AgoraOtwarty plac myśli

Martin Heidegger

1889–1976

Pierwsze przybliżeniecelowe uproszczenie – portret mówi więcej

Według Heideggera filozofia zapomniała zapytać, co znaczy być; istniejemy wrzuceni w świat, ukształtowani przez czas i własną śmierć.

Umiejscowienie

Fenomenologia i hermeneutyka · Europa Zachodnia · Metafizyka, Egzystencja i ja, Język

Pytanie o sens Bycia: Dasein jako bycie-w-świecie, bycie-ku-śmierci, krytyka techniki.

Kluczowe idee

  • Dasein
  • Bycie-ku-śmierci
  • Zapomnienie Bycia
  • Zestaw (Gestell)

Nauczyciele: Edmund Husserl, Heinrich Rickert

Uczniowie: Herbert Marcuse, Xavier Zubiri, Nishitani Keiji, Hans-Georg Gadamer, Hans Jonas, Emmanuel Levinas, Hannah Arendt, Jan Patočka

Otwórz na mapie gwiazd

Wpływ

Pod wpływem 16

  • Arystoteles

    pod wpływem ✓

    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”

    Źródło: także w Wikidanych · Wikidata · InPhO

    Arystoteles › 384–322 p.n.e.

  • Augustyn z Hippony

    pod wpływem

    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”

    Źródło: także w InPhO · InPhO

    Augustyn z Hippony › 354–430

  • Gottfried Wilhelm Leibniz

    pod wpływem

    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)

    Źródło: także w InPhO · InPhO

    Gottfried Wilhelm Leibniz › 1646–1716

  • Immanuel Kant

    pod wpływem ✓

    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”

    Źródło: także w Wikidanych · Wikidata · InPhO

    Immanuel Kant › 1724–1804

  • Søren Kierkegaard

    pod wpływem ✓

    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”

    Źródło: także w Wikidanych · Wikidata · InPhO

    Søren Kierkegaard › 1813–1855

  • Friedrich Nietzsche

    pod wpływem ✓

    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”

    Źródło: także w Wikidanych · Wikidata · InPhO

    Friedrich Nietzsche › 1844–1900

Pokaż wszystko (16)Pokaż mniej
  • Laozi

    pod wpływem sporne

    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”

    Źródło: szkic AI

    Laozi › postać legendarna

  • Heraklit

    pod wpływem ✓

    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”

    Źródło: także w Wikidanych · Wikidata · InPhO

    Heraklit › ok. 535–475 p.n.e.

  • Parmenides

    pod wpływem ✓

    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”

    Źródło: także w Wikidanych · Wikidata · InPhO

    Parmenides › ok. 515–450 p.n.e.

  • Zhuangzi

    pod wpływem

    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)

    Źródło: szkic AI

    Zhuangzi › ok. 369–286 p.n.e.

  • Mistrz Eckhart

    pod wpływem

    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”

    Źródło: szkic AI

    Mistrz Eckhart › ok. 1260–1328

  • Jan Duns Szkot

    pod wpływem ✓

    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”

    Źródło: także w Wikidanych · Wikidata · InPhO

    Jan Duns Szkot › ok. 1266–1308

  • Friedrich Hölderlin

    pod wpływem

    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)

    Źródło: szkic AI

    Friedrich Hölderlin › 1770–1843

  • Wilhelm Dilthey

    pod wpływem ✓

    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”

    Źródło: także w Wikidanych · Wikidata · InPhO

    Wilhelm Dilthey › 1833–1911

  • Franz Brentano

    pod wpływem ✓

    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”

    Źródło: także w Wikidanych · Wikidata · InPhO

    Franz Brentano › 1838–1917

  • Jakob von Uexküll

    pod wpływem

    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)

    Źródło: szkic AI

    Jakob von Uexküll › 1864–1944

Wpływ na 25

  • Hans-Georg Gadamer uczeń/uczennica

    uczeń/uczennica ✓

    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)

    Źródło: także w Wikidanych · Wikidata

    Hans-Georg Gadamer › 1900–2002

  • Jacques Lacan

    wpływ na ✓

    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”

