People on the far right seem to really like Heidegger, but was he really that important of a thinker...

Left and right typically take heed to different parts of his philosophy. Same with Nietzsche.

you know Fascists?

One but not personally, he's an internet friend.
Are we done with the interrogation Mr Gestapo?

Sure, but I was thinking more on the lines of actual philosophical books written as extensions of his philosophy, such as Being and Nothingness by Sartre.

I can't think of too many contemporary right heideggerians, otherwise yes to both questions.

I'll take it from here
*strolls calmly up to table*
now then, mister user.........
*slams hands on desk*
where were u on the night of wednesday the seventh at 10:40 pm????
*scowls menacingly*

If somebody was openly Fascist post WW2 do you honestly think anyone in academia anywhere would pay attention to them? I'm sure there is some guy out there with a giant reactionary continuation of Heidegger but who exactly is going to publish that

That's going to be pretty difficult since the far right is met with general hostility in the academia. You have exceptions like Alain de Benoist and Guillaume Faye, and Tomislav Sunic

The same people that would publish Evola, Schmitt, Hitler, Mussolini in the current year? You sound naive.

> I'm sure there is some guy out there with a giant reactionary continuation of Heidegger

There is. The guy who inspired the Islamic Revolution in Iran for example, Ahmad Fardid.

>but was he really that important of a thinker, and was he really that groundbreaking?
You really need to know the history of philosophy and then read him for yourself to determine the answer to your question. There's a lot of people who think he's a charlatan, someone who ripped off Rilke, someone who could only appeal to that segment of the intellectual class who are actually dumb nobodies, etc. Some notable Heidegger haters off the top of my head: John Searle, Thomas Bernhard, William Gass, most Anglo philosophers. And then there are the people who love him and think that he revolutionized philosophy and was able to finally get at what it had been missing the whole time. Some Heidegger lovers: Sartre, Rorty, pretty much all continentals after him, Dreyfus, too many novelists to name, Wittgenstein (maybe not a lover but an admirer).

I don't think you understand. I mean someone who is openly Fascist in the year 1970. A racist, antisemite, reactionary. Who would publish that

Evola is esoteric as fuck and was already popular before then. Mussolini and HItler are incredibly important historical figures, obviously they are published.

Well, Alain de Benoist is arguably not even right-wing. He strikes me as some kind of Trotskyist.

>most Anglo philosophers
To say that an anglo would hate something is a redundant expression, for they hate everything.

>Well, Alain de Benoist is arguably not even right-wing.
He's openly associated with the New Right and a proponent of white nationalism and European nationalism. You're correct that he synthesized left and right ideas, but it's not arguable that he's not right wing.

>fascism
>reactionary

>Who would publish that
Muslims

oh fuck off you know what I mean. If you LARP as a Monarchist you can pass by alarm bells, but try voicing your support for the Spanish Inquisition and see how fast you're called a Fascist

Hitler is actually really popular in the ME.

all the academics i ever knew who liked heidegger were on the left, never met a conservative academic who liked him

>never met a conservative academic
me neither

He's a virtual nonentity

My Classics professor was a Heidegger scholar, and he was certainly not on the Left. Though, I've heard that Classics is practically the last bastion of conservative people in academia in general.

Upvoted

Certain parts of history are also strongly conservative. Still, STEM and economics are generally much more right wing than the Arts.

I'm honestly surprised every time I'm reminded that he has followers on the left as well, I'm not sure what they get out of him.

He was important but important =/= great

Concepts like Das Man can easily be translated into some kind of Marxist interpretation of capitalist social structure. Whether it's correct or not is another thing though.

absolutely based

Not an example.

I'm about to graduate with my Phil degree at UCLA and my entire department is filled with conversatives Heideggerian Spinozists, of course it didn't begin that way though..

How the fuck did that happen?

Spencer and Greg Johnson are large fans.

Read Heidegger and make your own opinion. Stop developing your learning process through second-hand sources and, when it comes to such fields as epistemology/ontology, avoid making it political.

It didn't and hasn't that is how.

Oh yeah? The department and I will be at 510 Glenrock Ave this evening why don't you find out for yourself nigger.

What's your own political stance, user?

Phil student.
Easily upset and has shit bants
Just kill yourself.

Yea whole department kid. Not just you and your friends jacking off on a cracker.

Heidegger is admired regardless of political leanings and his reputation in academia has only increased , regardless about the bitching that he was a nazi. There are currently a fuckload of Heidegger scholars and not all of them are rightists. Gadamer, his most famous student had nothing to do with the right or the nazis.

I had to briefly read about him in Law School because of Hermeneutics.He is the go-to guy when Supreme Courts want to bend the meaning of words

How could supreme courts use Heidegger for that?

>People on the far right seem to really like Heidegger
So do leftists. Although it's true that his philosophy leans to the right.
>but was he really that important of a thinker, and was he really that groundbreaking?
Yes. He's on the very, very top tier. I unironically think he's the GOAT.

Gadamer instrumentalized him for constitutional interpretation. Pre-comprehension plays a great part and the interpreter actually constructs the meaning of the text, instead of revealing a hidden intention (Schleiermacher, Dilthey). Interpretation is an act of will.

>who droned on about 'traditional' forms of living
citation please

Damn near the entire genealogy of contemporary leftist identity politics can be traced back to him and Nietzsche

He equalized metaphysics and technology
complained about science pervading the whole life.
He wanted the life from the Greek Polis.
And he fled to the woods.

u wot m8

you don't mean that they explicitly mentioned him ?

>was he really that groundbreaking?
I mean, he corrected an error in philosophy that had persisted from the Classical Greek period, so yeah?

>tfw a nu-male soyboy finds out the greatest philosopher of the 20th century was an unrepentant antisemite

>you can only be a liberal or a conservative

the triggered subhuman is correct he did all of that and more
and he was right nigger
Heidegger, Nietzsche, Kant, Hegel, Wittgenstein are the only philosophers you should be forced to read to be considered human

>germanics
The only philosopher anyone should be forced to read is Hobbes, and the only work of his they should ever read is Leviathan.

no this is wrong, but add Hobbes to that list and Plato and we're good, you don't need to read anything else at all

It's nice of you to be dumb little amerimutt

Gadamer was CDU mate. You even read his book on European values. It's soft conservatism

this

Upvote

I'm trying to include Gadamer in my master thesis but I'm far from being well read on his work, I wish we'd have more hermeneutics/Gadamer threads on this board

Worst yet is that his philosophy kind of supports his antisemitism. Based Heidegger.