Martin Heidegger
For Heidegger, philosophy forgot to ask what it means to be; we exist thrown into a world, shaped by time and our own death.
Placement
The question of the meaning of Being: Dasein as being-in-the-world, being-towards-death, a critique of technology.
Key ideas
- Dasein
- Being-towards-death
- Forgetfulness of Being
- Enframing (Gestell)
Teachers: Edmund Husserl, Heinrich Rickert
Students: Herbert Marcuse, Xavier Zubiri, Nishitani Keiji, Hans-Georg Gadamer, Hans Jonas, Emmanuel Levinas, Hannah Arendt, Jan Patočka
Influence
Influenced by 16
Aristotle
influenced by ✓
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”
Aristotle › 384–322 BCE
Augustine
influenced by
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”
Evidence: also in InPhO · InPhO
Augustine › 354–430
Gottfried Wilhelm Leibniz
influenced by
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)
Evidence: also in InPhO · InPhO
Gottfried Wilhelm Leibniz › 1646–1716
Immanuel Kant
influenced by ✓
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”
Immanuel Kant › 1724–1804
Søren Kierkegaard
influenced by ✓
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”
Søren Kierkegaard › 1813–1855
Friedrich Nietzsche
influenced by ✓
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”
Friedrich Nietzsche › 1844–1900
Show all (16)Show fewer
Laozi
influenced by disputed
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”
Evidence: AI draft
Laozi › legendary figure
Heraclitus
influenced by ✓
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”
Heraclitus › c. 535–475 BCE
Parmenides
influenced by ✓
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”
Parmenides › c. 515–450 BCE
Zhuangzi
influenced by
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)
Evidence: AI draft
Zhuangzi › c. 369–286 BCE
Meister Eckhart
influenced by
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”
Evidence: AI draft
Meister Eckhart › c. 1260–1328
John Duns Scotus
influenced by ✓
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”
John Duns Scotus › c. 1266–1308
Friedrich Hölderlin
influenced by
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)
Evidence: AI draft
Friedrich Hölderlin › 1770–1843
Wilhelm Dilthey
influenced by ✓
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”
Wilhelm Dilthey › 1833–1911
Franz Brentano
influenced by ✓
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”
Franz Brentano › 1838–1917
Jakob von Uexküll
influenced by
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)
Evidence: AI draft
Jakob von Uexküll › 1864–1944
Influenced 25
Hans-Georg Gadamer taught
taught ✓
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)
Evidence: also in Wikidata · Wikidata
Hans-Georg Gadamer › 1900–2002
Jacques Lacan
influenced ✓
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”
Jacques Lacan › 1901–1981
Jean-Paul Sartre
influenced ✓
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”
Jean-Paul Sartre › 1905–1980
Maurice Merleau-Ponty
influenced ✓
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”
Maurice Merleau-Ponty › 1908–1961
Michel Foucault
influenced ✓
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”
Michel Foucault › 1926–1984
Jacques Derrida
influenced ✓
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”
Jacques Derrida › 1930–2004
Show all (25)Show fewer
Kuki Shūzō
influenced
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)
Evidence: AI draft
Kuki Shūzō › 1888–1941
Xavier Zubiri taught
taught
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)
Evidence: AI draft
Xavier Zubiri › 1898–1983
José Gaos
influenced
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)
Evidence: AI draft
José Gaos › 1900–1969
Nishitani Keiji taught
taught
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)
Evidence: AI draft
Nishitani Keiji › 1900–1990
K. E. Løgstrup
influenced
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)
Evidence: AI draft
K. E. Løgstrup › 1905–1981
Jan Patočka taught
taught ✓
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
Evidence: also in Wikidata · Wikidata
Jan Patočka › 1907–1977
Paul Ricœur
influenced
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”
Evidence: also in InPhO · InPhO
Paul Ricœur › 1913–2005
Rodolfo Kusch
influenced
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)
Evidence: AI draft
Rodolfo Kusch › 1922–1979
Reinhart Koselleck
influenced ✓
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)
Evidence: also in Wikidata · Wikidata
Reinhart Koselleck › 1923–2006
Karel Kosík
influenced
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)
Evidence: AI draft
Karel Kosík › 1926–2003
Richard Rorty
influenced ✓
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”
Richard Rorty › 1931–2007
Charles Taylor
influenced
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)
Evidence: AI draft
Charles Taylor › b. 1931
Enrique Dussel
influenced
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)
Evidence: AI draft
Enrique Dussel › 1934–2023
Gianni Vattimo
influenced
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)
Evidence: also in InPhO · InPhO
Gianni Vattimo › 1936–2023
Giorgio Agamben
influenced
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)
