(Translated by https://www.hiragana.jp/)
Talk:Martin Heidegger: Difference between revisions - Wikipedia Jump to content

Talk:Martin Heidegger: Difference between revisions

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Browse history interactively
← Previous edit
Content deleted Content added
VisualWikitext
correcting a display issue with the project boxes (which was probably my fault...)
m Archiving 1 discussion(s) to Talk:Martin Heidegger/Archive 6) (bot
 
(44 intermediate revisions by 9 users not shown)
Line 1: Line 1:
{{Talk header|archive_age=45|archive_bot=Lowercase sigmabot III}}
{{Talk header|archive_age=45|archive_bot=Lowercase sigmabot III}}
{{Vital article|level=4|topic=People|class=B}}
{{Round in circles|search=no}}
{{Round in circles|search=no}}
{{Calm}}
{{Calm}}
Line 10: Line 9:
|topic=philrelig
|topic=philrelig
}}
}}
{{WikiProject banner shell |collapsed=yes |living=no |blp=no |1=
{{WikiProject banner shell |collapsed=yes |blp=no |class=C|vital=yes|listas=Heidegger, Martin|1=
{{WikiProject Psychology|class=C|importance=Low|needs-infobox=no}}
{{WikiProject Psychology|importance=Low|needs-infobox=no}}
{{WikiProject Biography|class=C|living=no|listas=Heidegger, Martin|s&a-work-group=yes|s&a-priority=Mid|needs-discography=no|needs-filmography=no|needs-infobox=no|needs-photo=no}}
{{WikiProject Biography|s&a-work-group=yes|s&a-priority=Mid|needs-discography=no|needs-filmography=no|needs-infobox=no|needs-photo=no}}
{{WikiProject Politics|class=C|importance=Low|fascism=yes|needs-infobox=no|needs-image=no}}
{{WikiProject Politics|importance=Low|needs-infobox=no|needs-image=no}}
{{WikiProject Germany|class=C|importance=High|portal1-name=Philosophy|portal1-link=Selected philosopher/6}}
{{WikiProject Germany|importance=High}}
⚫
{{WikiProject Philosophy|importance=High|philosopher=yes|continental=yes|contemporary=yes|metaphysics=yes|aesthetics=yes|social=yes}}
⚫
{{WikiProject Christianity|importance=High|catholicism=yes|catholicism-importance=High|needs-infobox=no}}
⚫
{{WikiProject Religion|importance=High|needs-infobox=no|needs-photo=no}}
}}
}}
⚫
{{WikiProject Philosophy|class=C|importance=High|philosopher=yes|continental=yes|contemporary=yes|metaphysics=yes|aesthetics=yes|social=yes}}
⚫
{{WikiProject Christianity|class=C|importance=High|catholicism=yes|catholicism-importance=High|needs-infobox=no}}
⚫
{{WikiProject Religion|class=C|importance=High|needs-infobox=no|needs-photo=no}}
{{User:MiszaBot/config
{{User:MiszaBot/config
| algo = old(183d)
| algo = old(183d)
| archive = Talk:Martin Heidegger/Archive %(counter)d
| archive = Talk:Martin Heidegger/Archive %(counter)d
| counter = 4
| counter = 6
| maxarchivesize = 150K
| maxarchivesize = 150K
| archiveheader = {{Aan}}
| archiveheader = {{Aan}}
Line 34: Line 33:
|indexhere=yes}}
|indexhere=yes}}


== Poor introduction ==
== reorganization by IP editor ==


Hi @[[User:2001:569:538b:6500:805d:75c9:4c13:8fbb|2001:569:538b:6500:805d:75c9:4c13:8fbb]],
The introduction is narrow-scoped and the explication of ideas lacks context -- if you're going to include pithy expositions they need to be sufficiently general that they sit in context with his broader thought, not just one work. As such, it's misleading to readers who might want to acquaint themselves with the thinker. The controversial elements need to be mentioned -- but the breadth of influence of his ideas suggest that his very questionable political activity and failures in his personal life can, at least in part, be evaluated separately from his philosophical output. To make the introduction more representative, his philosophical project and breadth of work needs to be outlined more fully, including mention of his influence on subsequent philosophy. [[Special:Contributions/184.148.136.17|184.148.136.17]] ([[User talk:184.148.136.17|talk]]) 02:10, 4 March 2023 (UTC)


You recently made a large-scale organizational edit to the biographical and Nazi material in the article without even an edit description. It's not clear to me that this is an improvement, but I'd like to offer a chance to explain why you think it is.


