I wonder how deep they thought about how “thrownness” would fly in a multicultural culture.
_
The power of dasein… ilovephilosophy.com/viewtop … 7#p2896143
I now have two subscribers… I don’t like it.
Basically multiculturalism represents a failure of thrownness. One is unable to be properly “thrown” into one’s existence, and this has lots of detrimental consequences for us and society.
Hence things like depression, isolation, grasseater men (incels etc), women uninterested in having families, reversal of gender roles, suicides, sexual disorders like homosexuality and transgenderism massively increase, huge increase in drug addiction, in-group trust and cooperation massively decline, liberal-left sort of perspectives on the world increase as IQ declines and dependency increases and mental illness increases and also in part because of the social entropic effects of the technology that is already present to a sufficient degree to even allow multiculturalism to be able to be sustained without collapsing into violence, etc. Then you get further, derivative consequences of all this such as the growth of the police state/surveillance state, corporate-oligarchic takeover of politics increases without limit, breakdown in law and order, the people become victimized en mass by brainwashing and propaganda campaigns constantly running psyops and false flags on them, etc. etc. Not a very good situation to be in.
Existentialism: Heidegger on Dasein and Death
Nicole Czerwinski
Obviously, right?
Yet how many of us go to the grave not really giving this all that much thought? Some are intrinsically bound to an existence from the 5th century BC in China. Others from the 2nd century AD in Greece, others from the 14th century England, others from the 20th century America.
Now, how does the reality of that shape and mold the answers that might be given to the question that most draws me to philosophy:
“How ought one to live morally in a world awash in both conflicting goods and in contingency, chance and change?”
Of course before the birth of philosophy, most lived in relatively small communities…villages, hamlets. And right and wrong, good and bad then generally revolved around the assumptions that there was a proper place or role for everyone and everyone was expected to live out their life [given communal folkways, mores, traditions etc.] in their proper place or role. Often derived from one or another rendition of the Gods…often linked to natural phenomenon not yet understood “scientifically”.
Then came surplus labor. Some of whom became philosophers. And, in the increasingly more modern world, ethics was born. It was thought that given all of the diverse circumstances into which historically and culturally one could be “thrown” at birth, it was necessary to establish the most rational manner in which one was to comport oneself around others.
And, of course, along with that came all of the many, many different flavors of moral objectivism.
And that’s the part that “I” focus on in introducing the idea of dasein at the existential intersection of identity, value judgments, conflicting goods and political economy.
And then the reaction here of those who are themselves moral objectivists. The threat I pose to them is not in suggesting that they are wrong and others are right in regard to moral obligations linked to philosophy and ethics, but that philosophy and ethics are themselves but manifestations of dasein existentially.
Given a particular context.
Unless of course I’m wrong. So, let’s discuss that, I suggest…circumstantially.
And, sure, up in the clouds of abstractions this is “generally” the case for all of us. It’s just that some of us “think this through” and arrive at the conclusion that human existence in a No God world is essentially meaningless ontologically and essentially purposeless teleologically.
So, in focusing in on “I” ontically, what are we to make of situations in which different people [some philosophers, some not] come to very different conclusions regarding right and wrong, good and bad behaviors.
In other words, Heidegger’s Dasein out in the is/ought world today. The past and the present and the future “here and now”.
My point is that many…most…fall into a frame of mind in the present that revolves around the assumption that one can live, as the existentialists say, more or less “authentically”. The “temporality” then given both dasein as I understand it…and death.
Oblivion.
I’ve figured out how I got 3k views… I can sleep well at night, now. 
Existentialism: Heidegger on Dasein and Death
Nicole Czerwinski
Right.
As though in recognizing that one day we will topple over into the abyss that is oblivion isn’t likely to prompt exactly the opposite frame of mind. Philosophically or otherwise. A genuine and meaningful life sustained all the way to the grave with integrity? And in the end…dust? Dust on our way back to star stuff? Why not react instead by thinking, “fuck it, since I’m going to die anyway, why not live my life entirely on my own terms. Take what I can, get what I can because one day it’s all going to be gone forever.”
