मार्टिन हाइडेगर
हाइडेगर के अनुसार, दर्शन यह पूछना भूल गया कि होने का क्या अर्थ है; हम एक संसार में फेंके हुए अस्तित्व रखते हैं, समय और अपनी मृत्यु से आकार पाए हुए।
पृष्ठभूमि
सत्ता के अर्थ का प्रश्न: दासाइन संसार-में-होने के रूप में, मृत्यु-की-ओर-होना, प्रौद्योगिकी की आलोचना।
मुख्य विचार
- दासाइन
- मृत्यु-की-ओर-होना
- सत्ता की विस्मृति
- गेस्टेल (Enframing)
गुरु: एडमुंड हुसल, हाइनरिष रिकर्ट
शिष्य: हर्बर्ट मार्कूज़े, शावियर सुबीरी, निशितानी केइजी, हंस-गेऑर्ग गादामर, हांस योनास, इमैनुएल लेविनास, हाना आरंट, यान पातोचका
प्रभाव
जिनसे प्रभावित 16
अरस्तू
जिनसे प्रभावित ✓
Heidegger read Aristotle’s ethics and ontology phenomenologically in early lectures and the ‘Natorp report’ (1922, publ. 1989), groundwork for the analysis of Dasein in Being and Time (1927). M. Heidegger, “Phänomenologische Interpretationen zu Aristoteles (Anzeige der hermeneutischen Situation)” (1922; publ. 1989); Platon: Sophistes (lectures 1924–25; publ. 1992); Sein und Zeit (1927); SEP “Martin Heidegger”
अरस्तू › 384–322 ईसा पूर्व
ऑगस्टीन
जिनसे प्रभावित
Heidegger’s lecture ‘Augustinus und der Neuplatonismus’ (1921; publ. 1995) read Confessions X on care (curare) and temptation, motifs taken up in Being and Time (1927). M. Heidegger, Phänomenologie des religiösen Lebens (lectures 1920–21; publ. 1995); Sein und Zeit (1927); SEP “Martin Heidegger”
साक्ष्य: InPhO में भी · InPhO
ऑगस्टीन › 354–430
गॉटफ़्रीड विल्हेल्म लाइबनित्स
जिनसे प्रभावित
Heidegger took Leibniz’s principle of sufficient reason as a guide to the question of ground, from his logic lectures of 1928 to Der Satz vom Grund (1957). M. Heidegger, Metaphysische Anfangsgründe der Logik im Ausgang von Leibniz (lectures 1928, GA 26); Vom Wesen des Grundes (1929); Der Satz vom Grund (1957)
साक्ष्य: InPhO में भी · InPhO
गॉटफ़्रीड विल्हेल्म लाइबनित्स › 1646–1716
इमानुएल कांट
जिनसे प्रभावित ✓
Heidegger read the Critique of Pure Reason as grounding metaphysics in finite knowledge, rooted in the transcendental imagination (Kant und das Problem der Metaphysik, 1929). M. Heidegger, Kant und das Problem der Metaphysik (1929); Phänomenologische Interpretation von Kants Kritik der reinen Vernunft (lectures 1927–28; publ. 1977); SEP “Martin Heidegger”
इमानुएल कांट › 1724–1804
सोरेन किर्केगार्द
जिनसे प्रभावित ✓
Heidegger took up Kierkegaard’s analyses of anxiety and the moment in Being and Time (1927), noting that Kierkegaard had grasped the existentiell problem but not the existential analysis. M. Heidegger, Sein und Zeit (1927); SEP “Søren Kierkegaard”; SEP “Martin Heidegger”
सोरेन किर्केगार्द › 1813–1855
फ़्रीडरिश नीत्शे
जिनसे प्रभावित ✓
In his Nietzsche lectures (1936–40; publ. 1961) Heidegger read will to power and eternal recurrence as the last form of metaphysics, in which nihilism is completed. M. Heidegger, Nietzsche (2 vols., 1961; lectures 1936–40); “Nietzsches Wort ‚Gott ist tot‘” (1943), in Holzwege (1950); SEP “Martin Heidegger”
फ़्रीडरिश नीत्शे › 1844–1900
सभी दिखाएँ (16)कम दिखाएँ
लाओ-त्सू
जिनसे प्रभावित विवादित
Heidegger tried translating the Daodejing with Paul Shih-yi Hsiao (1946) and linked Tao with ‘way’ (Unterwegs zur Sprache, 1959); how far Daoism shaped him is disputed. P. Shih-yi Hsiao, “Wir trafen uns am Holzmarktplatz”, in G. Neske (ed.), Erinnerung an Martin Heidegger (1977); M. Heidegger, Unterwegs zur Sprache (1959); R. May, Ex oriente lux. Heideggers Werk unter ostasiatischem Einfluß (1989); SEP “Laozi”
साक्ष्य: AI मसौदा
लाओ-त्सू › किंवदंतियों से जुड़ा व्यक्तित्व
हेरक्लिटस
जिनसे प्रभावित ✓
Heidegger read Heraclitus’ logos as the gathering that lets beings appear (‘Logos’, 1951) and discussed his fragments in lectures (1943–44) and a seminar with Eugen Fink (1966–67). M. Heidegger, “Logos (Heraklit, Fragment 50)” (1951), in Vorträge und Aufsätze (1954); Heraklit (lectures 1943–44; publ. 1979); M. Heidegger and E. Fink, Heraklit (seminar 1966–67; publ. 1970); SEP “Martin Heidegger”
