratics) are a meme and have no legacy. Heidegger is destroying the very foundations of western beliefs.

figures, most of cultural marxists are similar to nazis

nothing wrong with post-modernism
it is the modernists/romantics/enlightenment trash/Christianity that is the problem

jews have been used as a scapegoat to gather the people. it's simple tribalism and it's very effective

this

>both continentals and analytics try to stop metaphysics in early 20th century
>get btfo by their inconsistencies
>both continentals and analytics back to philosophizing about metaphysics by late 20th century

the greeks and scholastics always win

Aestheticization of politics is something that both cultural marxists and nazis share, but does that mean that one isn't better than the other?

What epistmeological/ metaphysical premises, and deriving from those, moral systems are they using to arrive at their views?

Is the derivation from their seperate logic the same? (Which is to say the bounds of their leaps of faith they take) Is the aesthetic they arrive at truly equivalent?

I think most reasonable people would say that nazi literature and art isn't incredibly meaningful because it's too insular to be worth anything. You probably think this insularity is beauty itself, but it's kind of asinine to blame others for not finding it to be beautiful, considering that insularity.

i'd say nazis are worse because nothing is more boring than pseudo grecoroman aesthetics

just look at vienna ffs

Bump

>muh cultural marxist boogeyman
kill yourself retards, i doubt you ever read a single book by Horkheimer or Adorno or Habermas but you'll still parrot the "muh cultural marxist" meme that jordan peterson's cockmonglers regurgitate

If you're an American writing internet articles about pop culture then there's absolutely no difference at all. Otherwise deconstruction works towards subversion of oppositions. Not destroying them but turning the excluded term into a dominating one that absorbs the "privileged" one. For example, in Nietzsche subject is not an origin of perspective, it is merely an appearance within a certain kind of (reactive) perspective. In Derrida writing is not a degenerated form of speech, as Plato would have it, speech is merely a certain form of writing.
All this is a very vulgar way of putting it. I haven't read Derrida in years. I think he wrote an excellent short essay about deconstruction, as an explanation for a Japanese translator of his works (or something like that).

It is way better than the introduction.

>All this is a very vulgar way of putting it. I haven't read Derrida in years.
this

>the literal return to the well
m8, read a book. the shit people have been telling you is a lot like the rest of their good ideas.
if you want to google something: ready-to-hand; present-to-hand. i trust you don't speak french or german.

lmao

deconstruction is necessary in order to begin construction

where the faggot postmodernists failed is that they tore everything down and refused or were too stupid to build anything in its place

No one believes this anymore. They are the root of the problem, hence the countless expulsions.

>postmodernists failed

your ideas are so dumb they don't even get a youtube clip

has critique run out of steam?

...

Bump

>not playing the smoking game with joints so you're too fucked to remember the ending
lrn2fun

>doing the reddit drug
>fun

Now I recall: Introduction, Cambridge companion to Nietzsche.

>muh jordan peterson boogeyman
kill yourself retard, i doubt you ever read a single book by Jung or Nietzsche or Solzhenitsyn but you'll still parrot the "muh reactionary" meme that the frankfurt school's cockmonglers regurgitate

>having a brain without cannaboid receptors
well, if being literally brain dead is fun for you, you do that, brother.

better ded than red

is this humour in your country?

>not born raised and residing on international water

Maybe it's the jews who were right all along