• Wayfarer
    22.8k
    I put the following questions to ChatGPT about the philosophy of Martin Heidegger. Reproduced here for your edification and amusement.

    "What in the philosophy of Heidegger is the distinction between 'ontological' and 'ontic'?

    In the philosophy of Martin Heidegger, the distinction between 'ontological' and 'ontic' refers to the difference between being and entities. 'Ontological' refers to the study of being, or the nature of existence. 'Ontic' refers to the study of entities, or things that exist within the world. Heidegger argues that traditional philosophy has focused primarily on entities and their properties, rather than on the nature of being itself. He believes that by understanding being, we can gain a deeper understanding of the world and our place within it.

    What did Heidegger mean by 'onto-theology'?

    In the philosophy of Martin Heidegger, "onto-theology" refers to the traditional Western understanding of God as the highest being, or the "supreme being." Heidegger argues that this understanding of God as the ultimate being or ground of all being, has had a pervasive and detrimental effect on Western philosophy and culture.

    Heidegger claims that the idea of God as the highest being has led to a failure to properly understand the nature of being itself, and has obscured the true nature of things. He argues that this has led to an impoverished understanding of the world and our place within it. He believes that we must overcome this onto-theological way of thinking if we are to truly understand being.

    He also argues that onto-theology has also led to a tendency to view God as a kind of "super-entity," separate from the world, instead of recognizing the immanence of the divine in all things. This, in turn, has led to the alienation of humanity from the world and from its own nature.

    Why was Heidegger critical of the traditional Western conception of metaphysics?

    Martin Heidegger was critical of the traditional Western conception of metaphysics for several reasons. One of the main reasons is that he believed that traditional metaphysics had focused too much on entities and their properties, rather than on the nature of being itself. He believed that this had led to a failure to properly understand the nature of being, and that this failure has had a detrimental effect on Western philosophy and culture.

    Heidegger also argued that traditional metaphysics had reduced being to a set of concepts and categories, and that this reduction had led to a failure to properly understand the relationship between human beings and the world. He believed that traditional metaphysics had led to a view of the world as a collection of independent entities, rather than as a unified whole.

    Heidegger also criticized traditional metaphysics for its tendency to view the world as a set of objects that exist independently of human consciousness, this abstraction he called "subject-object metaphysics" and argues that it leads to a separation of the human being from the world, and thus to alienation.

    In addition, Heidegger also criticized the traditional Western conception of metaphysics for its onto-theological understanding of God, which he believed had led to a failure to understand the true nature of divinity and its relationship to the world.

    Overall, Heidegger's critique of traditional Western metaphysics is that it had failed to understand the true nature of being and has led to a narrow and impoverished understanding of the world and our place within it.

    Why has Heidegger's philosophy been compared with the philosophy of Zen Buddhism?

    Heidegger's philosophy has been compared with the philosophy of Zen Buddhism because they share some similarities in their approach to understanding the nature of reality and human existence. Both Heidegger and Zen Buddhism emphasize the importance of direct experience and the rejection of abstract concepts and categories.

    Heidegger's emphasis on the importance of understanding being, and his critique of traditional metaphysics for its failure to understand the true nature of being, is similar to the Zen Buddhist emphasis on the importance of experiencing the present moment and rejecting abstract concepts and beliefs.

    Both Heidegger and Zen Buddhism also emphasize the importance of overcoming the separation of the self from the world, and the importance of being fully present in the world. Heidegger calls this "dwelling" and Zen Buddhism calls it "awakening"

    Additionally, both Heidegger and Zen Buddhism reject the idea of a fixed self, and advocate for a more fluid understanding of the self and the world, Heidegger calls this "Dasein" and Zen Buddhism calls it "no-self".

    Furthermore, Both Heidegger and Zen Buddhism reject the idea of a "supreme being" or "ground of being" , Heidegger calls it "onto-theology" and Zen Buddhism calls it "Nirvana".

    In summary, both Heidegger's philosophy and Zen Buddhism share a similar focus on the rejection of abstract concepts and beliefs, the importance of direct experience, and the rejection of the separation of the self from the world, which is why they have been compared to each other."
    ***
    I struck out the indicated passage as I think there is a fallacy of equivocation. Other than that, reads OK to me.
  • 180 Proof
    15.4k
    Reads to me like a college undergrad's essay plagiarized in parts from a few different wiki articles. Shows what the Turing Test is actually worth, doesn't it?
  • Paine
    2.5k

    It seems to be an algorithm that takes three reactions to Heidegger's language and reconfigures them to fit different contexts.

    I have made several attempts to seriously study Heidegger over the years and lapsed into a coma each time. I object to a lot of his approach but now find myself wanting to defend him from the use of classifications he argued against.
  • L'éléphant
    1.6k
    This is depressing.

    After reading hundreds of posts on this site, I now vote that humans remain the dominant entity in charge of philosophy.
  • Wayfarer
    22.8k
    Sure. But I don’t regard what it turned out as particularly brilliant, merely competent. It helped me because I had those specific questions. It’s no substitute for doing the reading but it’s a helpful aide.
  • L'éléphant
    1.6k
    But I don’t regard what it turned out as particularly brilliant, merely competent.Wayfarer
    Competence is a measure over a range of tasks and over time. You've tested the AI within a very limited topic and tasks. We can't start assessing its competence yet.
  • Agent Smith
    9.5k
    Well, one thing's for sure, ChatGPT is smarter than me!

    One simple test, I'm sure extremely difficult to perform given the volume of literature out there, that could tell a person from an AI is to calculate a novelty index for answers to questions put to it. It looks as though ChatGPT is merely regurgitating information it has encountered i.e. for every answer it gives you'll find a person, living/dead, who gave that exact answer at some point in time. Of course, it needn't be mentioned, some humans too will fail the test, but we're talking about humanity as a collective.
bold
italic
underline
strike
code
quote
ulist
image
url
mention
reveal
youtube
tweet
Add a Comment

Welcome to The Philosophy Forum!

Get involved in philosophical discussions about knowledge, truth, language, consciousness, science, politics, religion, logic and mathematics, art, history, and lots more. No ads, no clutter, and very little agreement — just fascinating conversations.