Greatest teacher of philosophy in the 21st century. Thanks

This video, and Heidegger by extension, come in a quite a relevant time for me! Thank you so much Prof. Bonevac, and pardon me, i have now a date with Heidegger scheduled.

This is a very generous reading of Heidegger - the idea can easily be twisted into understanding modes of being more or less authentic, and the human expressions being worth more or less, offering some support for exterminating the inauthentic. I wish that weren't so, but explains the facts on the historical ground.

Helpful

This is the best explanation I’ve heard yet, thanks man!!!

I believe that part of the alienation of the Dasein comes from ths distinction between the object and the subject. Being in the world is not being in something that is apart from myself, like something completely opposite to my existence in the world, I'm part of it and I should be conscious about it. Greetings from Colombia, and thanks for sharing the video.

Thank you Sir for easy and accessible, but how substantial lectures!!!

Because of my past, I will never be fully and honestly accepted by my world of others. It's a very lonely place at times. Great lecture and lecturer

You are doing very good work.

Light, light, light.

Thank you !!!

First KZfaq comment ever. Thank you for everything you share!

I definitely took the plunge this last year.

We are the world. And the world is us

Thank you sir

Thank you for this lecture! Don't you think that between Heidegger's "Being in the world with others" and Ortega y Gasset's "I am me and my circumstance" there is something similar? It would be great to read/listen to your opinion.

13:50 - In German "end" as telos is "Zweck", whereas end as the opposite of beginning is "Ende". I do not think that Heidegger was confused about a homonymy which does not exist in his own language. (Although I am not 100% sure which words Heidegger uses in B&T here)

I think it's a mistake to think of thrownness as only pertaining to the conditions of your birth. My thrownness at any given moment pertains to the whole of my past (and the history preceding my birth) and to the particular situation I'm in - and as these things evolve, so does my thrownness. Heidegger says that moods disclose Dasein's thrownness, and Dasein's moods change constantly. If thrownness was a once-and-for-all deal that started and ended with birth, then Dasein's moods wouldn't be changing - supposing, as Heidegger does, that moods disclose thrownness. I think you present a conception of thrownness that's much more Sartrian than Heideggerian, and thus a conception of authenticity that's much more Sartrian, i.e., voluntarist. For Heidegger, authenticity involves an embracing of finitude, which means, among other things, that Dasein is heavily determined by its thrownness as against its projection. tldr: thrownness ≠ natality

Free will?

I wonder how much his comments on leaving the world (I assume it’s the Umwelt? Pardon my ignorance, as I’m not yet to the point in Being and Time that you’re covering) and entering another are related to his thinking about art. As he says in The Origin of the Work of Art, the work of art creates a world. And Heidegger certainly privileges these worlds over, say, the world of the World of Warcraft video game. So, if the two texts can be put in dialogue, this seems to me to be when Hölderlin’s line (that Heidegger loves so much) “Where danger is, grows the saving power too.” Would you agree? And, if so, what is it that slows us to leave the world set up by the work of art? Is our being-in-such-a-world essentially finite, just as our being-in-the-Umwelt is? Is this perhaps part of why Heidegger privileges art: If that’s the case, then art forces us to confront our finitude in a truly explicit way. Thank you.

Interesting series of lectures so far and I plan to finish. Thank you. However, how puzzling is this authenticity! I'm an old being (no children) so it's helped me to understand a bit better younger beings or is that Daseins? Anyhow, how can you reject what has been "imposed" by others and at the same time plunge into yourself looking for authenticity and all this time you have to allow for others and do some caring while you are at it? What a tall order. I should think that's worrying enough even before you set about contemplating your finitude and getting all anxious about dying. Phew. But perhaps I've misunderstood all this. Quite possible. I know there were certain things imposed on me at birth and as a young child and yes as I grew up and did some reflecting I managed my way out of those and imposed a few others on myself of which I liked some and didn't others. It's called muddling along. But some, possibly many, of those "imposed" things are really a bedrock, a stable environment and society, a culture from which secure place (well, as secure as it can be) you can set off from to make your way in the world (or make a world), to reflect and make choices and do your authentic stuff. Without that bedrock you can easily flounder about and play video games all day.

