Plop!

By R. Abilash

If thinking for Descartes is proof of Being (I think, therefore I am), writing, to many of us, is an act of intense suffering. In fact, suffering is integral to thinking as well. Bertrand Russell’s sarcastic comment, “most people would rather die than think and many of them do,” perhaps reflects his disdain for the ‘lowly’ existence of such non thinkers. Thinking and writing are interrelated. Writing is a natural corollary of the act of thinking. While thinking involves sincerity, open mindedness, flexibility and curiosity, writing entails discipline, focused and uninterrupted attention, not easily available in today’s world. That would explain why there are very few good writers amidst us. However, the crux of the matter is this: without doubting and questioning there can be no new knowledge, and for Descartes, the founder of the Rationalist School of philosophical thought, therefore, doubting and questioning are absolutely important virtues. These two acts are constant reminders and indicators of human existence.

Plop! Notes on Heidegger is an outcome of the aforementioned virtues – an artistic expression that is creative and critical at once. Life is all about trying to make sense of the seemingly nonsensical. Meanings are to be made of our everyday life – joys, sorrows, friends, enemies and every relationship that we form in this temporal world. What is that unifying factor that binds all these, the ‘is-ness’ that was crucial to Heidegger?

It’s interesting to learn that this work is born out of such a curiosity – a curiosity to understand and make meanings out of certain phenomena, perhaps even the most common ones, which yet may have gone unnoticed or conveniently ignored all the while. As the book is a critique of Heidegger’s philosophy and in their objective to be faithful to his huge breadth of works, the authors have discussed a vast gamut of topics ranging from everyday commonplace phenomena to art and culture, from freedom to media and technology, politics, philosophy and education. Philosophy is both inclusive and eclectic and this book too reflects that. It is also quite heartening to know that our faculty and students have such critical insights and more importantly they are brought to the fore through such creative initiatives.

I take this opportunity to congratulate the team, and also appreciate their efforts. A great work indeed from a small team! All the essays have been well conceived, well researched and written in a way any one can not only understand the philosophical underpinnings of Heidegger’s thoughts but also appreciate the relevance of Philosophy as a discipline itself. Dr Abilash Chandran is from the Department of English, Ms Neha Aggarwal is from Department of Psychology, and Mr Ayush is a student of Science. So here is an instance of Humanities, Social Science and Science bonding to create a new paradigm and for CHRIST which is focused on inter- and multi-disciplinary approaches to learning this connection is extremely significant.

As illustrated through the work, the possibilities of one’s ‘being’ are limitless, and my best wishes to the team to continue to exploring the possibilities by doubting, questioning, introspecting, and reflecting. In all this, have the courage to be self-critical of your own work, ideas, and practices – and that is yet another explicit sign of one’s ‘being’.

Best Wishes!
Dr John J Kennedy
Professor and Dean, Humanities and Social Sciences

• Language: English
• Publisher: Pustaka Digital Media
• Release date: Oct 4, 2019
• ISBN: 6580523204619

Book preview

http://www.pustaka.co.in

Plop!

Notes on Heidegger

Authors:

Neha Aggarwal

Ayush

R. Abilash Chandran

For more books

http://www.pustaka.co.in/home/author/r-abhilash

Digital/Electronic Copyright © by Pustaka Digital Media Pvt. Ltd.

All other copyright © by Author.

All rights reserved. This book or any portion thereof may not be reproduced or used in any manner whatsoever without the express written permission of the publisher except for the use of brief quotations in a book review.

