马丁·海德格尔
在海德格尔看来，哲学忘记了追问存在意味着什么；我们被抛入一个世界而存在，由时间和我们自己的死亡所塑造。
定位
存在意义的问题：此在（Dasein）作为在世存在、向死存在，以及对技术的批判。
核心思想
- 此在（Dasein）
- 向死存在
- 存在的遗忘
- 座架（Gestell）
学生: 赫伯特·马尔库塞, 哈维尔·苏比里, 西谷启治, 汉斯-格奥尔格·伽达默尔, 汉斯·约纳斯, 伊曼纽尔·列维纳斯, 汉娜·阿伦特, 扬·帕托什卡
影响
受影响于 16
亚里士多德
受其影响 ✓
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”
亚里士多德 › 公元前384—前322年
奥古斯丁
受其影响
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”
依据: 亦见于 InPhO · InPhO
奥古斯丁 › 354–430
戈特弗里德·威廉·莱布尼茨
受其影响
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)
依据: 亦见于 InPhO · InPhO
戈特弗里德·威廉·莱布尼茨 › 1646–1716
伊曼努尔·康德
受其影响 ✓
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”
伊曼努尔·康德 › 1724–1804
索伦·克尔凯郭尔
受其影响 ✓
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”
索伦·克尔凯郭尔 › 1813–1855
弗里德里希·尼采
受其影响 ✓
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”
弗里德里希·尼采 › 1844–1900
显示全部 (16)收起
老子
受其影响 存在争议
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”
依据: AI 草稿
老子 › 传说人物
赫拉克利特
受其影响 ✓
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”
赫拉克利特 › 约公元前535—前475年年
巴门尼德
受其影响 ✓
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”
巴门尼德 › 约公元前515—前450年年
庄子
受其影响
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)
依据: AI 草稿
庄子 › 约公元前369—前286年年
埃克哈特大师
受其影响
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”
依据: AI 草稿
埃克哈特大师 › 约1260–1328年
约翰·邓斯·司各脱
受其影响 ✓
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”
约翰·邓斯·司各脱 › 约1266–1308年
弗里德里希·荷尔德林
受其影响
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)
依据: AI 草稿
弗里德里希·荷尔德林 › 1770–1843
威廉·狄尔泰
受其影响 ✓
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”
威廉·狄尔泰 › 1833–1911
弗朗茨·布伦塔诺
受其影响 ✓
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”
弗朗茨·布伦塔诺 › 1838–1917
雅各布·冯·于克斯屈尔
受其影响
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)
依据: AI 草稿
雅各布·冯·于克斯屈尔 › 1864–1944
影响了 25
汉斯-格奥尔格·伽达默尔 教过
教过 ✓
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)
依据: 亦见于 Wikidata · Wikidata
汉斯-格奥尔格·伽达默尔 › 1900–2002
雅克·拉康
影响了 ✓
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”
雅克·拉康 › 1901–1981
让-保罗·萨特
影响了 ✓
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”
让-保罗·萨特 › 1905–1980
莫里斯·梅洛-庞蒂
影响了 ✓
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”
莫里斯·梅洛-庞蒂 › 1908–1961
米歇尔·福柯
影响了 ✓
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”
米歇尔·福柯 › 1926–1984
雅克·德里达
影响了 ✓
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”
雅克·德里达 › 1930–2004
显示全部 (25)收起
九鬼周造
影响了
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)
依据: AI 草稿
九鬼周造 › 1888–1941
哈维尔·苏比里 教过
教过
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)
依据: AI 草稿
哈维尔·苏比里 › 1898–1983
何塞·加奥斯
影响了
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)
依据: AI 草稿
何塞·加奥斯 › 1900–1969
西谷启治 教过
教过
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)
依据: AI 草稿
西谷启治 › 1900–1990
K. E. 洛格斯特鲁普
影响了
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)
依据: AI 草稿
K. E. 洛格斯特鲁普 › 1905–1981
扬·帕托什卡 教过
教过 ✓
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
依据: 亦见于 Wikidata · Wikidata
扬·帕托什卡 › 1907–1977
保罗·利科
影响了
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”
依据: 亦见于 InPhO · InPhO
保罗·利科 › 1913–2005
罗多尔福·库施
影响了
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)
依据: AI 草稿
罗多尔福·库施 › 1922–1979
莱因哈特·科塞雷克
影响了 ✓
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)
依据: 亦见于 Wikidata · Wikidata
莱因哈特·科塞雷克 › 1923–2006
卡雷尔·科西克
影响了
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)
依据: AI 草稿
卡雷尔·科西克 › 1926–2003
理查德·罗蒂
影响了 ✓
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”
理查德·罗蒂 › 1931–2007
查尔斯·泰勒
影响了
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)
依据: AI 草稿
查尔斯·泰勒 › 1931年生
恩里克·杜塞尔
影响了
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)
依据: AI 草稿
恩里克·杜塞尔 › 1934–2023
詹尼·瓦蒂莫
影响了
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)
依据: 亦见于 InPhO · InPhO
詹尼·瓦蒂莫 › 1936–2023
乔治·阿甘本
影响了