Crazy screaming acid-loving beer-drinking Jimmy Morrison; "into this world we're thrown, like a dog without a bone and Hector out alone. Riders on the Storm..." The Doors

Might I ask how old you are? I am curious what you make of your student who traveled to the lands of Azeroth, a game which centers around the concept of interacting with others in both a cooperative and competitive way in order to advance a digital avatar's progress.

And also he criticizes the way we do philosophy and science since Ancient Greece. I agree with him cause philosophy has always been ( in general ) elite thing in terms of number not class

Can force relations (foucault) make inauthentic choices authentic? After all,it seems that forcerelations wil make it the case the marginal utility of the inauthentic choice, greater than the marginal utility of the authentic choice. And also it seems that moral domestication (nietzche) can make inauthentic choices profitable and therefore authentic.

I prefer Lionel Trilling's Sincerity and Authenticity, on the topic of authenticity.

Re: living in “the world as it is”, but what if the world as it is, is a bunch of malarkey? And, or some kind of simulacrum that you find terribly disappointing and inauthentic??

life is a kind of trauma, this obfuscates Freud (occludes him) for he looked for 'special' trauma whereas its pob universal (so to speak) - Jung too is wrong and on and on

Dear sir, This is a doubt regarding freedom. Whether or not we are actually free. Kindly consider the following: P1. A person generally does that, what it likes. P2. A person cannot choose to like something. C. Therefore, a person does that what it cannot choose. Extending on the conclusion.... any freedom, if exists, gurantees choice. Choice is the synonym for freedom (here). But since we logically deduced that freedom is an illusion, does that in any ways change Heideggerian freedom of life choices? Wouldn't it lead to the conclusion that any life examined or unexamined cannot be lived otherwise? And the possibilities of authenticity become null? Thankyou.

Not easy to take Heidegger's advice on authenticity when you look at his own life...

A tension of Kierkegaard and Aristotle, the individual and social animal. No surprise that these were major influences. Pity he obscures both. Some ugly Hegelianism too - inauthentic notions of historicity and rootedness that no doubt lead him to the Nazis. The philosopher of authenticity was deeply inauthentic, a slave of culture. He was more Aristotelian than Kierkegaardian, despite his early works. Maybe he thought coming up with a new vocabulary made him an individual? Later Heidegger is hyper-romantic. He abandons Kierkegaard's subjectivity, but maintains the tension of three lifestyles/being from Kierkegaard: dwelling poetically' takes the place of faith or subjectivity. Despite protestations, Heidegger has an Aristotelian-like ethics of flourishing that points to a deeper, poetic contemplation of everyday life. He never gives up Hegelianism with his grand, poetic meta-narrative. Heidegger is good for people who will never read Kierkegaard, Nietzsche, or the summary of earlier work by Sartre.

How does being a Nazi equate with authenticity? (And no propaganda that he was a reluctant Nazi for only a short period).

▪️ 2:34 These past few years - There was absolutely *NO* "word that starts with a Pand, .... and Ends with a ... mic" - *AT ALL - WHATSOEVER* . ⬛️

Chatbot ... >>>>>>> Philobot Psychobot Medibot "Politibot" Ideas ....

Why do you assume we have ave freedom, even beyond family, culture influences etc? We are a human animal with certain genetic boundaries that define our emotional lives and responses. That is key to me - boundaries set by biology that we don’t even see, and that doesn’t even address physics determinism (but let’s ignore that). This video seems really superficial and puts people in a worse mental state, one of not realizing how hard it is to change due to simple biological drives and framing of the possible. The imperiousness of the sex drive, especially male, is the most obvious. This makes people wrong for what they inherently are. This seems WAY too simple.