Martin Heidegger- Contributions to Philosophy of the Event (Brief Introduction)

A short introduction and reading of Martin Heidegger's enigmatic later work, "Contributions to Philosophy (of the Event)".

[they]

Loving your channel, James. I first saw you in conversation with Jordan Hall. I am a catechumen in the Eastern Church and have read some philosophy and these videos bring a lot together.

[orthodoxboomergrandma]

James I even looked Heideggerian films! They exist! Lol. Thank you!

[Self-Duality]

Excellent introduction. Subscribed! 😎💭

[davidashton]

HI James
Good introduction to an extraordinary thinker. It's a difficult book, at least until you can get a sense of the language and the direction of Heidegger's thought towards this New Beginning. But as you work through it, an understanding begins to emerge. Some of the thought is - simply - dazzling!

[adamsmith]

Fantastic content lately James. Thank you and peace to you and your family.

[orthodoxboomergrandma]

Why did the way he speaks/writes remind me of Gurdgieff and Ouspensky? I discovered G in 2020 and spent almost a year learning about him and his methods of waking people up. As a former Hindu cult member I was blown away that I hadn’t run into G before I found his book, Meetings with Remarkable Men among my deceased Mom’s things. He was born Orthodox and had an Orthodox funeral but in between investigated Sufi mysticism and gained a lot of followers in Europe and the US. His concept of Self Remembering came to mind as I listened to you read H. I dropped G after realizing his system contained no love, at least in my opinion. His use of language is what your reading reminded me of I think. Now I’m going to google G and H and see what pops up…

[Phaedrus]

Attending a meetup on this book next weekend.

[misanek]

Hi James, as I was listening, the following idea sprang to my mind. When you said that Being was connected to God, I realized this would only apply under the condition that we are working within the framework of Dun Scotus' natural theology. (note: Heidegger did his habilitation on Dun Scotus) The concept of univocity of being would make Being (Sein) and God one, however, working with natural theology and Beyng (Seyn), we can also say, that Beyng is not God. This would make the annihilation of God possible (God is dead, F. Nietzsche) and it would be Beyng as Nothing (Seyn als Nichts). So in the end, we have to say that Beyng is and is not God, as this is an openness of Beyng to the annihilation of God, however, if we reject univocity of being and move away from natural theology, we could even say that Beyng and God are the same, but such an understanding of God would be inconsistent, it points to the question whether God can make 2+2 not equal 4 or not, under natural theology God cannot make 2+2 not equal 4.

However, if we want to stay in pure philosophizing we cannot move away from the natural (intuitive, noetic, Lebenswelt residing) understanding of God, if we move away from that, we stop doing philosophy and start doing theology.

It seems to me, that in the Western philosophical context the annihilation of God is possible, in the Orthodox-Russian philosophical context it is impossible, I would refer to Dugin's work On the Possibility of Russian philosophy. Since you are an Orthodox believer and living in the Western Dasein, this could prove difficult and seems even schizophrenic to my eyes, must be hard to grapple with.

[orthodoxboomergrandma]

What’s the best to read by H, or a good summary of him?

[orthodoxboomergrandma]

Nepsis the remedy…G taught people to wake up but Christ was not there…Ouspensky eventually broke w G and near the end of his life O told Gerald Palmer to go to Mt Athos to find the Real Deal…Palmer eventually helped Sherrard and Ware translate the Philokalia into English…
Btw, did you know Volume 5 finally came out from St George monastery. A female translator I believe. It’s on Amazon.

[orthodoxboomergrandma]

I found the connection…forgetfulness of being…