Martin Heidegger's "The Question Concerning Technology"

In this episode, I present Martin Heidegger's "The Question Concerning Technology."
If you want to support me, you can do that with these links:
Patreon: / theoryandphilosophy
paypal.me/theoryphilosophy
Twitter: @DavidGuignion
IG: @theory_and_philosophy

[@ahobimo732]

Recently discovered your channel, and I'm EXTREMELY impressed. You're explaining some of the most difficult texts in all of western academia! It's almost impossible to find accessible, yet thorough explanations of the texts and authors you discuss. You channel is a true gem!

[@user-nf8ph1gd4d]

Sep is an easy read

[@ltravail]

Heidegger's "The Question Concerning Technology" was jarringly insightful, given what see happening in our world of "modern technology" today. We have clearly reached, or are rapidly approaching, the negative extreme of his thesis. The modern technologies we celebrate today - including, or even especially, management technologies - exist almost exclusively for his "enframing" idea, and subsequently for the domination of nature and humanity. And the "freedom" (in Heidegger's sense of the word)of things, beasts, and humans consequently has been eviscerated. It's a pity that few people, especially those in power and authority, pay much attention to philosophers, especially great and insightful ones. Nice synopsis! Thanks.

[@Ykpaina988]

Yes, that is true but to those who have swords or keyboards and know how to use them but keep them sheathed or take the money and run will inherit the world.

[@thegreatgiginthesky8822]

Free yourself dude, be more realistic if technology is anything negative it is depression, not oppression

[@alexanderlarsen6412]

"All that is solid melts into air, all that is sacred is profaned" They are coping with capitalism without having access to Marx.

[@hilde45]

You did a fantastic job in a very short amount of time and a very complex reading. I am teaching this text in my upper division course this semester and was just surfing around for a refresher. Excellent excellent job and thank you.

[@dreed5818]

soooo appreciated having this video handy for a book club! thank you so much for explaining so well that someone like me can understand!

[@fahim-ev8qq]

Thank you for the great stuff you are always putting out.

[@edugon_]

I keep coming back to your videos while reading several authors. Excellent work dude! Keep it up!

[@nirvanahaldar1117]

You're amazing! You and Christina helped me through Cinema 1 and I am heavily indebted to you for that.

[@sadmort5903]

thank you good sir. Having misunderstood one concept of Heidegger's explanation of the essence of technology cascaded into me being completely lost by the end of his essay -- but it makes sense now!

[@Refr4me]

Thanks for sharing on this topic!

[@DavidLopez-gh4in]

actual good phil on youtube? i'm elated! keep it up!!

[@jacobvangeest9855]

I appreciate the copy of Dr. Michael Gregor's "How Not to Die". Also, this was really helpful for thinking aletheia more generally (as it appears in "The Origin of the Work of Art" and Being and TIme.

[@olimichaels]

Thanks so much! This is very helpful for me. Tough to read alone!

[@bigjimcrawdaddyx8731]

The issue is our contemporary understanding of being; it is not a matter of technology as a set of devices or innovations but how we relate to them, aka how they are given.

[@processorbot8761]

yay thanks for the video on this!

[@cathyrinepsycoor7056]

Thank you for this resource

[@sergiorodrig]

excellent excercise, dude ! Would love to hear your take on building dwelling thinking

[@OjoRojo40]

wtf the audio amigo. Thanks for the video.

[@joshualivingstone5259]

Well done, Dave! I really like how you emphasize the importance of questioning here (though I'd be wary of calling it critique). What I find particularly thrilling about this essay is that Heidegger is able to show (rather than just tell) how questioning is able to bring out the mysterious in the obvious, not by turning away from it but by dwelling with it and opening up to it, and how this can lead to radically new kinds of understanding. As he says in the Contributions to Philosophy, "in questioning resides the tempestuous advance that says ‘yes’ to what has not been mastered and the broadening out into ponderable, yet unexplored, realms." Very exciting.

[@TheoryPhilosophy]

Ya this is the only Heidegger I feel somewhat comfortable with. When you gonna come on to teach me being & time?!?! We need someone who actually knows this shit, lol

[@bigjimcrawdaddyx8731]

​@@TheoryPhilosophy Understanding how Heidegger interprets the "series of nows" in the B&T era will help you get a better grasp on how Enframing operates.