If you or someone else does not provide a compelling justification for the changes, I will probably restore the previous version. If I do this before you see this note, do not worry. All edits are saved in the article history, and your changes could be restored if there is later consensus.
=="Biography" and "Personal Life"==
What is the difference, and why are they considered separate segments? Is the same or similar logic applied to other parts of this article?
[[Special:Contributions/32.221.207.102|32.221.207.102]] ([[User talk:32.221.207.102|talk]]) 20:40, 23 July 2023 (UTC)


You might also have a look at [[WP:ACCOUNT]] on the benefits of creating a username and account.
== The essence of technology ==


Thanks for your attention to this article!
Below I copy a section from the [[phenomenology]] page that did not really fit. It's sourced though, and since you don't have coverage here, I thought it might be incorporated. I leave the specifics to those actively involved on the page.


Cheers, [[User:PatrickJWelsh|Patrick J. Welsh]] ([[User talk:PatrickJWelsh|talk]]) 15:27, 28 October 2023 (UTC)
Cheers,


:I support the revert if there is no convincing explanation forthcoming. [[User:Phlsph7|Phlsph7]] ([[User talk:Phlsph7|talk]]) 08:15, 29 October 2023 (UTC)
===The "essence of technology"===
According to Heidegger, the essence of technology is the way of being of modern humans—a way of conducting themselves towards the world—that sees the world as something to be ordered and shaped in line with projects, intentions and desires—a 'will to power' that manifests itself as a 'will to technology'.<ref name="Introna, L. 2005">Introna, L. (2005) Disclosing the Digital Face: The ethics of facial recognition systems, Ethics and Information Technology, 7(2)</ref>
Heidegger claims that there were other times in human history, a pre-modern time, where humans did not orient themselves towards the world in a technological way—simply as resources for our purposes.<ref name="Introna, L. 2005"/>


== restoring film section ==
However, according to Heidegger this 'pre-technological' age (or mood) is one where humans' relation with the world and artifacts, their way of being disposed, was poetic and aesthetic rather than technological (enframing).<ref name="Introna, L. 2005"/> There are many who disagree with Heidegger's account of the modern technological attitude as the 'enframing' of the world.<ref>Feenberg, A. (1999) 'Technology and Meaning', in Questioning Technology, London and New York: Routledge.</ref> For example, [[Andrew Feenberg]] argues that Heidegger's account of modern technology is not borne out in contemporary everyday encounters with [[technology]].<ref name="Introna, L. 2005"/> [[User:PatrickJWelsh|Patrick J. Welsh]] ([[User talk:PatrickJWelsh|talk]]) 20:00, 26 July 2023 (UTC)


@[[User:Susmuffin|Susmuffin]], I am restoring the film section to the article. One could argue that the inclusion of [[Terrence Malick]] is merely a pop cultural reference. However, he studied Heidegger at the doctoral level, and there is a considerable academic literature on Heideggerian themes in Malick's body of work. Once this has been pointed out, it is hard not to see everywhere.
== overlapping lists of students ==


The other two films prominently feature Heidegger scholars and are directly about his thought. I think that readers are well served by their mention in the article. In contrast to the content of "Further reading" sections, it is not likely to occur to most readers to seek out secondary films about a philosopher. I would classify these two as unlikely to be challenged and so not in need of supporting citations, but reviews could surely be adduced if necessary. You couldn't really write about them without saying in the process that they are about Heidegger.
There is duplication in the lists of Heidegger's students at Marbug (unsourced) and Freiburg (two sources). If there is a mistake in the first list, it should be corrected; if students followed him, that should be stated explicitly to avoid interpreting the duplication as an error. [[User:PatrickJWelsh|Patrick J. Welsh]] ([[User talk:PatrickJWelsh|talk]]) 18:54, 19 August 2023 (UTC)

(I've seen ''[[The Ister]]'' and, although I've not seen ''[[Being in the World]]'', which does not appear to be streaming anywhere either, I know the work of a few of the scholars who participated.)

