Heidegger's Being and Time with Johaness Niederhauser

[@lifearttimes]

On point, on all points.♾️ The meaning of “Be” & “ Have” = Behave indeed. To receive is to give it up and to receive is the continuum. Eckhart. 🕊️Shine On, Johannes & John!✨

[@mills8102]

Heidegger's incompleteness theorem of concealment! Wonderful. Amazing discussion. Thank you 🙏

[@UpCycleClub]

My two favorite philosophers together! Yay! 🎉🙌

[@northstar92]

🙌 I've been following both for a while too and was pleasantly surprised by this discussion

[@ModernTruthRevelation]

This may be the most advanced discussion I witness, and I'm a sucker for deep discussions. Let us be empowered in our understanding and truthfullness.

[@zachmorgan6982]

Are they speaking truth or philosophy gobldy gook

[@Robinson8491]

My favorite point made came at the very end in the last minute: that we live in the world of philosophers, without having even read them. It is inevitable, our world is shaped by their thinking

[@alanbyrneart9347]

Such a great dialogue really appreciate and enjoyed this one. It opened something in my thinking that is hard to explain it hit a few notes of understanding within me, thank you both.

[@mikegarrigan5182]

Because my perspective is oriented towards Eastern philosophy I appreciate your comments on “The Now” and how it presents itself in the timeline. Johannes’s metaphor of the bubble is appealing in that it ties into Quantum foam theory, well at least for me. Thank you, gentlemen, looking forward to your next discussion .

[@ramyafennell4615]

Recently I've been trying to hone my practice of awareness...of retaining a sense of unconditional being, while acting out tasks. My latest trick is to bring myself to awareness as often as possible...I am walking, I am sewing, Iam thinking....as i say the verb I hold onto pure 'am-ness'....so I always remember the present is in the eternal I- AM. As I listened to you I wondered if this is relevant to your discussion. Ive been having mentations of past trauma...they come unbidden even though Ive worked on myself for years and found forgiveness for the 'other' and Ibthought peace. But experts say that trauma is a wiring fault in the frontal cortex...not a memory stored in the hippocampus. So to heal trauma you have to rewire the emotion attached to the trauma to calm down the grip of it. Now, as a trauma comes unbidden, as soon as I can I catch it with awareness..'.I am traumatising'....and by hanging onto I am-ness... the eternal 'present' ....and by adding I am safe...then here ....the suffering of past and present coexist in the eternal I. This is putting the understanding of the function of transcendence into my life continually. Again and again ....as you concluded. 'Letting go' is for this purpose of daily transcendence...of self transformation. Being-existence-eternity is where completion of healing takes place, like ocean water constantly absorbing and reabsorbing waves...be they riplets or tsunamis into its equipoise. The schism is daily... to keep us open and sponataneous to the eternal life-force, which is inviting our reabsorption at every moment. That is the eternal love. Our little lives are but waves on the great ocean of Love...our true authentic nature...the nature of AM...of IS....of BEING. Time-suffering is a wave in-on.... BEING. Vedanta is my meta language to understand you guys...I hung onto this talk...especially the end....by the tips of my fingers, feeling my constant struggle in yours to articulate your goals. In my experience once you have really taken into yourself the conviction IAM...BEING...and really can experience that everyday reality is dependent and riding 'ON REALITY'....ON BEING...then the beauty of this non-duality can become a starting point for rewiring our troubled minds. Thank you so much for this jolt. Id love to hear from Johannes what Heidigger says about Parmenides poem 'On Reality'.

[@lsdc1]

Ramya, you are de-light-ful

[@Lucasvoz]

I've always found Heidegger extremely difficult to read. Thanks for this and I'd be very interested in the course by Johannes!

[@grahammoffat9752]

Play is a way of meeting the igniting of experience of which John speaks and asks at 47:30. The becoming or actualisation of an action in a play setting can be witnessed and followed in the absencing and presencing of objects in a game of hide n seek. You can even witness this in the moulding of clay/play dough or the shaping of a painting. Heidegger is conceptualising what the ongoingness of play looks like as it unfolds through and with time, experiencing itself as it does so. This is where his work I think overlaps with Whitehead and his notion of concrescence.

[@gnvtr20s]

I don’t know what y’all are talking about but I do enjoy it.

[@Art2GoCanada]

To be and to have at the same time. Behave. 2 worlds indeed! Thanks for this, I'm humbled. 📘🙏❤️🔥

[@BecomingJP]

I have never studied philosophy and so don’t know any more about Heidegger than this video, but I feel like it’s spoken less to me, more through me, to being me. Like a remembering of that which I somehow knew yet not necessarily’me’ that is the knowing. I hope that comes across. Thank you

[@northstar92]

Me too. Was listening today while doing roofing work and fell into a flow state. I put down shingles more efficiently than I had all day.