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)
依据: 亦见于 InPhO · InPhO
乔治·阿甘本 › 1942年生
彼得·斯劳特戴克
影响了 ✓
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)
依据: 亦见于 Wikidata · Wikidata
彼得·斯劳特戴克 › 1947年生
迪佩什·查克拉巴蒂
影响了
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)
依据: AI 草稿
迪佩什·查克拉巴蒂 › 1948年生
安迪·克拉克
影响了
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”
依据: AI 草稿
安迪·克拉克 › 1957年生
韩炳哲
影响了 ✓
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)
依据: 亦见于 Wikidata · Wikidata
韩炳哲 › 1959年生
批评
相互批评 1
恩斯特·卡西尔 ⇄ 相互
批评了
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”
依据: AI 草稿
受其批评
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
依据: AI 草稿
恩斯特·卡西尔 › 1874–1945
受批评于 13
田边元 影响了
影响了
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”
依据: AI 草稿
受其批评
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
依据: AI 草稿
田边元 › 1885–1962
和辻哲郎 影响了
影响了 ✓
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”
依据: 亦见于 Wikidata · Wikidata
受其批评
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”
依据: AI 草稿
和辻哲郎 › 1889–1960
赫伯特·马尔库塞 教过
教过
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)
依据: 亦见于 InPhO · InPhO
受其批评
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)
依据: AI 草稿
赫伯特·马尔库塞 › 1898–1979
汉斯·约纳斯 教过
教过 ✓
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)
依据: 亦见于 InPhO · InPhO
受其批评
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)
依据: AI 草稿
汉斯·约纳斯 › 1903–1993
汉娜·阿伦特 教过
教过 ✓
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)
受其批评
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)
依据: AI 草稿
汉娜·阿伦特 › 1906–1975
伊曼纽尔·列维纳斯 教过
教过 ✓
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”
依据: 亦见于 Wikidata · Wikidata
受其批评
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”
依据: AI 草稿
伊曼纽尔·列维纳斯 › 1906–1995
显示全部 (13)收起
鲁道夫·卡尔纳普
受其批评
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)
依据: AI 草稿
鲁道夫·卡尔纳普 › 1891–1970
艾迪特·施泰因
受其批评
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”
依据: AI 草稿
艾迪特·施泰因 › 1891–1942
西奥多·W. 阿多诺
受其批评
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
依据: AI 草稿
西奥多·W. 阿多诺 › 1903–1969
牟宗三
受其批评
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)
依据: AI 草稿
牟宗三 › 1909–1995
尤尔根·哈贝马斯
受其批评
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
依据: AI 草稿
尤尔根·哈贝马斯 › 1929–2026
皮埃尔·布迪厄
受其批评
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
依据: AI 草稿
皮埃尔·布迪厄 › 1930–2002
露丝·伊利格瑞
受其批评
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)
依据: AI 草稿
露丝·伊利格瑞 › 1930年生
批评了 7
柏拉图
批评了
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”
依据: AI 草稿
柏拉图 › 公元前428—前348年
勒内·笛卡尔
批评了
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”
依据: AI 草稿
勒内·笛卡尔 › 1596–1650
格奥尔格·威廉·弗里德里希·黑格尔
批评了
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)
依据: AI 草稿
格奥尔格·威廉·弗里德里希·黑格尔 › 1770–1831
埃德蒙德·胡塞尔 师从
师从 ✓
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)
依据: 亦见于 Wikidata · Wikidata
批评了
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”
依据: AI 草稿
埃德蒙德·胡塞尔 › 1859–1938
海因里希·李凯尔特 师从
师从 ✓
Heidegger wrote his 1915 habilitation on Duns Scotus under Rickert’s direction in Freiburg. SEP “Martin Heidegger” (M. Wrathall, 2025), life section
依据: 亦见于 Wikidata · Wikidata
批评了
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
依据: AI 草稿
海因里希·李凯尔特 › 1863–1936
埃米尔·拉斯克
批评了
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
依据: AI 草稿
埃米尔·拉斯克 › 1875–1915
阿尔弗雷德·博伊姆勒
批评了
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)
依据: AI 草稿
阿尔弗雷德·博伊姆勒 › 1887–1968
作品
立场
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.
生平与背景
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.
其他主要作品
- 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)
出现在
- 旅程 ‘怀疑与自我’ · 第 8 站，共 10 站
- 旅程 ‘亚洲与欧洲的对话’ · 第 9 站，共 11 站
- 旅程 ‘国家社会主义时期的哲学’ · 第 2 站，共 10 站
- 争论 ‘卡西尔与海德格尔在达沃斯’
- 争论 ‘卡尔纳普、海德格尔与“无”’
- 争论 ‘阿多诺与本真性的行话’
截至 2026年11月 · 来源 · 改进本页 · Agora 是如何制作的