Please explain further if you still think this should not be included. Although I think it is a nice addition to the article, I don't have especially strong feelings on the matter and am entirely open to the counter-arguments of anyone who disagrees.

Cheers, [[User:PatrickJWelsh|Patrick J. Welsh]] ([[User talk:PatrickJWelsh|talk]]) 20:58, 3 November 2023 (UTC)

== Valuable RS ==

An overview of the discussions whether Heidegger was a racist: {{cite book | first1=Jonathan | last1=Judaken | chapter=Heidegger's Shadow | editor-last1=Taylor | editor-first1=Paul C. | editor-last2=Alcoff | editor-first2=Linda Martín | editor-last3=Anderson | editor-first3=Luvell | title=The Routledge Companion to the Philosophy of Race | publisher=Taylor & Francis | series=Routledge Philosophy Companions | year=2017 | isbn=978-1-134-65578-6 | url=https://books.google.nl/books?id=XJxADwAAQBAJ&pg=PT111 | access-date=1 March 2024 | page=PT111}} [[User:tgeorgescu|tgeorgescu]] ([[User talk:tgeorgescu|talk]]) 23:02, 1 March 2024 (UTC)

Latest revision as of 12:34, 6 April 2024

Former good article nomineeMartin Heidegger was a Philosophy and religion good articles nominee, but did not meet the good article criteria at the time. There may be suggestions below for improving the article. Once these issues have been addressed, the article can be renominated. Editors may also seek a reassessment of the decision if they believe there was a mistake.
Article milestones
DateProcessResult
August 10, 2006Good article nomineeNot listed


reorganization by IP editor[edit]

Hi @2001:569:538b:6500:805d:75c9:4c13:8fbb,

You recently made a large-scale organizational edit to the biographical and Nazi material in the article without even an edit description. It's not clear to me that this is an improvement, but I'd like to offer a chance to explain why you think it is.

If you or someone else does not provide a compelling justification for the changes, I will probably restore the previous version. If I do this before you see this note, do not worry. All edits are saved in the article history, and your changes could be restored if there is later consensus.

You might also have a look at WP:ACCOUNT on the benefits of creating a username and account.

Thanks for your attention to this article!

Cheers, Patrick J. Welsh (talk) 15:27, 28 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I support the revert if there is no convincing explanation forthcoming. Phlsph7 (talk) 08:15, 29 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

restoring film section[edit]

@Susmuffin, I am restoring the film section to the article. One could argue that the inclusion of Terrence Malick is merely a pop cultural reference. However, he studied Heidegger at the doctoral level, and there is a considerable academic literature on Heideggerian themes in Malick's body of work. Once this has been pointed out, it is hard not to see everywhere.

The other two films prominently feature Heidegger scholars and are directly about his thought. I think that readers are well served by their mention in the article. In contrast to the content of "Further reading" sections, it is not likely to occur to most readers to seek out secondary films about a philosopher. I would classify these two as unlikely to be challenged and so not in need of supporting citations, but reviews could surely be adduced if necessary. You couldn't really write about them without saying in the process that they are about Heidegger.

(I've seen The Ister and, although I've not seen Being in the World, which does not appear to be streaming anywhere either, I know the work of a few of the scholars who participated.)

Please explain further if you still think this should not be included. Although I think it is a nice addition to the article, I don't have especially strong feelings on the matter and am entirely open to the counter-arguments of anyone who disagrees.

Cheers, Patrick J. Welsh (talk) 20:58, 3 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Valuable RS[edit]

An overview of the discussions whether Heidegger was a racist: Judaken, Jonathan (2017). "Heidegger's Shadow". In Taylor, Paul C.; Alcoff, Linda Martín; Anderson, Luvell (eds.). The Routledge Companion to the Philosophy of Race. Routledge Philosophy Companions. Taylor & Francis. p. PT111. ISBN 978-1-134-65578-6. Retrieved 1 March 2024. tgeorgescu (talk) 23:02, 1 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Martin_Heidegger&oldid=1217542585"