Find a flaw

Find a flaw

His hairline. Seriously, he should have just went full Foucalt on that one.

White-cis-man
Found three

he's only one of those things

Pedo

didn't finish the project set out in being and time

I'm a big Heidegger fan.

1. Harman, Meillasoux, Brassier et al will call Heidegger's thought 'correlationist.' Why assume that 'essential' thinking or being have anything with human thinking or human being? Put another way, it's anthropocentric: we see things through the purview of our humanity, but maybe humanity, even 'essential' humanity, like thinking, is not the best way of understanding objects and object relations, including complex technology.

2. Ihde argues that Heidegger's account of technology is essentially nostalgic. Heidegger doesn't like hydroelectric dams, but he does seem to like windmills and bridges: what's the difference between these, if not romanticism?

3. "Agriculture is now a motorized food industry: in its essence it is the same thing as the manufacture of gas chambers, the same thing as blockades and the reduction of hunger, the same as the manufacture of hydrogen bombs." Heidegger himself says this. Is that really the case? Is mechanized agriculture really the same thing as gas-chamber manufacturing?

4. He failed to produce a diss track about Rene Descartes and Immanuel Kant called Being and Crime, where he just tore those fools up.

>what's the difference between these
Dams fundamentally alter the natural surroundings and ecosystems, a small windmill H and in mind doesn't do so on the same scale.

>Is mechanized agriculture really the same thing as gas-chamber manufacturing?

Very much so. Factory farming is worse than the capital-H Holocaust no doubt.

He's pretty based but sadly no one can come close to this absolute beast

>Factory farming is worse than the capital-H Holocaust no doubt.

Are you for fucking real?

Literal Nazism, the most essentially false existence ever.

Yes.

Billions of sentient creatures terrorized and murdered in factory farms and having this be seen as nothing more than resource usage is the epitome of Ge-stell.

>dams fundamentally alter the natural surroundings and ecosystems, a small windmill H and in mind doesn't do so on the same scale.

Everything alters the natural surroundings. Even a charming wooden footbridge will attract traffic. The scale matters, for sure, but Heidegger doesn't address this question. Would a small dam be okay? How about a solar collector? These are things that he doesn't ask - in fairness, because some of that technology did not exist yet. But these are, nevertheless, aspects of his thought to be considered,

>factory farming is worse than the capital-H Holocaust no doubt

Do you have a crazy-guy manifesto we can read? Those are always fun.

They aren't human, and there's no reason to assume they suffer the same as we do.

That's not the point. Re-read Heidegger.

>Everything alters the natural surroundings.

Yes.

>Heidegger doesn't address this question.
He does, just not as explicitly as you demand.

I don't even know what a small dam would be, regardless a dam or a large wind turbine would no doubt be in the same league, I'd suspect.

>Do you have a crazy-guy manifesto we can read?
No. If you're assuming that I'm saying the chambers were excusable or somehow "good" then you'd be mistaken. They, like factory farming, are two sides of the same Gestell coin.

Reread the Spiegel interview.

>Re-read Heidegger

I'm some random anonymous. I aint got time for reading it in the first place, let alone re-reading it, and frankly the man's absurd techno-phobia does little to persuade me that I should. The man sounds spooked all to hell.

Sure.

He's not a Luddite but yeah, "spooked" is a great pigeonhole.

I'm really intrigued my Heidegger but I'm not sure what texts o should start with. Any recommendations for beginning with his writings? Any one o should read before I delve into big H?

Excuse these typos, I'm filthy dumb mobile scum

I know he's not a machine smashing member of a dated labour movement. His distaste for technology and industry sounds like an aesthetic hangup that he's attempted to rationalize into a philosophy.

He never could get that Ferris Bueller to stop skipping class.

This is one of those 2 hot 2 handle topics, honestly. Everyone has a different, strong, view. Generally you should be intimatly familiar with a host of thinkers (Hegel, Hume, Plato, even some pre-Socratics) before hand, then delve into the work of your focus or interest. Rüdiger Safranski's Martin Heidegger: Between Good and Evil might be a good place to start, honestly.

>an aesthetic hangup

I honestly don't even know where to begin with this...

>I honestly don't even know where to begin with this...
>It hurts my feefees when people build dams because they're ugly isn't an aesthetic hangup.

My feelings aren't hurt, my brain just hurts due to severe misunderstanding of so many terms and concepts. Like, I think some community college "Basic Continental Philosophy" course student would be more well-read than you are on the topic of technology, Ge-stell, and aesthetics. I'm seriously at a loss.

I'm not well read on it at all. I see literally no reason to read up on it, or Heidegger's inane jargon.

Clearly. I didn't even need that post to identify your ignorance, but thanks for the clarification.

Hey, you know what? That was a dickish thing on my part. I shouldn't dismiss an entire thinker based on a few four chan posts. Your calling farming worse than the holocaust got my dander up, when really I should just not let a disagreeable opinion to become a justification to stir up shit. Sorry.

I still disagree vehemently, but I'm going to assume you mean something that makes sense in the context of Heidegger's philosophy.

Why the fuck did I type Veeky Forums out like that?

Just read the interview he did for Der Spiegel and you can get the drift.

a dam transforms the river into merely a standing reserve or a source of energy while this is not the case with a small waterwheel. the waterwheel only really effects a certain small part of the river while the dam effects the river in its entirety.

I don't think it has anything to do with aesthetics but it comes back to ideas of essence or Being. The emergence of modern technology has created a framework in which we view things merely as standing reserve, a resource awaiting cultivation. This leads to the now prominent practical framework of society in which people focus on the external value of something rather than the thing itself. Once the river is dammed people no longer see the river as the river but rather the river is now viewed as a potential energy source waiting to be cultivated. He wants to move away from this practical, means to an end, framework of the world and wants people to see the world as it really is and this is done through art. That is where aesthetics comes into play. .