[@BecomingJP]

It is like a flow state, right!? Where enthusiasm, love of being itself in this moment, joy, I guess, and appreciation. Personally, I feel like my personage as I experienced me as much as I know me, is a conduit for something of a quality I can only know in essence but I’m privileged to be so. It’s also a privilege that grateful others as yourself are sharing in it. 🙏

[@northstar92]

​There is certainly more to us than what we might make ourselves aware of deliberately; an unknown capacity for gracefulness or spontaneity facilitated by love of being. Whenever I've managed to articulate something seemingly significant I didn't feel wholly responsible. "Conduit" is an excellent word for it, reminds me of Christians speaking about the Holy Spirit. 🙏

[@AsifKhan-bv3iu]

Fantastic presentation.

[@tcizzi]

1:28:30 It's these little tidbits of insight into Love that keep me coming back.

[@beepboop204]

the first time i read Being and Time i also concurrently read Blood Meridian. the Judge man, the Judge.

[@JiminiCrikkit]

Great talk, I feel as though there was new ground being agreed upon here ... and because of that new ground we find ourselves on, we DO have to re-inventio the wheel.

[@leninsyngel]

I think my best offer on how to engage with being, is to do so artistically. I know Heideggers fondness of poetry, but I think that he would agree that poetry is just one way to create the moments of clearing. Drawing, painting or sculpting may be even more fundamental ways of engaging with being, as they aren't even mediated by the lense of language. To some extent that is also true for manual work. But the fundamental aimlessness of art allows it to go further, and approach being with a completely open mind, resetting your expectations of what you are portraying/bringing forth actually is, to what it reveals itself to be through (artistic) care. I think the concept of 'Seinkönnen' (ability-to-be), is underdiscussed usually, partly because it's mostly talked about as a feature of Dasein. But if taken as a feature of a being, it's revaling to see being as the endless possibilities of re-understanding somethings role and part in an unfolding collective interpretation of reality. Ready-at-hand is revealing, as it will force you to reconsider your relation with a thing, but it is immediately disclosed through a new interpretation, forced into a new category of meaning. But the things ability-to-be is not limited to those intepretations. Engaging with it artistically will allow for an engagement that extends the moment of clearing, and postpones the disclosing interpretation. I suspect Jons ideas of love aims at somewhat the same thing, but I think for many, artistic engagement is easier to understand, and more concrete as a praxis.

[@sirrobinofloxley7156]

When I read Heideggers description of the stone, as it beings, I used it to meditate and find all the wisdom of his teachings are in that expression . Will you touch on McLuhan and his 'Medium is the massage'? Thanks, great show!

[@filipsmit5497]

So happy to have listened to your path seeking and transformative dialogue! Simply de-lighted! (I’m currently reading Heidegger in German, with Kluge’s Etymologische Woerterbuch der Deutsche Sprache and a Greek dictionary next to me to have a better grasp of the double and ambiguous meanings of Heidegger’s terminology - because poetics is indeed the way to go!) Best regards from the Netherlands, Filip

[@ChristianSt97]

Heidegger is always a pleasure

[@dariusparvizi-wayne8508]

Wow, what a tour de force. Profound in a manner almost beyond words. Would have loved to have heard you both discuss the convergence of Heideggerian ready-to-handedness and current work on affordances, skilled intentionality and autopoesis within the Active Inference framework. Perhaps the unfolding act of self-organisation holds the key to transcendence without the metaphysics of a two-world mythology. Hopefully next time!

[@johnvervaeke]

I do make those connections elsewhere in my work. Especially my work integrating predictive processing with relevance realization.

[@ramyafennell4615]

The documentary...Being in the World reveals Heidigger... and for me it says Be in Time but not of Time. Here we see Being as daily trandcendence in the task at hand..carpentry, cooking, jazz etc. I think they pinpoint the flow state.

[@ahmaditani8168]

Haven't watched the full video yet, but had to write the question: I wonder whether John thinks of lectio divina as a helpful practice to "remember" Being? Based on my humble and weak understanding, the moment we enact the imagery and wonder what this discloses in reality is that remembering. It also happens in Metta contemplation. We realized we have reduced the person to out image of them, and this opens us up through emotions of loving-kindness to "listen" to what really is the case. This disclosure is a reminder of Being. Am I seeing too much into this?

