Was he a brainlet?

no

can actually confirm.

Attached: bait is the mind killer.png (600x600, 17K)

this but ironically.

I had this exact same shit flung at me across a dinner table a couple Saturdays ago, still really upset over it.

Just ask them if it's ok to disregard all Marxist thinkers. They'll go on some stupid limp-logic retort about how Marxism is not inherently violent or the groups that it's violence is justified. Both of those statements are pretty easy to tear down and turn back on Nazism/Liberalism/Monarchism/Etcism. Hope that they'll see how stupid their original unironically bigoted position was. If they don't, they're retards without critical thinking capabilities. If they do, you'll have made them a much better but far less happy person.

>reveal your powerlevel
nice try jdif

It's not some /pol/ meme. Those people have been propagandized to make them easier to use as violent thugs for the elites. The specters generated by the Atlantean state-media apparatus to control your loved-ones' minds are equally fictitious on both "right" and "left". Everyone would be a happy Auschwitz guard if you let them do it in a Super hero T-shirt.
It'll're being tricked.

So Heidegger is portrayed as a mediocre philosopher because of his unpalatable ideology? Sounds pretty implausible, user.

I'm not reading all that shit you just typed. Sorry famalam

>Sounds pretty implausible, user.
How does something that's been done by every single political ideology in the past seem implausible?

It's 3 sentences lol

If a philosopher's politics are bad, they are a bad philosopher. If your philosophy and your politics aren't inextricable, you're a brainlet.

But thr thing is, user, his politics aren’t bad... There’s an understandable logic to it. Your objection isn’t political, it’s moral.

that's 3 sentences too many

Attached: giphy.gif (480x270, 1.94M)

>you may think Nazis are bad but have you considered that they're good

Attached: galaxy brain.png (422x279, 237K)

user, have you considered perhaps that Good and Bad is a hackneyed, groundless dichotomy? It hasnt served a useful function in formal philosophy since Machiavelli.

The first division of Being and Time is the possibly the the greatest work of philosophy in the 20th Century.

The second division where Heidegger introduces 'Temporality which temporalizes itself' and 'Historicity' seems really off.

He influenced Post-Structuralists, Speculative Realists, Hermeneutics with Gadamer, Leo Strauss and Hannah Arendt so he's pretty great.

That's not a response to his point. "Good" and "Bad" are horrifically words that do not lead to truth.
You're a petty moralizer and nothing else. The Nazis had a sound logic to their actions and ideas. That's an objective fact.

Can anyone source this anecdote for me? Can't remember where I heard it and too much of a faggot to google.

A friend invited ol Martin over for dinner and found the philosopher scanning through the bookshelf. Martin shelved the book he was reading -- DT Susuki's Essays in Zen -- and said "if I understand this man correctly, this is what I have been trying to say in all my philosophy."

Thoughts? Is this even true?

Attached: heidigger.jpg (581x872, 51K)

But Heidegger’s massive contribution to metaphysics has little to do with his political ideology.

>you may think Nazis are bad but have you considered that bad things aren't real

Attached: galaxy brain 2.jpg (2048x1024, 265K)

You're a fucking idiot.

Well, have you? It seems like an obvious and preliminary thought to consider for someone engaging in philosophic discussion.

>you may think Nazis are bad but have you considered that anyone who disagrees with me is a fucking idiot

I’m not a Nazi, but your lack of self-awareness astounding, holy shit

>you may think Nazis are bad but have you considered that you just don't know yourself well enough and if you did you'd be a Nazi too

Attached: galaxy brain 3.jpg (800x550, 92K)

I'm the persona that called you a fucking idiot because you are one.
Would you like to respond to the other user's original point or continue being an idiot?

Holy shit that's some heavy projection.

>you may think Nazis are bad but have you considered that you're a double idiot

Attached: galaxy brain 4.jpg (724x543, 89K)

It’s pointless, user. He’s a shitposter and given the opportunity he has yet to respond in any seriousness.

That aside. It’s ridiculous to think that someone would conflate politics with morality and yet consider themselves on the level to speak about modern philosophy. He’s either a transplant from /pol/ or a newfag.

>you may think Nazis are bad but have you considered that you think you don't know yourself well enough to be a Nazi but secretly you are a Nazi and you're just projecting your non-Naziness onto other people because you're scared of being a Nazi, thereby making you a Nazi

Attached: galaxy brain 5.jpg (480x360, 23K)

>you may think Nazis are bad but have you considered that you're a newfag and a shitposter and a brainlet

Attached: galaxy brain 6.jpg (1280x640, 378K)

Have you considered that? It seems like a pretty apt observation, given your extreme close mindedness.

Stop wasting your time. This person clearly does not wish to engage you in good faith.

>when psychoanalyze yourself

>you may think Nazis are bad but have you considered that your considering you yourself may be a closet Nazi unbeknownst to yourself projecting non-Naziness onto anons is clearly signaling that you are in fact a Nazi engaged in a deepfake operation against anons who may or may not be genuine Nazis, thereby making you a non-Nazi Nazi Nazi non-Nazi, thereby making you a Nazi

Attached: galaxy brain 7.jpg (480x360, 24K)

So do you just have this series of pictures in order to meme yourself out of an argument? I don’t understand why you’re in this thread exactly. What benefit is there in this except wasting time? It just seems like ruining everyone’s good time by asserting something and then not offering an explanation or a case. Clearly your intention is not convince anyone or change people’s minds, and it’s definitely not too argue or debate in good faith. I just don’t get the point of this exercise of yours? Is it a sensualist thing? Do you derive pleasure from the very act? I hardly believe you even object to nazism or heidegger this much in actuality since you don’t seem to have anything coherent to say. Will you even answer this?