हेरक्लिटस › लगभग 535–475 ईसा पूर्व
पारमेनीडेस
जिनसे प्रभावित ✓
Heidegger read Parmenides’ saying that thinking and being are the same as their belonging together (Introduction to Metaphysics, 1935; publ. 1953) and his goddess Aletheia as unconcealment (1942–43). M. Heidegger, Einführung in die Metaphysik (lectures 1935; publ. 1953); Parmenides (lectures 1942–43; publ. 1982); Identität und Differenz (1957); SEP “Martin Heidegger”
पारमेनीडेस › लगभग 515–450 ईसा पूर्व
ज़ुआंगज़ी
जिनसे प्रभावित
At a gathering in Bremen in October 1930, after his lecture “On the Essence of Truth”, Heidegger read aloud Zhuangzi’s story of the joy of the fishes from Buber’s translation; the “Evening Conversation” of 8 May 1945 in his Country Path Conversations turns on Zhuangzi’s dialogue with Huizi on the use of the useless. H. W. Petzet, Auf einen Stern zugehen (1983); Heidegger, Feldweg-Gespräche (1944/45, GA 77); G. Parkes (ed.), Heidegger and Asian Thought (1987)
साक्ष्य: AI मसौदा
ज़ुआंगज़ी › लगभग 369–286 ईसा पूर्व
मास्टर एकहार्ट
जिनसे प्रभावित
Heidegger took the word Gelassenheit from Meister Eckhart for a thinking that lets things be, distancing it from Eckhart’s surrender of self-will to God’s will (Gelassenheit, 1959). M. Heidegger, Gelassenheit (1959); Der Feldweg (1949); J. D. Caputo, The Mystical Element in Heidegger’s Thought (1978); SEP “Meister Eckhart”
साक्ष्य: AI मसौदा
मास्टर एकहार्ट › लगभग 1260–1328
दुन्स स्कोतुस
जिनसे प्रभावित ✓
Heidegger’s habilitation thesis (1915; publ. 1916) treated Duns Scotus’s doctrine of categories and meaning; its main source, the Grammatica speculativa, was later shown to be Thomas of Erfurt’s. M. Heidegger, Die Kategorien- und Bedeutungslehre des Duns Scotus (1916); T. Kisiel, The Genesis of Heidegger’s Being and Time (1993); SEP “Martin Heidegger”; SEP “John Duns Scotus”
दुन्स स्कोतुस › लगभग 1266–1308
फ़्रीडरिश हेल्डरलिन
जिनसे प्रभावित
Beginning with lectures on ‘Germanien’ and ‘Der Rhein’ (1934–35), Heidegger read Hölderlin as the poet of poetry’s essence and of the gods’ absence (Erläuterungen zu Hölderlins Dichtung, 1944). M. Heidegger, Hölderlins Hymnen “Germanien” und “Der Rhein” (lectures 1934–35; publ. 1980); “Hölderlin und das Wesen der Dichtung” (1936); Erläuterungen zu Hölderlins Dichtung (1944)
साक्ष्य: AI मसौदा
फ़्रीडरिश हेल्डरलिन › 1770–1843
विल्हेल्म डिल्थाई
जिनसे प्रभावित ✓
Heidegger took up Dilthey’s question of the historicity of life (Kassel lectures, 1925) and, via the Dilthey–Yorck letters, made historicality a structure of Dasein (Being and Time, 1927). M. Heidegger, “Wilhelm Diltheys Forschungsarbeit und der gegenwärtige Kampf um eine historische Weltanschauung” (Kassel lectures 1925; publ. 1992–93); Sein und Zeit (1927); SEP “Wilhelm Dilthey”
विल्हेल्म डिल्थाई › 1833–1911
फ़्रांत्स ब्रेंटानो
जिनसे प्रभावित ✓
Heidegger said Brentano’s dissertation on the senses of being in Aristotle (1862), read from 1907, set him the question of being (‘Mein Weg in die Phänomenologie’, 1963). M. Heidegger, “Mein Weg in die Phänomenologie” (1963), in Zur Sache des Denkens (1969); F. Brentano, Von der mannigfachen Bedeutung des Seienden nach Aristoteles (1862); SEP “Martin Heidegger”
फ़्रांत्स ब्रेंटानो › 1838–1917
याकोब फ़ॉन युक्सकुल
जिनसे प्रभावित
In his lectures of 1929–30 (publ. 1983) Heidegger drew on Uexküll’s environment studies to describe the animal as ‘poor in world’, captivated by its environment, unlike world-forming humans. M. Heidegger, Die Grundbegriffe der Metaphysik (lectures 1929–30; publ. 1983); J. von Uexküll, Umwelt und Innenwelt der Tiere (1909); Theoretische Biologie (1920)
साक्ष्य: AI मसौदा
याकोब फ़ॉन युक्सकुल › 1864–1944
जिन्हें प्रभावित किया 25
हंस-गेऑर्ग गादामर जिन्हें पढ़ाया
जिन्हें पढ़ाया ✓