    Źródło: także w Wikidanych · Wikidata · InPhO

    Jacques Lacan › 1901–1981

  • Jean-Paul Sartre

    wpływ na ✓

    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”

    Źródło: także w Wikidanych · Wikidata · InPhO

    Jean-Paul Sartre › 1905–1980

  • Maurice Merleau-Ponty

    wpływ na ✓

    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”

    Źródło: także w Wikidanych · Wikidata · InPhO

    Maurice Merleau-Ponty › 1908–1961

  • Michel Foucault

    wpływ na ✓

    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”

    Źródło: także w Wikidanych · Wikidata · InPhO

    Michel Foucault › 1926–1984

  • Jacques Derrida

    wpływ na ✓

    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”

    Źródło: także w Wikidanych · Wikidata · InPhO

    Jacques Derrida › 1930–2004

Pokaż wszystko (25)Pokaż mniej
  • Kuki Shūzō

    wpływ na

    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)

    Źródło: szkic AI

    Kuki Shūzō › 1888–1941

  • Xavier Zubiri uczeń/uczennica

    uczeń/uczennica

    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)

    Źródło: szkic AI

    Xavier Zubiri › 1898–1983

  • José Gaos

    wpływ na

    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)

    Źródło: szkic AI

    José Gaos › 1900–1969

  • Nishitani Keiji uczeń/uczennica

    uczeń/uczennica

    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)

    Źródło: szkic AI

    Nishitani Keiji › 1900–1990

  • K. E. Løgstrup

    wpływ na

    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)

    Źródło: szkic AI

    K. E. Løgstrup › 1905–1981

  • Jan Patočka uczeń/uczennica

    uczeń/uczennica ✓

    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

    Źródło: także w Wikidanych · Wikidata

    Jan Patočka › 1907–1977

  • Paul Ricoeur

    wpływ na

    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”

    Źródło: także w InPhO · InPhO

    Paul Ricoeur › 1913–2005

  • Rodolfo Kusch

    wpływ na

    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)

    Źródło: szkic AI

    Rodolfo Kusch › 1922–1979

  • Reinhart Koselleck

    wpływ na ✓

    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)

    Źródło: także w Wikidanych · Wikidata

    Reinhart Koselleck › 1923–2006

  • Karel Kosík

    wpływ na

    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)

    Źródło: szkic AI

    Karel Kosík › 1926–2003

  • Richard Rorty

    wpływ na ✓

    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”

    Źródło: także w Wikidanych · Wikidata · InPhO

    Richard Rorty › 1931–2007

  • Charles Taylor

    wpływ na

    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)

    Źródło: szkic AI

    Charles Taylor › ur. 1931

  • Enrique Dussel

    wpływ na

    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)

    Źródło: szkic AI

    Enrique Dussel › 1934–2023

  • Gianni Vattimo

    wpływ na

    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)

    Źródło: także w InPhO · InPhO

    Gianni Vattimo › 1936–2023

  • Giorgio Agamben

    wpływ na

    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)

    Źródło: także w InPhO · InPhO

    Giorgio Agamben › ur. 1942

  • Peter Sloterdijk

    wpływ na ✓

    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)

    Źródło: także w Wikidanych · Wikidata

    Peter Sloterdijk › ur. 1947

  • Dipesh Chakrabarty

    wpływ na

    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)

    Źródło: szkic AI

    Dipesh Chakrabarty › ur. 1948

  • Andy Clark

    wpływ na

    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”

    Źródło: szkic AI

    Andy Clark › ur. 1957

  • Byung-Chul Han

    wpływ na ✓

    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)

    Źródło: także w Wikidanych · Wikidata

    Byung-Chul Han › ur. 1959

Krytyka

Wzajemna krytyka 1

  • Ernst Cassirer ⇄ wzajemnie

    krytykuje

    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”

    Źródło: szkic AI

    krytyka ze strony

    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

    Źródło: szkic AI

    Ernst Cassirer › 1874–1945

Krytyka ze strony 13

  • Tanabe Hajime wpływ na

    wpływ na

    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”

