(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
m Archiving 1 discussion(s) to Talk:Martin Heidegger/Archive 6) (bot
 
(35 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.
:I agree. These should be integrated. There is a strong case to make for continuing to maintain the Nazi stuff as its own section, but at least some of this material would probably fit better under a unified Biography section. [[User:PatrickJWelsh|Patrick J. Welsh]] ([[User talk:PatrickJWelsh|talk]]) 22:02, 21 August 2023 (UTC)


Thanks for your attention to this article!
== The essence of technology ==


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


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


== restoring film section ==
===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"/>


@[[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.
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)


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.
{{reflist-talk}}


(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.)
== overlapping lists of students ==


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.
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)


⚫
Cheers, [[User:PatrickJWelsh|Patrick J. Welsh]] ([[User talk:PatrickJWelsh|talk]]) 20:58, 3 November 2023 (UTC)
== Ideal TOC for Philosophy section? ==


== Valuable RS ==
At present, this article is quite disappointing in its treatment of Heidegger's philosophy, which — since this is is the only reason he has an encyclopedia entry — is a serious shortcoming.


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)
My knowledge of the secondary literature is limited and surely outdated, but I know ''Being and Time'' reasonably well, and I can improve coverage of this part of his philosophy in neutral language sourced at least to his own writing.

I can also produce a short section on his work on the "essence of technology" and maybe some of his work on language. Possibly also his stuff on the work of art, although my assessment of this part of his philosophy is rather low—readers would probably be better served by a more sympathetic editor.

The whole project of producing a history of being requires someone else to step up. Based on my limited reading of the relevant texts, I am highly critical of this project. It belongs in the article, but I am not willing to do the research necessary to do an adequate job of presenting his positions. Even absent proper coverage, however, it would be helpful to create a place-holder section in the TOC.

What else needs to be covered? Just having a good TOC in place encourages productive edits. And the further away we get from ''Being and Time'', the less I know. Suggestions for what needs to be covered (if possible, with good secondary sources!) in what sort of order are most welcome even if you cannot commit to making the edits yourself.

⚫
Cheers, [[User:PatrickJWelsh|Patrick J. Welsh]] ([[User talk:PatrickJWelsh|talk]]) 22:30, 21 August 2023 (UTC)

:I've done some reorganization, and I've just added a new section "Being-in-the-world" that I think, together with the "Fundamental ontology" section, covers most of the major claims of Division I of BT.
:I am hoping to write two more sections on BT: one on authenticity and das Man, and one on historicity.
:Comments and suggestions most welcome!
⚫
:Cheers, [[User:PatrickJWelsh|Patrick J. Welsh]] ([[User talk:PatrickJWelsh|talk]]) 22:33, 26 August 2023 (UTC)
:I am going to cut back the section on "The Turn" because it is more of a debate about how to organize the scholarship than it is about Heidegger's actual thought, much of which remains absent or obscure in this article.
:Besides the history of being section, I think we need sections on the three items mentioned above: technology, language, and art. [[User:PatrickJWelsh|Patrick J. Welsh]] ([[User talk:PatrickJWelsh|talk]]) 17:15, 30 August 2023 (UTC)

A lot of the material at [[Heideggerian terminology]] is more detailed than what appears on this page, and it also covers important concepts not covered here at all. Very little of it is sourced, which is unfortunate, but I still call attention to it as a potential resource. (My understanding of Wikipedia policy is that it is fine to copy material like this as long as you acknowledge it with a hidden HTML comment. I've also see notes to this effect added to the yellow box thing on the Talk page, which I'm guessing is more for more extensive borrowings, but I don't know the exact rules.) [[User:PatrickJWelsh|Patrick J. Welsh]] ([[User talk:PatrickJWelsh|talk]]) 17:24, 22 August 2023 (UTC)

== Reception in France ==

Does anyone have any thoughts on this section? Right now it is disproportionally long, and I believe it will remain so even as the treatment of Heidegger's philosophy expands. My suggestion would be to make use of [[WP:SS]], that is, to break it off into its own article, which this article would summarize in about a paragraph with a link out to the "main article". [[User:PatrickJWelsh|Patrick J. Welsh]] ([[User talk:PatrickJWelsh|talk]]) 18:25, 26 August 2023 (UTC)

:On closer reading, aside from being poorly sourced, much of this was either too much about Sartre' existentialism or redundant with material already covered in the Nazi section. I have condensed and integrated under the head of European reception.
:For the time being, I am moving the material on the The Farías debate up to the Nazi section. It can be determined later how much to keep in what form. [[User:PatrickJWelsh|Patrick J. Welsh]] ([[User talk:PatrickJWelsh|talk]]) 14:01, 27 August 2023 (UTC)

== REFSPAM issue ==

[[Nader El-Bizri]] or someone close to him appears, unsurprisingly, to be responsible for the large number of references to his work. I notice, in particular, the activity of Levantine, who I suspect is the author, and AcademeEditorial, who I would guess is a well-meaning student. But I'm not familiar with all the forensic tools used to determine such matters with greater certainty. For now, I am just going to scrape at least most of the offending references. [[User:PatrickJWelsh|Patrick J. Welsh]] ([[User talk:PatrickJWelsh|talk]]) 05:27, 27 August 2023 (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"