Gadamer met Heidegger in Freiburg in 1923, followed him to Marburg and in 1928 submitted his Habilitation thesis on Plato’s Philebus under Heidegger and Paul Friedländer (printed as Platos dialektische Ethik, 1931); Heidegger had the most enduring effect on his thought. SEP “Hans-Georg Gadamer”; J. Grondin, Hans-Georg Gadamer. Eine Biographie (1999)
साक्ष्य: Wikidata में भी · Wikidata
हंस-गेऑर्ग गादामर › 1900–2002
जाक लाकाँ
जिन्हें प्रभावित किया ✓
Lacan, who met Heidegger in 1955, translated his ‘Logos’ for La Psychanalyse (1956) and drew on his thinking of speech and truth (Écrits, 1966). M. Heidegger, “Logos”, trans. J. Lacan, La Psychanalyse 1 (1956); J. Lacan, Écrits (1966); E. Roudinesco, Jacques Lacan (1993); SEP “Jacques Lacan”
जाक लाकाँ › 1901–1981
ज्यां-पाल सार्त्र
जिन्हें प्रभावित किया ✓
Being and Nothingness (1943) reworked concepts from Heidegger’s Being and Time, among them being-in-the-world and the nothing, though Heidegger rejected Sartre’s humanist reading (Letter on Humanism, 1947). J.-P. Sartre, L’Être et le néant (1943); M. Heidegger, Brief über den Humanismus (1947); SEP “Jean-Paul Sartre”
ज्यां-पाल सार्त्र › 1905–1980
मोरिस मर्लो-पोंती
जिन्हें प्रभावित किया ✓
Merleau-Ponty took up Heidegger’s being-in-the-world as être au monde and reinterpreted it as the pre-reflective engagement of the lived body with its world (Phenomenology of Perception, 1945). M. Merleau-Ponty, Phénoménologie de la perception (1945); SEP “Maurice Merleau-Ponty”
मोरिस मर्लो-पोंती › 1908–1961
मिशेल फूको
जिन्हें प्रभावित किया ✓
In his last interview (1984) Foucault said that reading Heidegger, with Nietzsche, had determined his philosophical development, though he wrote almost nothing on him. M. Foucault, “Le retour de la morale” (1984), in Dits et écrits IV (1994); SEP “Michel Foucault”
मिशेल फूको › 1926–1984
जाक देरिदा
जिन्हें प्रभावित किया ✓
Derrida developed deconstruction from Heidegger’s Destruktion of the history of ontology and related différance to the ontological difference (‘La différance’, 1968; ‘Lettre à un ami japonais’, 1985). J. Derrida, “La différance” (1968), in Marges de la philosophie (1972); “Lettre à un ami japonais” (1985), in Psyché (1987); De l’esprit (1987); SEP “Jacques Derrida”
जाक देरिदा › 1930–2004
सभी दिखाएँ (25)कम दिखाएँ
कुकी शूज़ो
जिन्हें प्रभावित किया
Kuki studied with Heidegger in the late 1920s and analysed iki hermeneutically, as the self-expression of a people’s way of being (The Structure of Iki, 1930). Kuki Shūzō, “Iki” no kōzō (1930); M. Heidegger, “Aus einem Gespräch von der Sprache”, in Unterwegs zur Sprache (1959)
साक्ष्य: AI मसौदा
कुकी शूज़ो › 1888–1941
शावियर सुबीरी जिन्हें पढ़ाया
जिन्हें पढ़ाया
On leave from his Madrid chair, Zubiri studied in Freiburg in 1928–29 and attended Heidegger’s courses, as well as Husserl’s, before moving on to Berlin. J. Corominas & J. A. Vicens, Xavier Zubiri. La soledad sonora (2006)
साक्ष्य: AI मसौदा
शावियर सुबीरी › 1898–1983
ख़ोसे गाओस
जिन्हें प्रभावित किया
Gaos translated Being and Time into Spanish (El ser y el tiempo, 1951) and explained it in a companion volume, making Heidegger widely read in Mexico. M. Heidegger, El ser y el tiempo, trans. J. Gaos (1951); J. Gaos, Introducción a El ser y el tiempo de Martin Heidegger (1951)
साक्ष्य: AI मसौदा
ख़ोसे गाओस › 1900–1969
निशितानी केइजी जिन्हें पढ़ाया
जिन्हें पढ़ाया
Nishitani studied with Heidegger in Freiburg from 1937 to 1939, when Heidegger was lecturing on Nietzsche and beginning to grapple with nihilism. SEP “The Kyoto School”; J. W. Heisig, Philosophers of Nothingness (2001)
साक्ष्य: AI मसौदा
निशितानी केइजी › 1900–1990
के. ई. लोग्स्ट्रुप
जिन्हें प्रभावित किया
Løgstrup heard Heidegger in Freiburg in the early 1930s; commentators count Heidegger, with Husserl, Scheler and Lipps, among the phenomenological sources of The Ethical Demand (1956). K. E. Løgstrup, Den etiske fordring (1956); H. Fink and A. MacIntyre, introduction to K. E. Løgstrup, The Ethical Demand (1997); H. Fink and R. Stern (eds.), What Is Ethically Demanded? (2017)
