Hubert Dreyfus on Husserl and Heidegger: Section 3

In contrast to empiricist and rationalist traditions, existentialism proposes and orderless world, vaguely hostile, where people choose their character goals, have an obligation only to "authentic," and may only observe the truth (reality) in moments of anxiety. In this program, University of California, Berkeley philosopher Herbert Dreyfus traces the roots of existentialism from Edmund Husserl's School of Phenomenology, to his pupil Martin Heidegger's theories of das Sein, the threefold structure of activity, authenticity, and nihilism. Dreyfus relates the philosophies of both en to present-day schools of thought.

Category:

Education

Tags:

• Bryan
• Magee
• Hubert
• Dreyfus
• Edmund
• Husserl
• Martin
• Heidegger
• Philosophy
• Existentialism
• Phenomenology
• Authenticity
• Nihilism

[dedbusted]

Dreyfus reminds me of Flanders from the Simpsons

[GordonMorrice]

For me, Dawkins is a close-minded puritan. I don't find his ideas, views and opinions very interesting. He's good at explaining biological states of affairs, but when it comes to philosophy, metaphysics and history of ideas, he gets out of his element. He's a million miles from Bryan Magee who is (was?) a brilliant man or "dasein" as it may be (!) who did an admirable job in bringing philosophy to the general public. He was like the Carl Sagan of philosophy.

[Morecake2]

It certainly meant a lot to me because at the time I was participating in an on-going debate with my peers about what authenticity actually was. To them it was being whatever your environment had socialized you into. It was a huge relief to find that it meant something quite different.

[SecretTheatre]

@memoryburn7 Why do you need Sam Harris when 'these things' are easily destructible? Why have you not shown how to destroy them? Why are you appealing to some 'higher power'?

[SecretTheatre]

@Morecake2 I agree. Saw it back in '87 on BBC 2 on Sunday evenings, I seem to recall. I got the book for Xmas! And it inspired me to study philosophy at university a year later.

[peteface24]

@TheDavid2222 In substance Dennet is pretty much the same as Dawkins only he is trained in philosophy so he comes across as more polite and sophisticated. But his philosophy is largely reiteration of science because like Dawkins he is a strict empiricist. I think theocracy / fascism is something for philosophers of politics rather than religion to discuss. After all, many theocrats are atheists and most theists are not theocrats.

[peteface24]

@memoryburn7 Likewise analysing religion as 'easily destructible' is not fair. This is just the problem, Dawkins makes it look like shooting fish in a barrel when it's not. Neither Harris nor Dawkins have made any sophisticated attempt to engage philosophically with spirituality / traditional metaphysics yet they do present themselves as having done so.

[poloisnacho]

Dreyfus, y u no talk about more about Husserl? #titlesofivdeoscanbemisleading

[Morecake2]

Thanks for putting this on YouTube. I remember being stunned by this when it was first shown on TV, and it is still compelling. Its hard to imagine the BBC doing this sort of thing these days.

[TheDavid2222]

@GordonMorrice I completely agree with you. The academic scholars fighting the forces of theocratic fascism should include people who have specialized in philosophy. "is there a god" is a philosophical question to begin with. What do you think of Dannielle Dennent? He was in my philosophy textbook and is still alive.

[memoryburn7]

analyzing dawkins as someone who is trying to bring philosophy to the general public is not fair. he is trying to shoot fish in a barrel that absolutely need shooting. to do this, he may have to use crude tools but his goal is to just shoot fish in a barrel. he isn't trying to create a complex philosophy. if you want a more philosophically precise destruction of easily destructible things, see sam harris.