Though, sure, I get the point from the other end as well. If this is all there is then live it in a way that those around you can pat you on the back precisely for being genuine and in living a meaningful life filled with integrity.
On the other hand, out in a particular world, what exactly ought that to revolve around? Which particular Humanism reflects the most genuine and meaningful and integrous life? After all, pick the wrong one and others might think of your life as anything but those things. What you think of as a noble existence they may see as the life of a scoundrel. Did Hitler live what he construed to be a genuine and meaningful life with integrity?
Okay, but, again, each of of us here might live a life that is far removed from the lives that others live. Thus, even this can be understood in very, very different ways. Some might literally die alone, others surrounded by family and loved ones. Some might welcome death, others might be terrified of it. Some might experience it entirely on a personal, existential level, others given a philosophical or a spiritual background.
Though, sure, there’s no getting around the fact that it is you who are dying, and not those about to mourn you. That will be encountered one by one for each of us. And who can say “in the end” how that might be experienced until it is the end.
And that’s the part where my own dasein comes into play, right?
Only, of course, with death, none of us can say with certainty that “I” comes to an end. That’s the profound mystery embedded in the existential relationship between “my birth”, “my death”, the “human condition” and “the existence of existence itself”. We. Just. Don’t. Know.
On the other hand, the distinction between those who really don’t know when, how or where they will die…and those that do. For example, once all your appeals run out on death row and a day and a time is set for your extinction. How many of us haven’t pondered ourselves in that situation?
God takes away meaning. Nature and the world are seen sometimes, as limited to God’s one purpose,
instead of having virtually any purpose one wants.
The world without god is a free world. A world beyond good and evil.
The “with God” world is also free, explains our hunger for meaning, and actually satisfies it with meaning that doesn’t hover over an abyss, but sticks to the ribs.
Existentialism: Heidegger on Dasein and Death
Nicole Czerwinski
But that is not the only way in which to focus in on our uniqueness. Yes, only human beings become self-conscious of the existential reality that will be own inevitable death. But there is also the fact that each of us comes to embody our own understanding of that as individuals. After all, there are countless narratives here. Some including God, some not. Some involving much to lose, some involving little. Some in experiencing a great fear, others in actually taking one’s own life. Heidegger’s Dasein seems aimed at bringing us all together under the same philosophical umbrella; my dasein , on the other hand, notes just how far removed our reactions to death might be given what can be entirely different indoctrinations as children and given entirely different sets of experiences as adults…out in diverse worlds historically and culturally and personally.
Either that or [for some] results in a frame of mind concluding that whatever we “figure out”, this is reflective only of the manner in which our thinking here is profoundly problematic. Given a very different indoctrination and set of experiences out in a very different world historically and culturally, who is to say just how different our figuring out might have been.
And isn’t that precisely why some come to philosophy? Okay, the existential parameters of our lives are crucial in regard to the goals we set for ourselves. But, as philosophers, we can think that part through and come up instead with the “wisest” means needed in order to pursue the “wisest” ends. Then we can start with the pre-Socratics and explore all of the many different conclusions that philosophers over the centuries have come up with to facilitate our own trajectory.
So, how is that working out for you? And, indeed, some here have no doubt settled on a philosopher or a “school of philosophy” as encompassing the optimal frame of mind. Or, for the most arrogant and autocratic, the only frame of mind allowed.
Bruh no one here understands Heidegger. Cmon now.
Mr. R.
You mean R for Retard?
Yeahhh… for reals.
Still doesnt know shit about H :-" :-" :-"
Are those lemons whistling Dixie?
withdrawn, your honor
The NEW ILP in a nutshell!!!
No, seriously.
Existentialism: Heidegger on Dasein and Death
Nicole Czerwinski
Anyone here actually willing to acknowledge that in regard to their own death, they are the very embodiment of an inauthentic frame of mind?..an inauthentic lifestyle?