[@mills8102]

I would speculate that by quickly and deeply indwelling another perspective, it affords access to the more fundamental experience of Being as something within that which is unchanged both in your perspective and in the perspective of the other because the contrast between them is sudden and noticeable if we are humble and honest with ourselves. Something that underlies both perspectives and affords the possibility of these perspectives.

[@johnvervaeke]

Not at all. Excellent reflections.

[@johnvervaeke]

@@mills8102 Good development of this line.

[@Richard_Paradise]

I read up on Being and Time a little before listening to this talk. It worked me over pretty good : ) This is a really interesting topic. "By shifting the priority from consciousness (psychology) to existence (ontology), Heidegger altered the subsequent direction of phenomenology." src: wiki

[@mariog1490]

I have always found it interesting how Heidegger sees his philosophy as a, in some sense, rejection of Aristotle and medieval notions of Being. But I have never understood why? My understanding is he read much of Scotus (who thought that being was a middle term shared by the creature for analogia). And read Aquinas but didn’t read Victorious, for example. Pure Act, comes from Victorinus. Heidegger says, Being is not a substance. Or is not an intellect. But in tradition Being is super subsistence, and pre-knowledge. And is said to be “beyond Being”. Aquinas is often misunderstood, since he is read out of context (maybe let’s read parts 1&2 of the Summa). But he writes quite extensively in other books and the Summa is designed as a textbook. Aquinas inherited quite a tradition the west; from Victorinus, to Augustine, to Greggory the Great, etc. and he intends to remain faithful to them. Derrida says logos tyrannizes itself in books on texts. But the Saints say the Holy book is bound by no words. Derrida will also say logos makes in seem like texts are structurally closed. But when the fathers contemplate mysterious things, like the figure of Melchizedek, they say what is not said in words is just as important as what is said. Heidegger seems, at first, eager to investigate Being. But Heidegger realizes after his failures, that he merely wants to leave Being open. For rather, it is being which gives itself to us. Or to speak more perfectly, we give ourselves to it. Here is this quote from Victorinus: “There are in all things an appropriate "to be,” “to live,” “to understand," to feel," so that these are the shadow or the image of three highest of all. Therefore God, although He is, as is affirmed by all, the one and the only one, some, however, have said that God is the one that is all, and not the one. For He is “principle of all things.” Therefore, “not all but all in a transcendent mode". But this is the reason for this first, indeed, that God is one and alone. Because these three do not result from composition, but since being each one what they are, they are also, by that fact, the two others, we believe. So that they are necessarily one and only one, with no kind of otherness of this we have often spoken. Indeed, as for what was said "one that is all and not one, for the principle of all,” does not this expression evidently and clearly designate God the Father of “all things and their principle," who "since He is not one” is rather, “all things.” Because He is cause and "principle” of all things and He is in all things. But since we have said that God is a certain act which is “to live,” but the “to live" above all “to live.” To live" from eternity to eternity. A notion simultaneously comprising “to be” and "to understand"-and this simultaneously must be taken in such a way that there is not a shadow of composition…Indeed, although He is the "to be” of all things, the "to live” of all things, the "to understand" of all things, and He is that while being one. and one without the least appearance of otherness. how does it happen that He is called "not one”? Because He is 'principle of all things" therefore of the one Himself. From this we are obliged henceforth necessarily also to put forward these statements about Him; that His “to be," “to live," “to understand," is incomprehensible, and not only that His “to be,” "to live,” “to understand," is incomprehensible, but that this “to be,” "to live," to understand," seems not to exist, because it is above every thing, That's why it is said that He is without existence, without substance, without understanding, without life, certainly, not by privation, but through transcendence. For all things which words designate are after Him. All these things have been understood and named from secondary phenomena. For after knowledge had appeared, preknowledge was both understood and named: in the same way, for preexistence and previtality: certainly, they existed but they were not yet recognized, not yet named. Therefore also unknowable is all that which is God." (Contra Arius)

[@gunterappoldt3037]