साक्ष्य: AI मसौदा
के. ई. लोग्स्ट्रुप › 1905–1981
यान पातोचका जिन्हें पढ़ाया
जिन्हें पढ़ाया ✓
During his stay in Freiburg in 1933, devoted mainly to Husserl, Patočka also attended Heidegger’s lectures and seminar; a looser relation than with Husserl, but Heidegger’s thought remained a point of reference in his later work. E. Kohák, Jan Patočka: Philosophy and Selected Writings (1989), introduction
साक्ष्य: Wikidata में भी · Wikidata
यान पातोचका › 1907–1977
पॉल रिक्यूर
जिन्हें प्रभावित किया
Ricœur accepted Heidegger’s grounding of understanding in existence but took a ‘long route’ through interpretation of symbols and texts instead of his ‘short route’ (‘Existence et herméneutique’, 1965). P. Ricœur, “Existence et herméneutique” (1965), in Le conflit des interprétations (1969); SEP “Paul Ricoeur”
साक्ष्य: InPhO में भी · InPhO
पॉल रिक्यूर › 1913–2005
रोडोल्फो कुश
जिन्हें प्रभावित किया
Kusch reworked Heidegger’s distinction between being and existence through the Spanish ser and estar, setting an Andean ‘mere being’ (estar) against Western being (América profunda, 1962). R. Kusch, América profunda (1962); El pensamiento indígena y popular en América (1970)
साक्ष्य: AI मसौदा
रोडोल्फो कुश › 1922–1979
राइनहार्ट कोसेलेक
जिन्हें प्रभावित किया ✓
Koselleck extended Heidegger’s being-towards-death into conditions of possible histories – having to die and being able to kill, friend and enemy (‘Historik und Hermeneutik’, 1987). R. Koselleck, “Historik und Hermeneutik” (1987), repr. in Zeitschichten (2000); M. Heidegger, Sein und Zeit (1927)
साक्ष्य: Wikidata में भी · Wikidata
राइनहार्ट कोसेलेक › 1923–2006
कारेल कोसिक
जिन्हें प्रभावित किया
Kosík reworked Heidegger’s analyses of care and everydayness into his account of the ‘pseudo-concrete’ world of manipulation and routine (Dialectics of the Concrete, 1963). K. Kosík, Dialektika konkrétního (1963); M. Heidegger, Sein und Zeit (1927)
साक्ष्य: AI मसौदा
कारेल कोसिक › 1926–2003
रिचर्ड रोर्टी
जिन्हें प्रभावित किया ✓
Rorty read Heidegger’s history of metaphysics as an ally of pragmatism against foundationalism, while rejecting his nostalgia for Being (‘Overcoming the Tradition: Heidegger and Dewey’, 1976). R. Rorty, “Overcoming the Tradition: Heidegger and Dewey” (1976), in Consequences of Pragmatism (1982); Essays on Heidegger and Others (1991); SEP “Richard Rorty”
रिचर्ड रोर्टी › 1931–2007
चार्ल्स टेलर
जिन्हें प्रभावित किया
Taylor took from Heidegger the idea of engaged agency against a background of practices, opposing it to representational models of mind (‘Engaged Agency and Background in Heidegger’, 1993). C. Taylor, “Engaged Agency and Background in Heidegger”, in C. Guignon (ed.), The Cambridge Companion to Heidegger (1993); Sources of the Self (1989)
साक्ष्य: AI मसौदा
चार्ल्स टेलर › जन्म 1931
एनरिके दुसेल
जिन्हें प्रभावित किया
Dussel’s early ethics began from Heidegger: Toward a De-struction of the History of Ethics (1973) applied Heidegger’s “destruction” to ethics, and the first volume of his Ethics of Latin American Liberation (1973) starts from the existential understanding of being before breaking with it, with Levinas, as a philosophy of totality. E. Dussel, Para una de-strucción de la historia de la ética (1973); Para una ética de la liberación latinoamericana I (1973)
साक्ष्य: AI मसौदा
एनरिके दुसेल › 1934–2023
जान्नी वात्तिमो
जिन्हें प्रभावित किया
Vattimo read Heidegger’s history of being as weakening and took his Verwindung of metaphysics, not its overcoming, as basis of weak thought (La fine della modernità, 1985). G. Vattimo, Essere, storia e linguaggio in Heidegger (1963); La fine della modernità (1985); G. Vattimo and P. A. Rovatti (eds.), Il pensiero debole (1983)
साक्ष्य: InPhO में भी · InPhO
जान्नी वात्तिमो › 1936–2023
जोरजो आगाम्बेन
जिन्हें प्रभावित किया
