3 ms·
Heidegger is against it, yes, but he's also clear that we're stuck within technology as a historical destining of Being. We can't just escape technology by thin
by Mark_Kumleben 5y ago
Heidegger is against it, yes, but he's also clear that we're stuck within technology as a historical destining of Being. We can't just escape technology by thinking differently about it, but must wait heedfully for the historical development of Being (as he lays out in The Turning, just after QCT). In fact, the fulfilment of technology's own reductionism is a necessary step, as only the full concealment of Being in technology allows us to recognize that oblivion for what it is and thus to overcome it. As such, I think it's a reasonable argument to make that AI taking away the work of ordering for humans may help us escape the incomplete agency of ordering the standing-reserve so that we're no longer forced to merely see the world as standing-reserve.
By the way, I saw your comment about Heidegger and Asian religious philosophy below - are you familiar with the Kyoto school? I've signed up for the Halkyon Guild's upcoming course on Nishitani Keiji, and am vaguely hoping his theory of the self-overcoming of nihilism can be brought to bear on the questions Heidegger raises about technology.
- pmoriarty 5y agoI have read briefly about the Kyoto school, but haven't delved deeply in to it yet. In Heidegger I hear echoes of Buddhism, the Tao Te Ching, and Hinduism. Recently I came across "The Book of Tea"[1], which Tomonobu Imamichi claimed Heidegger plagiarized. I've only just started reading it, and so far it seems nothing like Heidegger, but maybe it gets more interesting later. [1] - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_book_of_tea https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_book_of_tea