Table of Contents

A Note from the Dean of Humanities and Social Sciences

Preface - Neha Aggarwal

Introduction – Let's disclose Heidegger - Ayush

Why Should One Read Heidegger? - Neha Aggarwal

Art and Culture

What is the Fun in Dance? - R. Abilash Chandran

Culture and Identity – the Inauthenticity of Being - Ayush

Suffering as Being: A Photographer’s Dilemma - Ayush

Everyday

What Is It About Gossip That We Always Gossip? - R. Abilash Chandran

Why Do We Love Stereotyping and Hate Being Stereotyped? - R. Abilash Chandran

Where is my Helmet - R. Abilash Chandran

Death Thou Art So…- R. Abilash Chandran

Freedom

Freedom and Being – A Never-ending Saga - Ayush

What is Freedom When We Don’t Engage with It? - R. Abilash Chandran

Language

The Essence of Human Understanding - Ayush

What am I? - Ayush

The Being of a man known as Dalit - R. Abilash Chandran

The Creativity of Everyday Women - R. Abilash Chandran

Why is Gibberish More Fun than Language and Social Media? - R. Abilash Chandran

Media and Technology

A Writer’s Dilemma – the Crisis Confronting MeToo - Ayush

The Technological Man - Ayush

The Politics of Being - Ayush

Politics

Is There an Essential Dalithood? - R. Abilash Chandran

Philosophy

Towards the Light: Ayn Rand and Heidegge - Ayush

The Jargon of Knowledge – Adorno and Heidegger - Ayush

Realizing dasein – The dualistic approach - Ayush

Time

Can there be understanding without thought? - Ayush

Death – The End? A case for Pulwama - Ayush

Education

Education through Heideggerian Lens - Neha Aggarwal

Food

Eat Junk Food, Dream with Your Eyes! - R. Abilash Chandran

Glossary

Authors

Other Contributors

To a woman,

Who carries the will to live with unwavering and unconditional love despite the unusual melancholy of fate?

(Ayush)

To mom,

Who hasn’t read a single word I have ever written, and who, on account of which, remains my proudest reader!

(R. Abilash Chandran)

A Note from the Dean of Humanities and Social Sciences

If thinking for Descartes is proof of Being (I think, therefore I am), writing, to many of us, is an act of intense suffering. In fact, suffering is integral to thinking as well. Bertrand Russell’s sarcastic comment, most people would rather die than think and many of them do, perhaps reflects his disdain for the ‘lowly’ existence of such non thinkers. Thinking and writing are interrelated. Writing is a natural corollary of the act of thinking. While thinking involves sincerity, open mindedness, flexibility and curiosity, writing entails discipline, focused and uninterrupted attention, not easily available in today’s world. That would explain why there are very few good writers amidst us. However, the crux of the matter is this: without doubting and questioning there can be no new knowledge, and for Descartes, the founder of the Rationalist School of philosophical thought, therefore, doubting and questioning are absolutely important virtues. These two acts are constant reminders and indicators of human existence.

Plop! Notes on Heidegger is an outcome of the aforementioned virtues – an artistic expression that is creative and critical at once. Life is all about trying to make sense of the seemingly nonsensical. Meanings are to be made of our everyday life – joys, sorrows, friends, enemies and every relationship that we form in this temporal world. What is that unifying factor that binds all these, the ‘is-ness’ that was crucial to Heidegger?

It’s interesting to learn that this work is born out of such a curiosity – a curiosity to understand and make meanings out of certain phenomena, perhaps even the most common ones, which yet may have gone unnoticed or conveniently ignored all the while. As the book is a critique of Heidegger’s philosophy and in their objective to be faithful to his huge breadth of works, the authors have discussed a vast gamut of topics ranging from everyday commonplace phenomena to art and culture, from freedom to media and technology, politics, philosophy and education. Philosophy is both inclusive and eclectic and this book too reflects that. It is also quite heartening to know that our faculty and students have such critical insights and more importantly they are brought to the fore through such creative initiatives.

I take this opportunity to congratulate the team, and also appreciate their efforts. A great work indeed from a small team! All the essays have been well conceived, well researched and written in a way any one can not only understand the philosophical underpinnings of Heidegger’s thoughts but also appreciate the relevance of Philosophy as a discipline itself. Dr Abilash Chandran is from the Department of English, Ms Neha Aggarwal is from Department of Psychology, and Mr Ayush is a student of Science. So here is an instance of Humanities, Social Science and Science bonding to create a new paradigm and for CHRIST which is focused on inter- and multi-disciplinary approaches to learning this connection is extremely significant.

As illustrated through the work, the possibilities of one’s ‘being’ are limitless, and my best wishes to the team to continue to exploring the possibilities by doubting, questioning, introspecting, and reflecting. In all this, have the courage to be self-critical of your own work, ideas, and practices – and that is yet another explicit sign of one’s ‘being’.

Best Wishes!