Agamben, who attended Heidegger’s Le Thor seminars (1966 and 1968), took up his lectures on the animal’s poverty in world and the open in L’aperto (2002). G. Agamben, Il linguaggio e la morte (1982); L’aperto. L’uomo e l’animale (2002); M. Heidegger, Vier Seminare (Le Thor 1966–69; publ. 1977)
साक्ष्य: InPhO में भी · InPhO
जोरजो आगाम्बेन › जन्म 1942
पेटर स्लोटरदाइक
जिन्हें प्रभावित किया ✓
Sloterdijk answered Heidegger’s Letter on Humanism in ‘Regeln für den Menschenpark’ (1999) and recast being-in-the-world as being in shared spaces in his Spheres trilogy (1998–2004). P. Sloterdijk, Regeln für den Menschenpark. Ein Antwortschreiben zu Heideggers Brief über den Humanismus (1999); Sphären I–III (1998–2004)
साक्ष्य: Wikidata में भी · Wikidata
पेटर स्लोटरदाइक › जन्म 1947
दिपेश चक्रवर्ती
जिन्हें प्रभावित किया
In Provincializing Europe (2000) Chakrabarty paired Marx’s abstract categories with Heidegger’s thinking of belonging and being-in-the-world to write histories of life-worlds not subsumed by capital. D. Chakrabarty, Provincializing Europe: Postcolonial Thought and Historical Difference (2000)
साक्ष्य: AI मसौदा
दिपेश चक्रवर्ती › जन्म 1948
एंडी क्लार्क
जिन्हें प्रभावित किया
Clark drew on Heidegger’s analysis of ready-to-hand equipment, used fluently without being represented, for his action-oriented account of embodied cognition (Being There, 1997). A. Clark, Being There: Putting Brain, Body, and World Together Again (1997); M. Heidegger, Sein und Zeit (1927); SEP “Embodied Cognition”
साक्ष्य: AI मसौदा
एंडी क्लार्क › जन्म 1957
ब्युंग-चुल हान
जिन्हें प्रभावित किया ✓
Han wrote his Freiburg dissertation (1994) on mood (Stimmung) in Heidegger (Heideggers Herz, 1996) and drew on him for a renewed vita contemplativa in Duft der Zeit (2009). B.-C. Han, Heideggers Herz. Zum Begriff der Stimmung bei Martin Heidegger (1996); Duft der Zeit. Ein philosophischer Essay zur Kunst des Verweilens (2009)
साक्ष्य: Wikidata में भी · Wikidata
ब्युंग-चुल हान › जन्म 1959
आलोचना
परस्पर आलोचना 1
अर्न्स्ट कासिरर ⇄ परस्पर
जिनकी आलोचना की
At Davos (1929) Heidegger rejected Cassirer’s neo-Kantian reading of Kant as a theory of knowledge and culture, stressing human finitude (Kant und das Problem der Metaphysik, 1929). Davoser Disputation (1929), appendix to M. Heidegger, Kant und das Problem der Metaphysik (4th ed. 1973); Heidegger, review of Cassirer, Philosophie der symbolischen Formen II, Deutsche Literaturzeitung (1928); SEP “Ernst Cassirer”
साक्ष्य: AI मसौदा
जिनके द्वारा आलोचित
At Davos (1929) and in a review of Heidegger’s Kant book (1931) Cassirer objected that Heidegger reduced Kant’s reason to finite imagination, neglecting objective and ethical validity. E. Cassirer, ‘Kant und das Problem der Metaphysik’, Kant-Studien 36 (1931); P. E. Gordon, Continental Divide: Heidegger, Cassirer, Davos, 2010
साक्ष्य: AI मसौदा
अर्न्स्ट कासिरर › 1874–1945
जिनके द्वारा आलोचित 13
तानाबे हाजिमे जिन्हें प्रभावित किया
जिन्हें प्रभावित किया
Tanabe, who came to know Heidegger in Freiburg, presented his hermeneutics of life in ‘A New Turn in Phenomenology’ (1924), and later contributed ‘Todesdialektik’ to his Festschrift (1959). Tanabe Hajime, “Genshōgaku ni okeru atarashiki tenkō” (1924); “Todesdialektik”, in Martin Heidegger zum siebzigsten Geburtstag (1959); SEP “Tanabe Hajime”
साक्ष्य: AI मसौदा
जिनके द्वारा आलोचित
In “Dialectic of Death”, his contribution to the Festschrift for Heidegger’s seventieth birthday (1959), Tanabe set a philosophy of death against Heidegger’s being-towards-death, which he read as still a philosophy of life. Tanabe Hajime, “Todesdialektik”, in Martin Heidegger zum siebzigsten Geburtstag. Festschrift (Neske, 1959), pp. 93–133
साक्ष्य: AI मसौदा
तानाबे हाजिमे › 1885–1962
वात्सुजी तेत्सुरो जिन्हें प्रभावित किया
जिन्हें प्रभावित किया ✓
Watsuji adopted the hermeneutic analysis of existence from Being and Time but shifted it from the individual to betweenness (aidagara) in Ethics as the Study of Ningen (1934). Watsuji Tetsurō, Ningen no gaku to shite no rinrigaku (1934); Fūdo (1935); SEP “Watsuji Tetsurō”