[@georgiaperlah7732]

this was so helpful thank you

[@markrafferty992]

Thank you my friend 🙏🏻

[@kuchuksary]

Thank you sooo much!!!!

[@dianeatkinson9113]

I found your presentation fascinating. Although I don't know much about Heidegger, I was also struck by the apparent contradiction that you highlighted between his definition of freedom as you presented it, and his Nazi sympathies. It would seem that he was calling on people to listen and respect others, and not treat others as objects. This leads me to question whether he was actually critical of Nazi ideas, but presenting the criticism in a way that would avoid being silenced.

[@bigjimcrawdaddyx8731]

Heidegger has his own understanding of freedom (he considers "originary"), which involves Dasein & the Clearing.

[@pierre-mariebesson9529]

Heidegger's philosophy allows all political/ideological pitfalls we know because of it's attempt to reach an authentic relation to "being as being" ; as the ancient greeks tried to (with, inter alia, stoicism) ; in other words to think ethic without moral. Heidegger's philosophy is NOT nazi, but simply allows, prepares, these aberrations. (wich isn't, i'll admit, less dangerous)

[@bigjimcrawdaddyx8731]

His phenomenological methods do nothing of the sort. His politics, like anyone else's, were ontic. At this point, we've brought about the 6th mass extinction. So...Heidegger's ontic mistakes are small & irrelevant, in comparison.

[@Megaghost_]

What do you think Heidegger would have said about A.I. technologies?

[@user-nf8ph1gd4d]

"Philosophy will became cybernetic"

[@raymondtalisic8292]

Can anyone provide at least three vivid similarities and three differences of Husserl and Heidegger on being and time? That should be of great help to be referenced for the paper I am working. Thanks.

[@kaidenkondo5997]

Hello, you should do more videos on Heidegger!

[@kvass679]

my fav youtube chanel

[@natedaug1]

Good lecture.

[@picaweltschmerz6357]

Love your content! It will be a shame when this ends. Did you mean Heidegger at 21:04?

[@B.Pilgrim]

Lock's notion of essences seem to corelate with Heidegger's at some point with what you were conveying. It seems as if no one questions technology anymore (as I type this on my smart phone). The pervasiveness of opinions, and the phenomenon of the internet is certainly a question for Postmodern theorists.

[@masscreationbroadcasts]

To make something more real or consider it as real is called "to reify".

[@visiemacarubbo6857]

Do you agree with martin Heidegger in his idea that technology should only be seen as one of the approaches in perceiving truth? What are other possible approaches we should consider?

[@SK-le1gm]

The Loneliness Of The Long Distance App Developer heidegger has just nailed my last decade of fruitless effort 😂

[@ipdavid1043]

It is good philosopher thinks with pure objectivism

[@hd-xc2lz]

Only ONE entry on Heidegger compared to multiple entries on Arendt, Derrida, Foucault, Butler, and others strongly influenced by his work? Kinda odd.

[@thegreatgiginthesky8822]

Don Ihde was not exaggerating when he called Heidegger the grandpa of Philosophy of Technology and he was hardly banalizing when he said "even Heideggereans love laptops".

[@Big-guy1981]

Heidegger was Hannah Arendt's mentor, lover and longtime friend. Not sure he was an antisemite.

[@bigjimcrawdaddyx8731]

He was. He didn't dislike individuals rather the cultural understanding by which they made their way in the world.

[@ik5083]

1

[@dordiwesterlund2528]

What you say in the beginning concerning the title has no ground, in German the title is Die Frage nach der Technik - there is no play of words concerning concerning. What you say about Heidegger and the Nazis is just an old cliche. I am not disputing it. Heidegger was Nazi rector in Freiburg for some nine months and said some incredibly stupid things as the politically conservative nationalist he was. It was also time that the war was over in '45 because his beloved Nazis would have shipped him off to some camp - he was under investigation by the Gestapo and one guy - forgot his name, once sent him a threatening letter writing that they were on to him ('Gallicean, your language betrays you'). Much has been made of the black notebooks and his antisemitism - did you read them? Arendt, Lowith or Marcuse did not consider Heidegger an antisemite. Being and Time was originally dedicated to Husserl and that this dedication disappeared in the second print because Husserl was Jewish is pure conjecture. It's one of the many things that Adorno assumed after murdering Being and Time in his stupid book on Heidegger's jargon as an expression of his Nazism, while it was of course Adorno himself who, mediated through the Schule in Frankfurt, specialised in writing unreadable books devoid of all practicality after the CIA politely requested Horkheimer, who was the director of the institute, to do in exchange for some funding (cf. Rockhill). In the meantime, there is no doubt Heidegger is one of the most important and influential philosophers of all time. Concentrate on the work, not the man and leave the subject about the connections between the work and the man to people who will never develop even the most modest thought themselves.