Dr John J Kennedy

Professor and Dean, Humanities and Social Sciences

Preface

- Neha Aggarwal

Plop: Notes on Heidegger was a journey that began for the three individuals in quiet an uncommon fashion. What can be said of poetry – that it comes to people when they are least looking for it – can also be said for philosophy! The authors have had different experiences with philosophy or may hold questions pertaining to existence, whether after reading Ayn Rand or post heartache or as a result of harsh difficulties in life or simply out of monotony of a meaningless life. The writings began to flow as we three kept indulging ourselves in Heidegger's thoughts penned down in his famous Being and Time. The difficulty of comprehending the philosophical text of 20th century was overcome by back-and-forth readings on other writers such as Jiddu Krishnamurti or Derrida. We let the lunch hour of our work days be consumed by the walks we took on the garden spaces of campus and by reflecting on our daily lives and events from the perspective of dasein and other popular concepts of Heidegger. As the discussions proceeded, so did our curiosity into the world and our presence in it, and we witnessed the gradual change in our language for interpreting the world.

This book is not an academic one, with formal chapters based on the philosophy of Heidegger; rather it is a semi-formal write-up styled as notes similar to those scribbled on random pieces of paper on an evening after the intense lunch-time discussions. These are, nevertheless, an intimate, personalized and internalized account of reflections that contribute to the understanding of Martin Heidegger. The book has attempted to cover the significant topics of our lives lit up with the philosophical wisdom of Heidegger. The authors have related to different art and cultural forms such as dance, photography and sports rallied around the concept of ‘being’. They reveal the essence of everyday instances such as gossiping and stereotyping and our existence with the objects that we use in everyday life. The concept of freedom has been discussed from the existential point of view, and the book raises some pertinent questions relevant in this modern period of identity politics. The chapters on language and being, with a literary taste, enable us to look at our communicative patterns with others. Another popular theme of the day is media and technology, and the authors have thrown some light on what these two do to our beings. In the theme of philosophy, authors have compared and contrasted Heidegger with other philosophers, and one of the final components of the book has been written on the unique interpretation of the concept of death!

We extend our thanks to the management of CHRIST (deemed to be University) for being so accommodative of our creative and intellectual pursuits, for keeping red tape at bay, and for letting chance bringing three eager minds come together so that this book could happen!

Introduction – Let's disclose Heidegger

- Ayush

Consider the above optical illusion. Which one is longer?

Our intuition convinces us to believe that the second one is the longer line. But on measurement we realise that both are of the same length. We in general are very attracted to the notion of causal relation containing the world. Time as we know it is very fluid – one can neither stop it nor can one make complete sense of each moment of it. What we refrain to think however is what if it is the very unaltered fluidity of time that makes the observer see as if there is no pause in the work involved. What about the one who experiences the work? Does he feel time the same way as the observer? Can time be objectified?

Our intuition portrays a sequence of temporal events to be just the nature of cause and effect and is a knowledge that we have closed in our sense of knowing. Consider a case where at a signal a few vehicles start moving before the signal turns green, and you see a person standing at a place 200m far down the road. The man standing there (who being 200m far and unable to see the state of the signal) would assume that the signal has turned green regardless of the fact that it was a mutual conformity to move on despite the signal being red. Laws of causation would make him come to an inference that the signal had turned green and because of that the vehicles moved and as a result he experienced a closure of knowledge. But the basic premise of such a closure of knowledge that the signal was turned green itself is false. This is how knowledge works. It works on the premises of mutual agreement. It is a desperate attempt to find meaning and regularities in a world of undifferentiated and purposeless disarray. It is a game played by time which tempts to see objects as they are undifferentiated by their essence. Hence Aristotle’s claim that if x and y are in same state of affair and if x and y are two different closely linked temporal events, then x causes y cannot be completely true. The above example gives us an understanding of our failure to question our natural premises of objective reasoning. This is not a result of our inability to know. But it lies in our methodology of failing to articulate things we take for granted. This basic metaphysical question in the everydayness of our being takes us on a road to linking inarticulate thoughts. What is strange about this way of knowing is that it carries with itself a will and a desire. A desire to know what is already known. But what does Heidegger have to say about this? How do we know without willing to know?