    Źródło: szkic AI

    krytyka ze strony

    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

    Źródło: szkic AI

    Tanabe Hajime › 1885–1962

  • Watsuji Tetsurō wpływ na

    wpływ na ✓

    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”

    Źródło: także w Wikidanych · Wikidata

    krytyka ze strony

    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”

    Źródło: szkic AI

    Watsuji Tetsurō › 1889–1960

  • Herbert Marcuse uczeń/uczennica

    uczeń/uczennica

    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)

    Źródło: także w InPhO · InPhO

    krytyka ze strony

    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)

    Źródło: szkic AI

    Herbert Marcuse › 1898–1979

  • Hans Jonas uczeń/uczennica

    uczeń/uczennica ✓

    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)

    Źródło: także w InPhO · InPhO

    krytyka ze strony

    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)

    Źródło: szkic AI

    Hans Jonas › 1903–1993

  • Hannah Arendt uczeń/uczennica

    uczeń/uczennica ✓

    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)

    Źródło: także w Wikidanych · Wikidata · InPhO

    krytyka ze strony

    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)

    Źródło: szkic AI

    Hannah Arendt › 1906–1975

  • Emmanuel Levinas uczeń/uczennica

    uczeń/uczennica ✓

    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”

    Źródło: także w Wikidanych · Wikidata

    krytyka ze strony

    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”

    Źródło: szkic AI

    Emmanuel Levinas › 1906–1995

Pokaż wszystko (13)Pokaż mniej
  • Rudolf Carnap

    krytyka ze strony

    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)

    Źródło: szkic AI

    Rudolf Carnap › 1891–1970

  • Edith Stein

    krytyka ze strony

    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”

    Źródło: szkic AI

    Edith Stein › 1891–1942

  • Theodor Adorno

    krytyka ze strony

    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

    Źródło: szkic AI

    Theodor Adorno › 1903–1969

  • Mou Zongsan

    krytyka ze strony

    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)

    Źródło: szkic AI

    Mou Zongsan › 1909–1995

  • Jürgen Habermas

    krytyka ze strony

    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

    Źródło: szkic AI

    Jürgen Habermas › 1929–2026

  • Pierre Bourdieu

    krytyka ze strony

    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

    Źródło: szkic AI

    Pierre Bourdieu › 1930–2002

  • Luce Irigaray

    krytyka ze strony

    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)

    Źródło: szkic AI

    Luce Irigaray › ur. 1930

Krytykuje 7

  • Platon

    krytykuje

    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”

    Źródło: szkic AI

    Platon › 428–348 p.n.e.

  • Kartezjusz

    krytykuje

    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”

    Źródło: szkic AI

    Kartezjusz › 1596–1650

  • Georg Wilhelm Friedrich Hegel

    krytykuje

    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)

    Źródło: szkic AI

    Georg Wilhelm Friedrich Hegel › 1770–1831

  • Edmund Husserl nauczyciel(ka)

    nauczyciel(ka) ✓

    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)

    Źródło: także w Wikidanych · Wikidata

    krytykuje

    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”

    Źródło: szkic AI

    Edmund Husserl › 1859–1938

  • Heinrich Rickert nauczyciel(ka)

    nauczyciel(ka) ✓

    Heidegger wrote his 1915 habilitation on Duns Scotus under Rickert’s direction in Freiburg. SEP “Martin Heidegger” (M. Wrathall, 2025), life section

    Źródło: także w Wikidanych · Wikidata

    krytykuje

    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

    Źródło: szkic AI

    Heinrich Rickert › 1863–1936

  • Emil Lask

    krytykuje

    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

    Źródło: szkic AI

    Emil Lask › 1875–1915

  • Alfred Baeumler

    krytykuje

    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)

    Źródło: szkic AI

    Alfred Baeumler › 1887–1968

Dzieła

Stanowisko

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.

Życie i kontekst

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.

Dalsze główne dzieła

  • 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)

Pojawia się w

Źródła: Wikipedia · Wikidata

Stan na listopad 2026 · Źródła · Ulepsz tę stronę · Jak powstaje Agora

Otwórz na mapie gwiazd