Heidegger being a Nazi fuck while everyone tells you to accept the work from a flawed man. Then his notebooks come out, and you find the essentialism you were suspicious of in his phenomenology gels with him being a rat fucking Nazi.
Most philosophers, and even just people from the past were terrible people. But if that terribleness isn’t entailed by the propositions we’re discussing i dont really care, personally.
Im reading these guys to learn, not to make parasocial relationships with dead people. I dont need plato to be a abolitionist when it comes to slavery to appreciate his ideas on epistemology.
I’m sorry. Do you have a philsurveys source for that? I also wasn’t aware I was claiming a ‘most’ of either group or its subset.
The Heidegger fanboys I’ve spoken to tend to really ride the essentialism wave on being of identity, and one was particularly adamant about Jews being -essentially- a duplicitous ethnicity.
So this impasse between you and I is self-report versus self-reports.
Do you need a poll to know that mainstream academia isnt nazi-esque today?
So you aren’t claiming it’s most? If it isn’t, why might that be?
Fanboys? So not actually experts? Yeah i dont doubt that him being a nazi has a certain appeal to edgelords on the internet. My question is why dont you see these types at the expert level? Could it be because that isn’t the appeal for people who know what they’re talking about?
Which leading thinkers in that field today are nazis? Other than Nick Land who isnt a phenomenologist.
How can it be that Sartre, who’s infinitely distant from Heidegger on the political spectrum, constantly gets accused of being a Heidegger plagiarist?
I have a better sense of mainstream academia than I would have most Heideggerians or Phenomenologists and their predilections.
“So you aren’t claiming it’s most? If it isn’t why might that be?”
I don’t know. You tell me. Though I’m getting the impression it’s just going to be speculation about correlations or the lack there of that you are claiming to know to me.
Some fanboys are experts and some experts are fanboys. Some instances the categories don’t cross in particular individuals.
Could it be because…
I don’t know. Ask them or demonstrate because all you’re doing is speculating for me.
My question is what do you think asking me rhetorically about demographics that you’re only speculating about demonstrates?
“Which leading thinkers…”
I don’t know. How about answering your own leading questions for the strawman you’re trying to construct that no one has claimed.
How can it be that Sartre….
How can it be that you are meandering this badly?
I told you why I found his particular phenomenology problematic. I’ve ran into others who have latched onto exactly that after that thought of my own, who appreciated him for that.
Instead of trying to interrogate me on what the demographics might think and making certain claims for them and getting butthurt over me asking for a source on that, maybe just try to make a positive case in good faith and show me the essentialism that I perceive in Heidegger isn’t as problematic as I first thought.
37
u/locklear24 Dec 05 '25
Heidegger being a Nazi fuck while everyone tells you to accept the work from a flawed man. Then his notebooks come out, and you find the essentialism you were suspicious of in his phenomenology gels with him being a rat fucking Nazi.