>you may think Nazis are bad but have you considered that

Attached: galaxy brain 8.jpg (446x611, 81K)

Carry on then, user. Congratulations on achieving absolutely nothing. I suppose I have to imagine you happy.

>you may think Nazis are bad but have you considered that I just want you to be happy

Attached: galaxy brain 9.jpg (796x635, 52K)

lmao, based

Dude, read the black notebooks. There’s a lot more to it than you think. The Jews were only part of the problem.

I'm aware of Heidegger thinking that Jews uproot beings and believed in a ''dangerous international Jewish element'' according to Karl Jaspers, but I haven't read anything other than Being and Time. What else is there in those books worth looking into?

Holy fuck, why did you even bother wasting words towards a shitposter? The fact that you were still serious despite knowing he was a shitposter and really isn't invested in arguing just shows how autistic you really are. Is this your first day not posting on reddit?

Even if the black notebooks are pretty damning, it's not like the nazis held a monopoly on antisemitism.

Im sorry you are this jaded and cynical. That you’re willing to eat dirt just because it’s what they put on your plate. My advice to you is to always aim to change what you dislike and not simply grumble in solitude.

>arguing with the right side of history

Finally a fucking real response. I remember why I left the shitty board of literal retards who think they are smart cause they read Wikipedia

>le "define good" double digit IQ pseudtastic underage polyps getting BTFO by based galaxy brain user
Absolutely based.

Attached: 6dBt2Oj.jpg (251x242, 15K)

>So Heidegger is portrayed as a mediocre philosopher because of his unpalatable ideology?
no, he is potrayed as borderline wrongthink and it's being implied that a deeper study of his work isn't recommended because of his ideology.
>Sounds pretty implausible, user.
i wasn't speaking affirmatively i just said this was my experience on university. my history professor also argued that the nazis were dumb and incompetent and only came to power because germans are bad. this is what happens when schools become indoctrination centers and a teacher's only function is reduced to moralizing instead of educating.

heidegger is being underrated for his political inclinations by some but also overrated for the same reason by others.

holy shit BASED

>but the nazis had LOGIC and REASON
whoa.. so this is the power of moral relativism...

Everyone can see how assblasted you are, my dude.

>the endless ritual disavowals of secular satan
yawn

Have you actually read him? There's an entire social aspect to his philosophy and it's not something unrelated to his phenomenology but a direct consequence of it. If you accept Heidegger's premise you have accept its social implications. That being said I wouldn't call his politics fascist. They are their own thing and more complex than such oversimplifications.

Bravo galaxy user, expected the usual pol kiddie garbage but this was a nice surprise.

The whole going along with the everyday crowd leveling you down into inauthenticity bit doesn't seem to really endorse dissolving the individual person into a totalitarian collective.

>hes a nazi so hes dumb
Spoken like a true seething retard

Can we have 1 thread on this board without far-leftists shitting and pissing themselves at the mere mention of some right winger with a brain

Imagine getting this baited on a public board. I sometimes wish we all had trips so I could keep up with the faggots like you. Bleedingly obvious high school/early undergrad tier reactions m8.

Can we have 1 thread on this board without politicized children sharing their worthless opinions?

>heidegger is right wing
says a lot about the scope of your understanding. if you can only express yourself through CIA approved political dichotomy you're way beyond redemption. Off yourself. You've never read Heidegger anyways.

>Homelessness is coming to be the destiny of the world. Hence it is necessary to think that destiny in terms of the history of being. What Marx recognized in an essential and significant sense, though derived from Hegel, as the estrangement of the human being has its roots in the homelessness of modem human beings. This homelessness is specifically evoked from the destiny of being in the form of metaphysics, and through metaphysics is simultaneously entrenched and covered up as such. Because Man by experiencing estrangement attains an essential dimension of history, the Marxist view of history is superior to that of other historical accounts. But since neither Husserl nor - so far as I have seen till now - Sartre recognizes the essential importance of the historical in being, neither phenomenology nor existentialism enters that dimension within which a productive dialogue with Marxism first becomes possible.
-Letter on "Humanism", 1946.

Wew boy
Please explain how Heidegger isnt a right winger

Did you know Mussolini was a Marxist user

That's why I said I wouldn't call his politics fascist but, while that's the reason why he became disappointed with nazism, you're still misunderstanding him. For Heidegger authenticity is not achieved by rejecting society. Dasein can't ever not be social. Not even when it's alone. das Sein is intrinsically social. Authenticity comes from questioning it but you can't ever escape its frontiers. Rejecting society doesn't free from the ontological frontiers. It reduces them only to have to expand them again. The role of Dasein is to expand them consciously. This is why Heidegger is against liberalism. He's a conservative thinker.

I'd say he was an archaist mystic more than a conservative. Dasein is irreducibly social yes, and I wasn't suggesting the passage on the They was some banal call to "reject society", it's obviously subtler and more specific than that.

>separating politics and reality
A good metaphysicist knows the ethical and political implications of their metaphysics. Not seeing how these things are interconnected is peak brainletism.