Death, Faith & Existentialism
Filiz Peach explains what two of the greatest existentialist thinkers thought about death: Martin Heidegger and Karl Jaspers.
Interesting perhaps but rather routine for those who root such things in the existential fabrication of “I”. He was no different from the rest of us. Thrown adventitiously into a set of circumstances at birth, then indoctrinated as a child to see himself out in a particular world in a particular way.
God and religion being but one manifestation of that.
So, my intent would be to discover how and why, given the life that he lived, he came to write Being and Time at all. And why including some things but not others? And why with so few references to God and religion. Or, for that matter, human moral and political values.
Then the part where the “serious philosophers” among us speculate as to whether this was a “mistake” on his part. That God and religion are important factors regarding being in time…and that it may well be possible for the most rational among us to determine the precise content that would be needed in order to make his book all that much more relevant to the “human condition”.
Okay, but in what particular context, involving what particular beings moving through time for what particular reasons. Why choose these instead of those. And then all the stuff that matters most to me: identity, value judgments and political power.
Still, in regard to “human existence” in a particular set of circumstances, where does the ontic stop and the ontological begin? Or the ontological stop and the ontic begin?
As that relates to the distinction I make between beings in time interacting objectively in the either/or world, and beings in time interacting subjectively in the is/ought world.
And, no, not just in regard to the Nazis.