Martin Heidegger is known for his fourfold concept of the world: the holy whole of earth, sky, mortals, and gods. Cryptically, this unity has transformed into the subsequent diminishing epochs: from the original mythological to the threefold religious, twofold scientific, and the collapsed technological. The last two manifestations—modern and postmodern—are considered a threat, particularly the final one. Could the decline turn into a salvation? What would be the next worldview that overcomes the technical danger? Are there any poetic premonitions of it in art and literature?

We may present this phenomenological plot graphically as follows (see Merilai 2023: 35).

[Enclosed Figure 1. The Heideggerian worldview epochs.]

References

Heidegger, Martin. 1954. Vorträge und Aufsätze. Pfulligen: Günther Neske Verlag.

Heidegger, Martin. 1962. Die Technik und die Kehre. Pfulligen: Günther Neske Verlag.

Heidegger, Martin. 1976. „Nur noch ein Gott kann uns retten.“ – Der Spiegel, No. 30 (May): 193–219.

Heidegger, Martin. 1992. Basic Writings: from Being and Time (1927) to The Task of Thinking (1964). Ed. David Farrell Krell. San Francisco: Harper Collins Editions.

Merilai, Arne. 2023. A Technical Turn and Poetic Declination: God Help Us. – Merilai, Arne. Estonian Pragmapoetics, from Poetry and Fiction to Philosophy and Genetics. Newcastle upon Tyne: Cambridge Scholars Publishing, 30–48.

This study focuses on Kazuo Ishiguro’s dystopian fiction Klara and the Sun (2021), specifically analysing how technology amplifies loneliness and prompts society to create more advanced technological solutions to alleviate the feeling of isolation. For example, sentient robots have already been developed to take care of human loneliness. The technology has proven successful in eliciting appropriate emotional responses, but “there is psychological risk in the robotic moment” (Turkle 55). By examining the relationship between mankind and Artificial Intelligence (AI), this study evaluates to what extent technology can genuinely lighten this uniquely human experience of loneliness from the Heideggerian perspective. In the novel, advanced androids, known as Artificial Friends (AFs), are designed to accompany children and even serve as continuities for those who have passed away. In such an intricate relationship, humans view AFs as manageable resources providing companionship, while AFs disconnect humans from the true Being. This interaction visualises Heidegger’s “Enframing” (Gestell). I thereby argue that we are risking relinquishing essential aspects of humanity when we allow AI to increasingly involve in our narrative. As a result, I advocate that we need a more nuanced approach to how we engage with technology, especially concerning sentient machines, to effectively and ethically address loneliness.

Being and Time is Martin Heidegger's magnum opus and a cornerstone of his reputation as one of the greatest modern philosophers. However, this masterpiece is notoriously difficult and obscure. Is there a way to present its core ideas in simpler, more accessible language so that scholars and readers unfamiliar with Western philosophy can understand and appreciate it? A more important question is: how can we bring Heidegger’s philosophical thoughts into a dialogue with Chinese philosophy, thus bridging the gap between Eastern and Western philosophy and facilitating the integration of both perspectives? Inspired by the famous philosopher Alfred North Whitehead's advice to scholars—"If you want to understand Confucius, read John Dewey. If you want to understand John Dewey, read Confucius," the author attempts to create a dialogue between Laozi and Heidegger across time, culture, and civilization. This dialogue aims to understand Being and Time through a reading of Tao Te Ching, and to deepen our understanding of Tao Te Ching through a close reading of Being and Time. This paper focuses on a detailed reading and comparison of Tao Te Ching and Being and Time, with the goal of deepening our understanding of the core concepts of "Tao" (the Way) and "Sein" (Being), and making a modest contribution to the fusion of Eastern and Western thought.

Tao Te Ching, in the minds of the Chinese, is considered a profound work—just over five thousand characters, yet it conveys deep meanings and encompasses the universe. Being and Time, as a modern philosophical text, may not have the same far-reaching and lasting influence as Tao Te Ching, but it holds immense importance in the Western world. In this book, Heidegger questions the metaphysical tradition of Western philosophy, which has been built over centuries, and provides a deeper and ontological interpretation of human existence. Although both of these philosophical masterpieces are groundbreaking in their own right, they seem to have no obvious connection from their introductions, making a comparison between them seems unnecessary. Tao Te Ching explores the general nature of existence between humans and the cosmos, with humans being the central focus, though not seen as the center of the universe. On the other hand, Being and Time centers on human existence (Dasein), asserting that the world gains its meaning from human existence. In this sense, Being and Time appears to have a narrower scope in its interpretation of existence. This difference is undoubtedly related to the contrasts between Eastern and Western thought. Chinese philosophy, especially Taoism, emphasizes nature and views humans as part of the cosmos and nature, with human existence needing to align with the universal way. In contrast, Western philosophy, especially mainstream metaphysics, is human-centered and explores existence through the lens of human beings. Heidegger’s existentialism further emphasizes human existence as distinct from other beings. In terms of structure, Tao Te Ching is divided according to its content, while Being and Time is divided through logical reasoning. This structural difference reflects the different approaches to interpretation between Eastern and Western philosophies—namely, the distinct pursuits of the logic of interpretation. Chinese thinkers tend to prioritize the accessibility of ideas, aiming to transmit knowledge and truth to the student, whose task is to absorb the logic and source of knowledge through repeated reading and contemplation. In contrast, Western philosophers, especially Heidegger, resemble scientists (Of course, Heidegger would certainly sneer at such a metaphor, but the process of his interpretation in Being and Time indeed presents a strong sense of scientific rigor. ) in that they emphasize revealing the origins and development of knowledge and truth, focusing on the formation process and the problems that arise within those ideas. Given these differences, one might wonder: with such contrasting approaches to thought and expression, is there any meaningful comparison or dialogue between Laozi and Heidegger’s core ideas? How can the central concepts of "Dao" and "Being" be understood in relation to each other, despite these fundamental differences in thinking and presentation?

