Jump to content
Main menu
Main menu
move to sidebar
hide
Navigation
Main page
Recent changes
Random page
Help about MediaWiki
Special pages
Niidae Wiki
Search
Search
Appearance
Create account
Log in
Personal tools
Create account
Log in
Pages for logged out editors
learn more
Contributions
Talk
Editing
Martin Heidegger
(section)
Page
Discussion
English
Read
Edit
View history
Tools
Tools
move to sidebar
hide
Actions
Read
Edit
View history
General
What links here
Related changes
Page information
Appearance
move to sidebar
hide
Warning:
You are not logged in. Your IP address will be publicly visible if you make any edits. If you
log in
or
create an account
, your edits will be attributed to your username, along with other benefits.
Anti-spam check. Do
not
fill this in!
=== Criticism === According to Husserl, ''Being and Time'' claimed to deal with ontology, but only did so in the first few pages of the book. Having nothing further to contribute to an ontology independent of human existence, Heidegger changed the topic to Dasein. Whereas Heidegger argued that the question of human existence is central to the pursuit of the question of being, Husserl criticized this as reducing phenomenology to "philosophical anthropology" and offering an abstract and incorrect portrait of the human being.{{sfn|Husserl|1997}} Aspects of his work have been criticized by those who acknowledge his influence. Some questions raised about Heidegger's philosophy include the priority of ontology, the status of animals, the nature of the religious, Heidegger's supposed neglect of ethics ([[Emmanuel Levinas]]), the body ([[Maurice Merleau-Ponty]]), sexual difference ([[Luce Irigaray]]), and space ([[Peter Sloterdijk]]).{{sfn|Holland|2018|pages=139–43}}{{sfn|Elden|2012|pages=85–88}} [[A. J. Ayer]] objected that Heidegger proposed vast, overarching theories regarding existence that were completely unverifiable through empirical demonstration and logical analysis.{{sfn|Gorner|2000|page=90}} In France, there is a very long and particular history of reading and interpreting Heidegger. In 1929 the [[Neo-Kantian]] [[Ernst Cassirer]] and Heidegger engaged in [[Cassirer–Heidegger debate|an influential debate]], during the Second [[Davos Hochschulkurs]] in [[Davos]], concerning the significance of [[Immanuel Kant|Kantian]] notions of freedom and rationality. Whereas Cassirer defended the role of rationality in Kant, Heidegger argued for the priority of the imagination.{{sfn|Nirenberg|2011}}The reception of Heidegger's philosophy by Anglo-American [[analytic philosophy]], beginning with the [[logical positivism|logical positivists]], was almost uniformly negative. [[Rudolf Carnap]] accused Heidegger of offering an "illusory" ontology, criticizing him for committing the fallacy of [[Reification (fallacy)|reification]] and for wrongly dismissing the logical treatment of language which, according to Carnap, can only lead to writing "nonsensical pseudo-propositions".{{sfn|Carnap|1931}}{{sfn|Carnap|1966}} [[Georg Wilhelm Friedrich Hegel|Hegel]]ian-[[Marx]]ist thinkers, especially [[György Lukács]] and the [[Frankfurt School]], associated the style and content of Heidegger's thought with irrationalism and criticized its political implications. For instance, [[Theodor Adorno]] wrote an extended critique of the ideological character of Heidegger's early and later use of language in the ''Jargon of Authenticity'', and [[Jürgen Habermas]] admonishes the influence of Heidegger on recent French philosophy in his polemic against "[[postmodernism]]" in ''[[The Philosophical Discourse of Modernity]]''.{{sfn|Rockmore|1992|pages=[https://books.google.com/books?id=feWlC4ioGTYC&newbks=1&newbks_redir=0&printsec=frontcover&pg=PA57&redir_esc=y#v=onepage&q&f=false 57], [https://books.google.com/books?id=feWlC4ioGTYC&newbks=1&newbks_redir=0&printsec=frontcover&pg=PA75&redir_esc=y#v=onepage&q&f=false 75], [https://books.google.com/books?id=feWlC4ioGTYC&newbks=1&newbks_redir=0&printsec=frontcover&pg=PA149&redir_esc=y#v=onepage&q&f=false 149], [https://books.google.com/books?id=feWlC4ioGTYC&newbks=1&newbks_redir=0&printsec=frontcover&pg=PA258&redir_esc=y#v=onepage&q&f=false 258]}}{{sfn|Adorno|1973}}{{sfn|Habermas|1990|loc=chapter VI}} [[Bertrand Russell]] considered Heidegger an [[obscurantist]], writing, "Highly eccentric in its terminology, his philosophy is extremely obscure. One cannot help suspecting that language is here running riot. An interesting point in his speculations is the insistence that nothingness is something positive. As with much else in Existentialism, this is a psychological observation made to pass for logic."{{sfn|Russell|1959 |page=303}} According to [[Richard Polt]], this quote expresses the sentiments of many 20th-century analytic philosophers concerning Heidegger.{{sfn|Polt|1999|page=123}}
Summary:
Please note that all contributions to Niidae Wiki may be edited, altered, or removed by other contributors. If you do not want your writing to be edited mercilessly, then do not submit it here.
You are also promising us that you wrote this yourself, or copied it from a public domain or similar free resource (see
Encyclopedia:Copyrights
for details).
Do not submit copyrighted work without permission!
Cancel
Editing help
(opens in new window)
Search
Search
Editing
Martin Heidegger
(section)
Add topic