Me? I have basically come to believe myself that since no one really knows what actually does happen to “I” after we die, anything that one is able to think oneself into believing that minimizes the apprehension and the fear [God or No God] is the most authentic frame of mind. Though with God the extra bonus being that you acquire an objective morality on this side of the grave and salvation on the other side of it.
Nothing beats that of course. If only “I” could figure out a way to get back on that path myself.
Indeed, though the overwhelming preponderance of mere mortals leave all that stuff to the clergy. Or they get caught up in any number of existential distractions – family, work, arts, sports, sex, politics – and concentrate more on being “happy” and “fulfilled” and “successful”. Anything to keep “I” away from the part about death.
Besides, the “they-self” itself can encompass any number of “authentic” parameters historically and culturally and experientially. What it means to some here may be completely unintelligible to others. Their personal experiences are just too far remove for coherent communication much beyond the either/or world.
I’ve always interpreted Sartre’s “Hell is other people” as revolving around how others seek to objectify us…to see us, assess us, evaluate and judge us in terms of their own moral and political prejudices. I merely take that further by suggesting that “Hell is ‘I’ itself”. Why? Because, for some of us, we are unable even to objectify our own “self” in the is/ought world. Drawn and quartered there as well down to the bone.
For example, think of those who allowed themselves to be immersed in the world that the Nazis invented.
Existentialism: Heidegger on Dasein and Death
Nicole Czerwinski
Yes, what choice do we have as the only animals able to grasp the reality of “my death”. Even able to grapple with death itself in a forum such as this.
Philosophically.
But, of course, it is one thing to ponder death intellectually – analytically? – and another thing altogether to come to grips with it existentially. The real deal death is something that even philosophers will have their own subjective narrative regarding. In other words, there does not appear to be the “wisest” manner in which to think and to feel about it even among those of our ilk.
Anyone here doubt what the number one illusion has been now for centuries? Ever since “the Gods” were reduced down to a God, the God Himself. The opiate that is not just of the masses either.
Or those who are undecided about God but, in the interim, on this side of the grave, throw themselves into one or another ideological crusade…fascism, communism, populism.
Then this part…
Of course what this means to me, it may not mean to you. From my frame of mind, it revolves around those who throw themselves into all of the many “distractions” that can take one away from the reality of “my death”. It might be pop culture or sports or a career or sex or the arts or politics. Something – anything – that becomes important enough to provide you with an escape from what it all must inevitably come down to…nothingness.
Here though the more you accumulate fulfillment and satisfaction from these things, the greater the loss when the Grim Reaper does come around. So, most will still fall back on God every Friday, Saturday or Sunday.
[tab]When I explained to my psychologist why I was suicidal,
they told me to read ‘The Schopenhauer Cure’ written by Irvin D. Yalom.
That was my introduction to Schopenhauer.
A new spirit animal - my thoughts mirrored many of his.
It was so cathartic to hear the words expressed so eloquently.
I created this account on ILP shortly after reading the book.
This is your thread and I don’t want to derail,
but I’ve written quite a lot about death - my death.
The questions of how to live in the face of it.
What to do with that existential dread.
And why to do anything.
I’d be ok with spewing it at you,
but maybe it’d just be noise.
What works for me, may not for you.
I truly believe when death comes for me,
I can step down from the stage of life,
and be grateful that I stood alongside y’all.
Come what may.
The book is one of forgiveness and living in the face of death.
The story is kind of split between three main characters,
one of whom is dying - facing his mortality.
I think you’d find it a meaningful read.[/tab]
Sending you good vibes, man.
One thing I am constantly having to refocus to is living in light of eternity. That’s what “on earth as it is in heaven” is about. Rather than doing the mundane default… which includes the intellectual clouds if they are ungrounded …
…baptize the care. “Catch the little foxes”.
Reign it… neutralize/break it… then ride it.