साक्ष्य: Wikidata में भी · Wikidata
जिनके द्वारा आलोचित
Watsuji, who read Being and Time in Berlin in 1927, objected that Heidegger privileged time and the individual over space and human relations shaped by climate (Fūdo, 1935). Watsuji Tetsurō, Fūdo (1935), preface; tr. G. Bownas, Climate and Culture, 1961; SEP “Watsuji Tetsurō”
साक्ष्य: AI मसौदा
वात्सुजी तेत्सुरो › 1889–1960
हर्बर्ट मार्कूज़े जिन्हें पढ़ाया
जिन्हें पढ़ाया
Impressed by Being and Time, Marcuse returned to Freiburg in 1928 to study with Heidegger and wrote Hegels Ontologie und die Grundlegung einer Theorie der Geschichtlichkeit (1932) as a Habilitation thesis, which did not lead to a Habilitation; in 1933 he joined Horkheimer’s Institute. SEP “Herbert Marcuse”; D. Kellner, Herbert Marcuse and the Crisis of Marxism (1984)
साक्ष्य: InPhO में भी · InPhO
जिनके द्वारा आलोचित
Marcuse asked Heidegger in 1947 to disavow National Socialism, and later called the concreteness of Being and Time ‘to a great extent a phony, a false concreteness’ (1977). H. Marcuse to M. Heidegger, 28 Aug. 1947, and Heidegger’s reply, 20 Jan. 1948; F. Olafson, “Heidegger’s Politics: An Interview with Herbert Marcuse”, Graduate Faculty Philosophy Journal 6 (1977)
साक्ष्य: AI मसौदा
हर्बर्ट मार्कूज़े › 1898–1979
हांस योनास जिन्हें पढ़ाया
जिन्हें पढ़ाया ✓
Jonas followed Heidegger to Marburg and took his doctorate there in 1928 with a dissertation on the concept of gnosis, under Heidegger and Rudolf Bultmann; it grew into Gnosis und spätantiker Geist (1934). H. Jonas, Erinnerungen (2003)
साक्ष्य: InPhO में भी · InPhO
जिनके द्वारा आलोचित
Jonas warned theologians against borrowing from Heidegger, whose call of Being knows no standard of good, and read existentialism as a nihilistic gnosticism (‘Heidegger and Theology’, 1964). H. Jonas, “Heidegger and Theology”, Review of Metaphysics 18 (1964), 207–233; “Gnosticism, Existentialism, and Nihilism”, epilogue to The Gnostic Religion (2nd ed. 1963)
साक्ष्य: AI मसौदा
हांस योनास › 1903–1993
हाना आरंट जिन्हें पढ़ाया
जिन्हें पढ़ाया ✓
Arendt studied with Heidegger in Marburg in 1924–25, attending his lecture course on Plato’s Sophist, and then went to Jaspers in Heidelberg; their personal relationship, documented in their letters, began in Marburg. E. Young-Bruehl, Hannah Arendt: For Love of the World (1982); H. Arendt & M. Heidegger, Briefe 1925 bis 1975 (1998)
जिनके द्वारा आलोचित
Arendt criticised Heidegger’s Self as isolated, its being-with merely structural (‘What Is Existenz Philosophy?’, 1946), and his turn to a ‘will-not-to-will’ (The Life of the Mind, 1978). H. Arendt, “What Is Existenz Philosophy?”, Partisan Review 13 (1946); The Life of the Mind II: Willing (1978)
साक्ष्य: AI मसौदा
हाना आरंट › 1906–1975
इमैनुएल लेविनास जिन्हें पढ़ाया
जिन्हें पढ़ाया ✓
During his year in Freiburg (1928–29), spent mainly with Husserl, Levinas attended Heidegger’s seminar and witnessed his Davos disputation with Cassirer (1929). A short period of study, followed by lifelong engagement and criticism. SEP “Emmanuel Levinas”
साक्ष्य: Wikidata में भी · Wikidata
जिनके द्वारा आलोचित
Levinas objected that Heidegger’s fundamental ontology subordinates the relation with the Other to the understanding of Being, making it a philosophy of power (Totality and Infinity, 1961). E. Levinas, Totalité et infini (1961), section I; SEP “Emmanuel Levinas”
साक्ष्य: AI मसौदा
इमैनुएल लेविनास › 1906–1995
सभी दिखाएँ (13)कम दिखाएँ
रुडोल्फ कार्नैप
जिनके द्वारा आलोचित
Carnap declared sentences such as Heidegger’s ‘The Nothing itself nothings’ pseudo-statements without cognitive content (‘Überwindung der Metaphysik durch logische Analyse der Sprache’, Erkenntnis, 1931/32). R. Carnap, “Überwindung der Metaphysik durch logische Analyse der Sprache”, Erkenntnis 2 (1931/32), 219–241, § 5; M. Heidegger, Was ist Metaphysik? (1929)
