Search Results
6/19/2025, 5:12:53 AM
>>24478015
>went out of his way to write in a dense, obtuse manner
Dhat doesn't make reading him a chore.
The topics he deals with are WAY more dense and obtuse than the small window of clarity Land opens for us.
You just lack the biological constitution to read Nick Land
>went out of his way to write in a dense, obtuse manner
Dhat doesn't make reading him a chore.
The topics he deals with are WAY more dense and obtuse than the small window of clarity Land opens for us.
You just lack the biological constitution to read Nick Land
6/19/2025, 4:56:05 AM
>>24477976
One could just argue that all philosophy, after the demystification and rationalization of the world, is a reaction by necessity. If Heidegger was only following the main question all philosophy has asked or came close to ask, that is, the meaning of the Being, then he's just dealing with philosophy. Not to say that Heidegger ignores the demystification and rationalization of the world, he's hermeneutically contextualized in a tremendous way, and deals with such a hermeneutical context to arrive at a clear way of asking for the meaning of being -doing philosophy-, it's just that in a mystified and non-rational world the question philosophy follows still stands, and as such, I don't know if it'd be just to call what Heidegger does a "reaction".
One could just argue that all philosophy, after the demystification and rationalization of the world, is a reaction by necessity. If Heidegger was only following the main question all philosophy has asked or came close to ask, that is, the meaning of the Being, then he's just dealing with philosophy. Not to say that Heidegger ignores the demystification and rationalization of the world, he's hermeneutically contextualized in a tremendous way, and deals with such a hermeneutical context to arrive at a clear way of asking for the meaning of being -doing philosophy-, it's just that in a mystified and non-rational world the question philosophy follows still stands, and as such, I don't know if it'd be just to call what Heidegger does a "reaction".
Page 1