Evidence: also in InPhO · InPhO
Giorgio Agamben › b. 1942
Peter Sloterdijk
influenced ✓
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)
Evidence: also in Wikidata · Wikidata
Peter Sloterdijk › b. 1947
Dipesh Chakrabarty
influenced
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)
Evidence: AI draft
Dipesh Chakrabarty › b. 1948
Andy Clark
influenced
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”
Evidence: AI draft
Andy Clark › b. 1957
Byung-Chul Han
influenced ✓
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)
Evidence: also in Wikidata · Wikidata
Byung-Chul Han › b. 1959
Criticism
Mutual critique 1
Ernst Cassirer ⇄ mutual
criticised
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”
Evidence: AI draft
criticised by
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
Evidence: AI draft
Ernst Cassirer › 1874–1945
Criticized by 13
Tanabe Hajime influenced
influenced
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”
Evidence: AI draft
criticised by
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
Evidence: AI draft
Tanabe Hajime › 1885–1962
Watsuji Tetsurō influenced
influenced ✓
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”
Evidence: also in Wikidata · Wikidata
criticised by
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”
Evidence: AI draft
Watsuji Tetsurō › 1889–1960
Herbert Marcuse taught
taught
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)
Evidence: also in InPhO · InPhO
criticised by
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)
Evidence: AI draft
Herbert Marcuse › 1898–1979
Hans Jonas taught
taught ✓
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)
Evidence: also in InPhO · InPhO
criticised by
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)
Evidence: AI draft
Hans Jonas › 1903–1993
Hannah Arendt taught
taught ✓
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)
criticised by
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)
Evidence: AI draft
Hannah Arendt › 1906–1975
Emmanuel Levinas taught
taught ✓
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”
Evidence: also in Wikidata · Wikidata
criticised by
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”
Evidence: AI draft
Emmanuel Levinas › 1906–1995
Show all (13)Show fewer
Rudolf Carnap
criticised by
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)
Evidence: AI draft
Rudolf Carnap › 1891–1970
Edith Stein
criticised by
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”
Evidence: AI draft
Edith Stein › 1891–1942
Theodor W. Adorno
criticised by
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
Evidence: AI draft
Theodor W. Adorno › 1903–1969
Mou Zongsan
criticised by
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)
Evidence: AI draft
Mou Zongsan › 1909–1995
Jürgen Habermas
criticised by
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
Evidence: AI draft
Jürgen Habermas › 1929–2026
Pierre Bourdieu
criticised by
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
Evidence: AI draft
Pierre Bourdieu › 1930–2002
Luce Irigaray
criticised by
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)
Evidence: AI draft
Luce Irigaray › b. 1930
Criticizes 7
Plato
criticised
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”
Evidence: AI draft
Plato › 428–348 BCE
René Descartes
criticised
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”
Evidence: AI draft
René Descartes › 1596–1650
Georg Wilhelm Friedrich Hegel
criticised
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)
Evidence: AI draft
Georg Wilhelm Friedrich Hegel › 1770–1831
Edmund Husserl studied with
studied with ✓
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)
Evidence: also in Wikidata · Wikidata
criticised
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”
Evidence: AI draft
Edmund Husserl › 1859–1938
Heinrich Rickert studied with
studied with ✓
Heidegger wrote his 1915 habilitation on Duns Scotus under Rickert’s direction in Freiburg. SEP “Martin Heidegger” (M. Wrathall, 2025), life section
Evidence: also in Wikidata · Wikidata
criticised
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
Evidence: AI draft
Heinrich Rickert › 1863–1936
Emil Lask
criticised
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
Evidence: AI draft
Emil Lask › 1875–1915
Alfred Baeumler
criticised
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)
Evidence: AI draft
Alfred Baeumler › 1887–1968
Works
- 1927Being and Time
The question of the meaning of Being, posed through Dasein: care, anxiety, being-toward-death.
Inaugural lecture: the nothing itself nothings.
The artwork opens up a world – Van Gogh's shoes.
Language is the house of Being – a reply to Sartre.
The essence of technology is enframing (Gestell).
Position
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.
Life & context
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.
Appears in
- Journey ‘Doubt and the Self’ · Stop 8 of 10
- Journey ‘Asia and Europe in Dialogue’ · Stop 9 of 11
- Journey ‘Philosophy under National Socialism’ · Stop 2 of 10
- Debate ‘Cassirer and Heidegger at Davos’
- Debate ‘Carnap, Heidegger and the Nothing’
- Debate ‘Adorno and the Jargon of Authenticity’
As of November 2026 · Sources · Improve this page · How Agora is made