Hei Nigger

Hei Nigger.
Is there any shortcut to reading this Nazi? What are the basics?
inb4 start with the geeks
inb4 op can't inb4

Other urls found in this thread:

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Origin_of_the_Work_of_Art
twitter.com/AnonBabble

inb4 you inb4

it's not just him. everyone posting here needs to start with the greeks. if you havent already, lurk more. this is unironic

Been lurkin for years
I've read Homer, Plato, the sophists, have a general knowledge of Aristotle and medieval philosophers, a good grasp on Kant and 19th century German philosophers, particularly Schop and Neetch. What next?

>start with the greeks
How do I do that without going through a gigantic lit tier chart?

Just use the Fucking chart

Start with the Neanderthals.

honestly if you're acquainted with the basics problems of metaphysics (constitution of space and time, status of knowledge, substance/subject, ego cogito), then you'll find that heidegger lays out his project pretty lucidly in the intro to Being and Time. but be prepared to think, read, and experience the world differently thereafter.

if you've read any derrida, particularly his earlier material (roughly, from Of Grammatology through Margins), then you're already familiar with much of the impetus for heidegger's work; what you're missing is the real content, which is phenomenological hermeneutics. read Husserl's Cartesian Meditations to get yourself up to speed there.

Literally no reason to read him. Don't @ me on this.

How about this?

Plato’s Republic, Gorgias, Theaetetus, Euthyphro, Meno, Crito, Apology, Protagoras, Parmenides

Aristotle’s Politics, Ethics, Metaphysics

And for a good understanding of Materialism Lucretius’s ‘On the Nature of Things’

...

there is a chart just follow that.

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Origin_of_the_Work_of_Art
if you have basic knowledge of classic aesthetics, read this essay and then decide for yourself if anything he offers is original or whether you like his method

>shortcut

what the fuck do you think it means to read philosophy? or even to read? why do you even want to read if you want "shortcuts?"

read Kant, read Hegel, read Kierkegaard, read Nietzsche

duh

>it's an "i already arrived at my beliefs without reading any theory" thread

That essay has almost nothing to do with aesthetics in the conventional sense, I would be cautious about that

>and then decide for yourself if anything he offers is original

Heidegger might as well be Greek
The chart is shit. If you're in it just for phil then read the fragments and secondary interpretation of Heraclitus and Parmenides. Then Plato's 5 trial dialogues, excerpts of The Republic, and maybe Parmenides. Then read a secondary source for Aristotle's metaphysics along with the primary. That is the quick route
And if you really want to enjoy and really "get" Heidegger, read Descartes and Kant at least. If that seems like to much then why the fuck are reading Heidegger

You must start with the Greeks if you want to seriously get into philosophy

How can you tell what's original if you don't understand it though? It's like recommending "What Is Called Thinking?", or Wittgenstein's late lectures on aesthetics, as an intro to his philosophy because his originality is still in there. In those lectures (Work of Art is "mid-"Heidegger, 1935-37~) he's writing in a weird post-philosophical mode that only makes sense if you understand how/why he got there through his 1920s work.

Wittgenstein and Heidegger are both deceptively simple once you already understand the fulcrum-point they discover in their major work (B&T Heid, PI Witt). The fulcrum-point itself is simple. But the initial finding of it takes hard work.

I think going into it with knowledge of philosophical aesthetics would actually be more misleading than not.

>How can you tell what's original if you don't understand it though?
entertain the possibility that some people honestly dont find him original

But the question is how to understand him so you can tell whether he is original or not, not whether some people find him original or not. In fact, the only way to show Heidegger as unoriginal (a fair accusation) is to show people how to understand him, so they can see for themselves.

as i'm finishing my philosophy degree i'm realizing that the whole "start with the greeks" meme isn't actually a meme.

you will not be able to grasp heidegger without a solid background in the greeks, descartes, kant, husserl, hegel, Kierkegaard, neitzsche etc