साक्ष्य: AI मसौदा
रुडोल्फ कार्नैप › 1891–1970
एडिथ श्टाइन
जिनके द्वारा आलोचित
Stein objected that Heidegger’s analysis of Dasein never asks whence thrown, finite existence receives its being, and so closes itself off from eternal being (‘Martin Heideggers Existenzphilosophie’, 1936). E. Stein, “Martin Heideggers Existenzphilosophie” (written 1936 as an appendix to Endliches und ewiges Sein; publ. 1962); SEP “Edith Stein”
साक्ष्य: AI मसौदा
एडिथ श्टाइन › 1891–1942
थियोडोर डब्ल्यू. एडोर्नो
जिनके द्वारा आलोचित
Adorno argued that the language of authenticity in Heidegger and his followers turns social conditions into timeless pathos and lends ideology a profound sound (Jargon der Eigentlichkeit, 1964). T. W. Adorno, Jargon der Eigentlichkeit. Zur deutschen Ideologie (1964); Negative Dialektik (1966), Part I
साक्ष्य: AI मसौदा
थियोडोर डब्ल्यू. एडोर्नो › 1903–1969
मोउ ज़ोंगसान
जिनके द्वारा आलोचित
In Intellectual Intuition and Chinese Philosophy (1971) Mou credited Heidegger’s Kant and the Problem of Metaphysics with opening Kant to him, but objected that Heidegger’s stress on human finitude leaves no room for the infinite, self-legislating moral mind that Confucianism ascribes to human beings. Mou Zongsan, Zhi de zhijue yu Zhongguo zhexue (1971); S. Billioud, “Mou Zongsan’s Problem with the Heideggerian Interpretation of Kant”, Journal of Chinese Philosophy 33 (2006)
साक्ष्य: AI मसौदा
मोउ ज़ोंगसान › 1909–1995
युर्गन हाबरमास
जिनके द्वारा आलोचित
In 1953 Habermas asked publicly why Heidegger had republished his 1935 phrase on the ‘inner truth and greatness’ of National Socialism without comment (FAZ, 25 July 1953). J. Habermas, “Mit Heidegger gegen Heidegger denken”, Frankfurter Allgemeine Zeitung, 25 July 1953; Der philosophische Diskurs der Moderne (1985), Lecture VI
साक्ष्य: AI मसौदा
युर्गन हाबरमास › 1929–2026
पियरे बूर्दियो
जिनके द्वारा आलोचित
Bourdieu read Heidegger’s ontology as a euphemised form of the Weimar ‘conservative revolution’, shaped by its author’s position in the academic field (L’ontologie politique de Martin Heidegger, 1988). P. Bourdieu, “L’ontologie politique de Martin Heidegger”, Actes de la recherche en sciences sociales 5–6 (1975); book 1988
साक्ष्य: AI मसौदा
पियरे बूर्दियो › 1930–2002
लूस इरिगरे
जिनके द्वारा आलोचित
In L’oubli de l’air chez Martin Heidegger (1983) Irigaray argued that Heidegger’s thinking of Being forgets air, the elemental, material medium that sustains it. L. Irigaray, L’oubli de l’air chez Martin Heidegger (1983)
साक्ष्य: AI मसौदा
लूस इरिगरे › जन्म 1930
जिनकी आलोचना की 7
प्लेटो
जिनकी आलोचना की
Heidegger argued that Plato’s allegory of the cave shifts truth from unconcealment to the correctness of seeing the Idea, beginning Western metaphysics (‘Platons Lehre von der Wahrheit’, 1942). M. Heidegger, “Platons Lehre von der Wahrheit” (1942; in Wegmarken, 1967); SEP “Martin Heidegger”
साक्ष्य: AI मसौदा
प्लेटो › 428–348 ईसा पूर्व
रने देकार्त
जिनकी आलोचना की
Heidegger objected that Descartes leaves the being of the ‘sum’ unexamined and reduces the world to measurable extension, missing being-in-the-world (Being and Time, 1927, §§ 6, 19–21). M. Heidegger, Sein und Zeit (1927), §§ 6, 19–21; SEP “Martin Heidegger”
साक्ष्य: AI मसौदा
रने देकार्त › 1596–1650
गेऑर्ग विल्हेल्म फ़्रीडरिश हेगल
जिनकी आलोचना की
Heidegger set existential temporality against Hegel’s concept of time, which he found bound to the ordinary idea of time as a sequence of nows (Being and Time, 1927). M. Heidegger, Sein und Zeit (1927), § 82; lectures Hegels Phänomenologie des Geistes (1930/31, GA 32)
साक्ष्य: AI मसौदा
गेऑर्ग विल्हेल्म फ़्रीडरिश हेगल › 1770–1831
एडमुंड हुसल जिनसे पढ़ा
जिनसे पढ़ा ✓
Heidegger had habilitated under Rickert, but after Husserl came to Freiburg in 1916 he worked closely with him and was his assistant from 1919 to 1923, holding seminars with him; Husserl backed his call to Marburg and his succession to the Freiburg chair (1928). SEP “Martin Heidegger”; T. Kisiel, The Genesis of Heidegger’s Being and Time (1993)
