How his use of language confused readers

Many modern philosophers and intellectuals consider Martin Heidegger to be one of the most important philosophers of the 20th Century. I cannot dispute this.  However – I can critique Heidegger’s work.  My main problem with his work is that, he seemed to have used language as a way to sodomize the minds of his readers.  For instance – just read any sentence in his magnum opus, Being and Time. By reading just one sentence, one gets the feeling that something’s not quite right. After reading a few sentences of a paragraph, one can begin to feel nauseated by reading so many words used together, words that “try” to convey his ideas and philosophies, but sometimes fail to.

To illustrate what I mean, read the following sentence, from Being & time, by Martin Heidegger:

• Dasein is an entity which, in its very Being, comports itself understandingly towards that Being.

What am I supposed to make of this?  I’m sure he could have used a much, much more elementary way of conveying his ideas. I think he meant to say:

• "Man is an entity which takes a stand on its being."

Being and Time is a very, very interesting book – and by studying it, discussing it with other philosophers and professors and reading about it – one can finally understand all that Heidegger really meant in all of his jargon.  I must say that I like the book.  It’s one of my favorite philosophical texts.  I have read quite a few by now and, I’ve been reading and reading – and so it’s time I get back to my own writings and philosophical works and create something that will (one day) be read just as Martin Heidegger’s works and so on. 

I suppose that Heidegger would have not been noticed, had he NOT used such obscure, eccentric and obtuse language in order to contribute to Philosophy.  But, just as soon as one get’s one’s head wrapped around the real and true difficulty of making sense of his writings, comes his story – his life background of being a member of the Nazi party and his contribution to the deaths of millions of Jews, Gays and others.  How is it that a man can be such a great philosopher and yet be a Nazi simultaneously?  How can one excuse Mr. Heidegger from all that he did to his mentor and teacher Edmund Husserl?  Instead of holding Heidegger in such good stead – I’ll do my part in making it known that I utterly reject him.  I will even go so far as to downgrade his contributions to philosophy and call it…pompous, pretentious falderal.  I cannot see how he can be taken seriously.  Despite his contribution to Existentialism, a philosophy that I enjoy as a way of life, the man was insane! Though a professor, his work was “language run amok”.  He expressed his insanity on paper!

As a philosopher, I consider it my duty to rigorously and intelligently learn everything in the world of philosophy.  I must read as many works, research the many great thinkers and come up with my own unique twist to various ideas and so forth.  I consider myself an Existentialist – and, unlike many philosophers, I am rather proud to use the term to describe the philosophical school of thought that I identify with the most.  So call me an Existentialist.  I live and breathe Existentialism.  Though I have only just begun my philosophical journeys, I will continue onward in pursuit of the ultimate philosophical dialectic about and in regards to the Existential tradition.  I view philosophy as a way of life. I wake up thinking existential thoughts, I see existential art – I witness the existential angst among my peers and the so on.  I see through existential eyes…may you call me blinded by the light of Existentialism, call it what you will. And that’s fine.  The reason?  Existentialism is existence – and all that Existentialism says about existence – reflects the truth about existing.        

Reflection of the aforementioned

It’s been about a year since I wrote the above paragraphs.  Upon reflection of the aforementioned, I now have come to understand just what Heidegger was talking about.  However – that does not negate my previous statements about his use of language to convey his ideas.  It has taken me almost a year to come to a basic (vague) understanding of his terminologies.  Heidegger seems to have used common words to come up with a unique vocabulary, using words with one definition to convey an idea or “re-invent” definitions of words.  I don’t know for sure – this is likely my own understanding, misunderstanding or conjecture, to be sure.  In other words: don’t quote me as an authority on Heidegger, as I surely am not.  I’m just a philosopher educating myself on Heidegger and his place in the world of philosophy. I have come to thoroughly enjoy reading Heidegger.  I must say that, while I dislike Heidegger the man, I do not dislike Heidegger the philosopher.  I have mixed feelings about his personality.  I have mixed feelings about him in general, but I do not doubt his contributions to society and philosophy.

Being that I intend to carry forward the existential tradition, I find it my duty to analyze and synthesize all of the literature that I can read about Existentialism. While many of the philosophers of the past generations have rejected the term “Existentialist”, I do not! I find it patently absurd to deny that which I am. And, since I identify most closely with the Existentialist philosophers of the past, it is my privilege to call myself a proud Existentialist. I sense that my fellow philosophers of today have re-examined Existentialism and have sort of kept it in the public mind. I think this is good. Searching the Internet, I tend to find that quite a few fellow students and professors and others have taken an interest in the philosophy especially in recent years (i.e. 2000-2009). 

Back to Heidegger: I am still reading Being & Time.  I find it fascinating, as I mentioned previously, and I find it a challenging read. It’s good to know that after I conquer that book – that I’ll be able to wrap my head around any other kind of literary work indeed.  A book of this magnitude is definitely something to behold.  Heidegger’s use of language has taught me to re-read sentences many times over if I’m confused about something. I’ve found that it’s very important to re-read it until I either understand it, or discover that it is in error.  Thus, my feelings about the book have changed over time, incidentally.  I feel good about this and will continue to read the book until I finish it. 

Speaking about Philosophy in general, I feel that we’ve come a very long way in the modern day, however I know that we’ve got a long way to go indeed and that, (as the “They” say) an artist’s work is never done, so goes the work of a philosopher as well. I love the state of modern Psychology, Philosophy, and Science in general.  Though there is still much we don’t know, I feel that there is quite a bit that we are fortunate enough to know. For example, psychology has learned a whole lot about mental illnesses such as Schizophrenia, Post-Traumatic-Stress Disorder (PTSD) and Mood Disorders (just to name a few).  The fact that I can look up any bit of information that I need to know right from my own computer is still a very fascinating feeling.  It allows me and humanity to become more and more knowledgeable about various issues, topics and phenomena.