{"id":11707,"date":"2020-04-13T13:42:14","date_gmt":"2020-04-13T21:42:14","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.scotthyoung.com\/blog\/?p=11707"},"modified":"2020-05-01T02:54:19","modified_gmt":"2020-05-01T10:54:19","slug":"being-and-time","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.scotthyoung.com\/blog\/2020\/04\/13\/being-and-time\/","title":{"rendered":"Being and Time: An Interesting Book You Probably Shouldn’t Read"},"content":{"rendered":"

I just spent the last two months doing a deep dive trying to understand Martin Heidegger\u2019s seminal work, Being and Time<\/a>.<\/p>\n

You probably shouldn\u2019t read it. It\u2019s also one of the most interesting and thought-provoking books I\u2019ve read in the last decade. This post is my attempt to reconcile those two beliefs.<\/p>\n

The reasons not to read Being and Time<\/em> are obvious. The book is only half-finished. Of what was written, the second division is so muddled, that even after taking a companion class with dozens of hours of lectures, I still have no idea how to make sense of it.<\/p>\n

Also, Heidegger was a Nazi<\/a>.<\/p>\n

It\u2019s not clear how much Heidegger\u2019s politics influence his writing. Especially around 1927 when this book was published. Still, there\u2019s an undeniable ick factor.<\/p>\n

However, even if you do separate Heidegger\u2019s politics from his philosophy, he may have bigger problems. Philosopher Philippe Lemoine describes Heidegger, half-jokingly, as \u201cThe only man about whom one can truly say that being a Nazi was the least of his sins.\u201d<\/p>\n

Indeed, Heidegger was a major influence of postmodernist thought. You know, that philosophy that says that there is no truth, science isn\u2019t real, all that exists are belief structures made by whomever is in charge. Heidegger didn\u2019t say exactly those things, but his work definitely inspired later postmodern thinkers like Foucault and Derrida.<\/p>\n

On top of all that, he\u2019s a terrible writer. It took me a companion course, dozens of articles and books to try to make sense of it from a first reading. I can honestly say reading the Dao De Jing<\/a> in Chinese was less effortful.<\/p>\n

Given all this, why spend two months grinding through the book and why write this now? Sunk-cost fallacy<\/a> in action, or is there something more?<\/p>\n

Interesting Takeaways from a Nearly Unreadable Book<\/h2>\n
\nListen to this article<\/small>
\n