[@alexandreorion33]

Salut, David, J'ai reregardé cette vidéo. Tu es mignon quand tu cherches une manière d'exprimer quelque-chose de compliqué : ἀλήθεια. Cela m'a fait rire... (ce n'était point de la moquerie, juste j'ai trouvé ça charmant)

[@frederickanderson1860]

Philosophy isnot tailor made for the average person. The intellectual elite think they know more than us uneducated people. Its a culture thing. Revolution was achieved by the intellectual kind, Lenin Trotsky, and other revolutionary intellectual kind, like hegel who said ideas influenced historical process, yet Karl mark m9ved away from hegel like all Philosophy ideas, and he had another answer by the economic sphere. Same pattern in all human ideas, always a division between them, thesis and anti thesis, equals synthesis, not a solution but a alternative idea. Sheer madness.

[@36cmbr]

You guys think the oral teachings are sufficiently obscure to avoid them; but you have out-done yourselves in explaining the natural world. Socrates made the subjective map and its objective coordinates rather plain but then again you snuffed his ass. All that aside, you do good work.

[@thairk]

Other writers (for instance Michael Inwood) provide solid information about the relations of Heidegger to Nazism particularly that he left Nazism soon and that he was put under the radar of Gestapo. That information makes me feel that your repetition he was Nazi and not good person is insincere.

[@bigjimcrawdaddyx8731]

He still had his own understanding of National Socialism. However, I have yet to find anywhere in his work wherein ontic politics occur at the level of his methodology. Whenever he mentions politics or race, it's an obvious add on with no merit.

[@tcmackgeorges12]

21:22 IF YOU WANT TO UNTANGLE THIS PROBLEM YOU HAVE TO TURN TO WHAT SARTRE SAYS ABOUT COUNTER-FINALITY !!!!!!!!!!!!!!

[@tcmackgeorges12]

24:20

[@Flomo112]

Was he anti Semitic? Opportunist yes, anti Semite, perhaps.His lover was Jewish and his teacher was also.

[@javabrunn3929]

Idgi

[@fumoblitzkrie]

I know I sound ridicolous (I also know how elitist Heidegger sounds tho) but Heidy gives me immense "boomer vibes"

[@hereisacomment4u]

I thought the same thing. I think It’s true that people can be looked at as resources and tools but I don’t think this is new. It seems to me that Heidegger wanted to think there was something different about modern technology but I’m struggling to see this distinction. And yeah it’s super boomery to be like “people used to like trees and use windmills but now it’s all this crazy computery stuff!”

[@bigjimcrawdaddyx8731]

​@Jonathan Coe You're missing the point. Heidegger isn't arguing for Ludditism. He thinks we need to change how we understand & relate to technology. He was far ahead of his time in deciphering how everything is showing up as utterly replaceable all for the sake of efficiency.

[@bigjimcrawdaddyx8731]

Definitely not.

[@terrywhelan1]

How does a brilliant mind become a Nazi?

[@malvolio01]

If Heidegger was an anti-semite, why did he bone Hannah Arendt?

[@bigjimcrawdaddyx8731]

Why do white racists "bone" black people?

[@leiferiksson5548]

Do a video on 'Being and Time' instead.

[@alexanderlarsen6412]

Having read a lot of Nietzsche and Heidegger I was very confused until I realized they're trying to cope with capitalism but are ALLERGIC to Marx. "All that is solid melts into air, all that is sacred is profaned" sums up their philosophy much better than they ever could.

[@vangannaway1015]

You realize you've said nothing ... right?

[@Giantcrabz]

It made sense to me

[@bigjimcrawdaddyx8731]

He said quite a bit. Analytic "thought" has nothing to say or offer.