What Heidegger talks about is truth through disclosedness of being by our interaction with the world, which is contrary to the one applied by us in our everyday life. Truth through disclosedness here reveals the way of existence when one is thrown-into-the-world. It involves a peculiar kind of ceremony where a man is not deciphering his thought to action, but rather it is the world that invites him to change his being and it is the world that calls for action. For example, a man lying in the grass feels a change in his being as if the grass were not separate from him. But what calls him to lie on the grass is not the thought of it but the very presence of it, of it being-there. Certainly, there is a will and a desire involved to lie on the grass, but it is not evoked by thought of lying on the grass but rather the presence. This presence of the grass invites him, but it is also the man’s care towards the world, or, so to speak, a man’s will towards the world that makes him want to know the object or interact with the object that lies ahead of him. It is this very unique nature of our being that is constantly changing by its interaction with the world and in the process is calling for a change within him and the world. Knowledge in Heideggerian world is unconcealment where the interaction with the world reveals what is. For example, Chennai is hotter than Bangalore. I am not an all-time data analyst to come upon this conclusion. Neither have I ever compared the weather reports of Chennai and Bangalore. But I have been to Chennai, in fact I lived there for 15 years. I keep using the statement Why does Chennai have to be so hot … always? Why not chill a little? Never though did I stop to do some fact-checking. I feel it is implicit in my being. The land of my walks and the warmth that never left my skin made it known. It is the hotness, the very experience of the sun, that establishes the knowing of the known, that is, Chennai is hotter than Bangalore.

It is a drive in the desire to the unknown that keeps a man from knowing what is already known. Like what J. Krishnamurti said, What is already known only can be known because what is unknown is known through the known and hence it always leads to the known. (5) Love, happiness and everything else that make his being elated are obscured by the social and religious institutions that are spending more time in preserving their ideologies than experiencing them. This overbearing nature of social and religious dogma is what keeps us from the authenticity of our being or in other sense knowing what is known.

Heidegger comes out of this despair in social and religious constructs and sees the world undergoing change every moment. A change observed not through the senses but through the experience of it. According to Heidegger, time is just a state of being that one experiences because one lives through change, and to make sense of time is to make sense of our being and its constant interaction and change with the world.

References

Jiddu Krishnamurti, the Collected Works, Vol. VI, p 5, First Talk in Rajahmundry (20 November 1945), J.Krishnamurti Online, JKO Serial No. 491120.

Why Should One Read Heidegger?

– Neha Aggarwal

Whether we read philosophy books or not, reflection is part of our everyday life. Our or others’ life events often make us wonder about life and question the meaning of it. The list for commonly unanswered questions is endless. For instance, why do we attract suffering, the reasons for war, the questions about stupid and unreasonable acts of people, the overpowering influence of technology, addictions, so on and so forth. Our wonderments and amazement call out for an ontological enquiry as they are not a coincidence. They symbolize the need for a deeper reflection, for a profound engagement with our existence into this world. The centuries-old philosophers have gifted us with some of the answers. Many of the philosophies also contradict each other, resulting in a mind confused, yet quenching our thirst for knowledge. To go deeper into any ontological enquiry, it is first crucial to break a concept down and view it from different, opposite and multiple perspectives. It is also crucial to question the activities we indulge into, since these activities form our essence.

Can spending more time in the graveyard solve the problem of meaninglessness of our lives, as Martin Heidegger suggested? There is no research in the area, but it definitely is not an easy activity to carry out. This is probably so because of an unconscious fear of death! The fear of death is inversely proportional to the meaningful life that we live. On the other hand, the concept of anxiety is quiet ironical. The world has made us believe that anxiety is bad, that it should be treated with pharmaceuticals and any kind of restlessness must be undone. This is problematic because, anxiety, when experienced to the core, takes us to the ultimate meaninglessness of monotony of everyday life, in turn making us change that mundaneness and give a meaning to life. Thus, it becomes important to know the what and how of anxiety in its essence. The anxiety of doing more, achieving more is thus not just a compensation of inferiority and insufficiency felt in the childhood as individual psychologist Alfred Adler would interpret, or it isn’t caused by materialistic or power greed, or mere lack of planning abilities, but much beyond that.

The core of it lies in our existence, of what I am and about what and how I want my being to be, because I realize that the possibilities of my being are limitless. We grow up to realize that we are only puppets of our society, and then we desire to change our paths, our career, our destiny, take our life in our own hands, making life even more difficult for us. This experience is preceded by the feeling of meaninglessness of our everyday life. It's not that humans don’t aspire to make their life meaningful. On the contrary, all our efforts are to make it more and more counted and significant. Taking as many pictures of a scenic