The study of time is a vast field, indeed - an it has a history, as well as concepts of "time" have devevloped since ... stone-ages (hunch). Seen from a phenomenological perspective, - starting research ideally, if possible, with data derived from concrete "life-worlds", - this "familiar stranger" (J.T. Fraser), we use(d) to call "time", "Zeit", "時間", "toki/jikan", to divinize as "Chronos", "Kali", and/or other Gods, You name it, has many names, so to speak. There were also other, less well known phenomenological thinkers, besides E. Husserl and M. Heidegger, who also contributed to the "deep-phenomenology of our life-world(s)"; what spontaneously came to my mind, while listening, was the sociological/cultural-anthropological tradition initiated by Alfred Schütz (quite inspiring, namely, e.g., his "Collected Papers"; see also P. Berger, T. Luckmann, and others) which I personally regard as providers of interesting "supplements" via "thick descriptions" - and Anthony Giddens´ socio-historical studies, and Clifford Geerz, and "symbolic interactionism",and ... Yes, it is a vast field, indeed. Re: Concepts of time/timeliness in the Far East are manifold, so my thesis - which basically goes well along with the famous essay on the topic by the Doyen of SCC-studies, Joseph Needham, as presented in "Voices of Time" (1966). Evan Thompson also, these days, seems to hold a more critical, differentiated (if I may say so) view, regarding "Buddhist exeptionalism", including radical "here-now" rhetorics/dogmatics, (e.g., YT: "Mind & Life Podcast: Evan Thompson - Expanding Our View of the Mind"). In sum, I would say something like this (inspired by a note on "Concepts of Time in [Early?()] Buddhism" by the late Buddhologist R. Barth [right spelling?]): We can find all kinds of concepts (in the broadest sense, beginning with myth, and so forth, that is) of "time" in the Sinitic World. Just sayin´. Anyway, many thanks for the interesting talk. -Regards

[@MrMarktrumble]

Thank you

[@drewid0847]

I've read a lot of Heidegger and studied him at university. I love him but I have yet to tackle the entire Being and Time.

[@drewid0847]

How do you abstract being from subjectiveness?

[@HantonSacu]

I love how John ended it, 'again and again' 😂

[@DavidButler-m4j]

A term I use in 'Wider mentoring' (Wattpad) is 'steadfast' to mean intelligent but not an intellectual. I recommend that term rather than 'peasant' or 'working class'.

[@geoffreydawson5430]

An apophatic logos? The ocean, as I have heard explained by many secular non dualist who trained in traditional practices but eventually got bored with the rules and conditioning of all faiths. Or as Ajahn Sumedo discribes when he realised bliss for two week, but then came crashing down to earth when he had to renew his passport and got berated by beuraucrats. He recently gave a talk on Timelessness. Will let you guess the link.

[@drewid0847]

Well...for the Greeks time was folded into space and causation.

[@missh1774]

"It's raining" means to imply... there is more? But to just say "rain", it may imply... That to know where it comes from is irrelevant in the present moment? 🤔 Idk... "It" is begging for a curious child to keep pushing for answers and the other maybe fixes in a conserved moment to moment approach? Yooo... But if "it" came out from the translation of home language into English, then ha! "It" was already chuck learning categories even though "it" is not self aware of the feature. Yes??? ... That reminds me of how I was kind of shocked when I first learnt as an adult that some people didn't actually greet the Sun as though it was a Being 🤭. It simply did not register as a subject object thing. It was a given... the chunking of common "where from" stuff. Philosophy must be like a fine comb...of all the languages we are only left with the letters - I +T and I + S 🤦🏽‍♀️ thank you Johannes and John.

[@felixionescu6720]

Heidegger's Contributions to Philosophy next please?

[@beepboop204]

always been a fan and even convinced a prof to do a Reading Course with me on him. Building Dwelling Thinking is my fav

[@_ARCATEC_]

1:04:54

[@simka321]

A meta-crisis in society calls for the emergence of a meta-Christ from the midst of society.

[@Alex-ht1oq]

Christ is his own meta-Christ, the reason being is that he embodies absolute transcendence itself and so for a given crisis - at any degree of complexity - requires that same central nature.

[@DougCrawford-z5v]

Is whatever is happening now, must happen? Is our task to allow intelligibility to seep in through a communal undestanding?

[@DougCrawford-z5v]

Is this the ignition of experience?

[@DougCrawford-z5v]

I think I experience experience giving me experience to which I try to, in gratitude, give back.

[@herbertverner2875]

Mr Niederhauser is especially pretentious. Love the glasses.

[@Pedro-be4px]

Positivism

[@JoelChristophel]

1:02:34 What happened here?? lol

[@_ARCATEC_]

🌲🌲🌲 🤸🧘🤼 🌲🌲🌲

[@_ARCATEC_]

🌬️ 🪁 🏃🏻

[@sdfghjkjhgfdfghnbvbn]

A being or just being. 🤯

[@CancelledPhilosopher]

Ah, the Beingness of Being as a Being in the world.

[@sdfghjkjhgfdfghnbvbn]

I’m just a bean 🫘