साक्ष्य: Wikidata में भी · Wikidata
जिनकी आलोचना की
Heidegger objected that Husserl never asks about the being of the intentional, of consciousness itself, and turned to Dasein instead (Prolegomena zur Geschichte des Zeitbegriffs, 1925, §§ 10–13). M. Heidegger, Prolegomena zur Geschichte des Zeitbegriffs (lectures 1925; GA 20), §§ 10–13; SEP “Martin Heidegger”
साक्ष्य: AI मसौदा
एडमुंड हुसल › 1859–1938
हाइनरिष रिकर्ट जिनसे पढ़ा
जिनसे पढ़ा ✓
Heidegger wrote his 1915 habilitation on Duns Scotus under Rickert’s direction in Freiburg. SEP “Martin Heidegger” (M. Wrathall, 2025), life section
साक्ष्य: Wikidata में भी · Wikidata
जिनकी आलोचना की
In his 1919 lecture course Heidegger drew on Brentano, Dilthey and Husserl for a phenomenological critique of the neo-Kantian transcendental philosophy of value of Windelband, Rickert and Lask. SEP “Hermann Lotze” (D. Sullivan, rev. 2024), §5.3
साक्ष्य: AI मसौदा
हाइनरिष रिकर्ट › 1863–1936
एमिल लास्क
जिनकी आलोचना की
Heidegger’s 1919 lecture course likewise made Lask’s version of the philosophy of value a target of phenomenological critique. SEP “Hermann Lotze” (D. Sullivan, rev. 2024), §5.3
साक्ष्य: AI मसौदा
एमिल लास्क › 1875–1915
आल्फ्रेड बोइमलर
जिनकी आलोचना की
In his Nietzsche lectures (1936–37) Heidegger rejected Baeumler’s claim that the doctrine of eternal recurrence is unimportant beside the will to power (Nietzsche I, 1961). M. Heidegger, Nietzsche I (1961; lectures 1936–37); A. Baeumler, Nietzsche, der Philosoph und Politiker (1931)
साक्ष्य: AI मसौदा
आल्फ्रेड बोइमलर › 1887–1968
कृतियाँ
- 1927सत्ता और समय
सत्ता के अर्थ का प्रश्न, दासाइन के माध्यम से उठाया गया: देखभाल, चिंता, मृत्यु-की-ओर-होना।
उद्घाटन व्याख्यान: शून्य स्वयं शून्यित करता है।
कलाकृति एक संसार खोलती है – वान गॉग के जूते।
- 1946मानववाद पर पत्र
भाषा सत्ता का घर है – सार्त्र को उत्तर।
प्रौद्योगिकी का सार गेस्टेल (Enframing) है।
मत
Heidegger revived the question that he believed Western philosophy had forgotten: what does it mean to be? He approached it through the being that asks it, Dasein, which is always already “in the world”, absorbed in practical dealings with things and others. Dasein is care, thrown into a world it did not choose; in anxiety and in facing its own death it can choose to live authentically rather than as the anonymous “they”. In his later thought he traced the history of being and criticised modern technology, which reveals everything as standing reserve to be ordered and used. Sartre, Gadamer, Arendt, Levinas, Derrida and Foucault all developed or contested his ideas.
जीवन और संदर्भ
Heidegger grew up Catholic in Meßkirch, studied theology and philosophy in Freiburg and became Husserl’s assistant. Being and Time, written during his years in Marburg, made him famous. In 1933 he joined the NSDAP, remaining a member until 1945, and as rector of Freiburg University (1933–34) publicly backed Hitler and the regime’s restructuring of the university; after the war he was barred from teaching for several years. The “Black Notebooks”, published from 2014, contain antisemitic passages that link his history of being to “world Judaism”. How far this affects his philosophy is debated; the facts are not.
अन्य प्रमुख कृतियाँ
- Being and Time (1927)
- What Is Metaphysics? (1929)
- The Origin of the Work of Art (1935)
- Letter on Humanism (1946)
- The Question Concerning Technology (1953)
इनमें आता है
- यात्रा ‘संदेह और आत्म’ · 10 में से पड़ाव 8
- यात्रा ‘एशिया और यूरोप संवाद में’ · 11 में से पड़ाव 9
- यात्रा ‘राष्ट्रीय समाजवाद के अधीन दर्शन’ · 10 में से पड़ाव 2
- बहस ‘कासिरर और हाइडेगर दावोस में’
- बहस ‘कार्नैप, हाइडेगर और शून्य’
- बहस ‘एडोर्नो और प्रामाणिकता का शब्दजाल’
नवंबर 2026 तक · स्रोत · इस पृष्ठ को बेहतर बनाएँ · Agora कैसे बना है