In order to comprehend the dialogue between two great thinkers and philosophers, we need to learn to play the role of “the child” (chi zi, 赤子) that Laozi refers to, or “the child” in the three metamorphises of human existence mentioned by Friedrich Wilhelm Nietzsche, jumping out of the constraints of tradition. When comparing Tao Te Ching and Being and Time, we need to learn to forget: forget that Laozi was from ancient China, the founder of Taoism, and Heidegger was from twentieth-century Germany, a major figure in Western existential philosophy, the so-called "Nazist"; forget that Tao Te Ching was written in Chinese, the "king of all Chinese classics," and Being and Time was written in German, a monumental work of postmodernism; forget that in Tao Te Ching, the human being is just a part of the cosmos and nature, while in Being and Time, the human being is the meaning of the entire world; forget that Tao Te Ching teaches people to act without action, to align with nature, while Being and Time emphasizes human initiative and the unique fact of being born for death. In fact, regardless of how to evaluate Tao Te Ching and Being and Time, both works explore existence, and existence—especially human existence—is the core that Laozi and Heidegger want us to focus on. Tao Te Ching mainly explores what the Tao is and its relationship with the world. So, what is the Tao? According to Wang Defeng, a famous philosopher and a philosophical professor in Fu Dan University in China, Laozi doesn't explain what the Tao is in Tao Te Ching, but rather, he tells us what the Tao is not. To follow the Tao, one must first perform subtraction, that is, Laozi's concepts of "loss" (sun, 损) and " non-action" (wu wei, 无为). Through Tao Te Ching, Laozi tells people how to exist in the world, how to follow the universal law of existence—the Tao—by practicing "sun" and "wu wei," and thereby "doing nothing and yet nothing remains undone" (无为而无不为). Being and Time primarily explores what Sein (Being) is, particularly what Dasein (human existence) is. Of course, Heidegger would likely object to the concepts of "is" and "what" in this context, because throughout Being and Time, he strives to free philosophy from the concepts of "is" and "what," which have constrained and misled Western thoughts for centuries, and he seemingly does not intend to answer such questions. However, it is undeniable that while attempting to reveal the phenomenon of existence from the perspective of human existence, Heidegger does answer what human existence is.

Laozi’s Tao and Heidegger’s Sein have commonalities. The first is the ineffability of the philosophical concepts "Tao" and "Sein." The second is the ambiguity of the concepts of "Tao" and "Sein." The third is the duality within the structure of "Tao" and "Sein." Furthermore, both philosophers highlight the concept of dualistic unity of opposites in their works. Firstly, the concept of "being and non-being" (you/wu, 有无) is a core idea in Laozi's philosophy, and a similar concept of "being and non-being" (thingness and nothingness) is proposed in Heidegger's philosophy. It is undeniable that Heidegger's thought may have been influenced by Western classical philosophy and art, such as the Greek god Dionysus in ancient Greek mythology. Here, it is necessary to compare the concept of the Greek god Dionysus with Laozi's philosophy of Yin and Yang, as both are the origins of binary thinking in Eastern and Western philosophies. In this context, we can observe the similarity between Heidegger's concept of being and Laozi's Taoist philosophy of Yin and Yang: the opposing sides of a contradiction cannot be completely separated; they complement each other. Secondly, Laozi says, "Therefore, you and wu give birth to each other," and "All things in the world arise from you, and you arises from wu." Heidegger states that what is lacking in the everyday experience of "being-in-the-world" is a foundation that Dasein can rely on or stand upon. This inherent deficiency, according to Heidegger's analysis, is "nothingness." Therefore, from an ontological perspective, the core of being-in-the-world is this "nothingness." He also believes that "nothingness" is a higher state of existence than "thingness" and is the essential nature of being-in-the-world. Heidegger deliberately avoids using the word "thingness" in Being and Time, as it has been overused in Western metaphysics and scientism, and it fails to reveal the most essential phenomenon of human existence. Heidegger argues that "nothingness" has the capacity to reveal this essence.

Through a close reading and mutual interpretation of the core concepts in Laozi and Heidegger's philosophies, this study does not aim to prove that the thoughts of Laozi or Heidegger are superior to each other, nor does it seek to compare the superiority or inferiority of Eastern and Western existential philosophy. Furthermore, the study does not intend to suggest that Heidegger’s existential philosophy benefits from or originates from Laozi’s Taoism (although Heidegger’s philosophy does exhibit elements of Taoist thought, this influence is not the focus of this study). Rather, the aim is to highlight the "fusion of horizons" between Eastern and Western existential philosophy, an aspect that was once overshadowed by the opposition between Eastern and Western thought and Western-centered epistemology. As Mr. Qian Zhongshu said: "In Eastern and Western scholarships, the ways and methods have not yet entirely different from each other; in the South Sea and North Sea, people’s psychology is the same." Although Tao Te Ching and Being and Time seem to be entirely different philosophical works, the principles and philosophical reflections they present share commonalities. The purpose of comparative literature and comparative poetics is not to determine whether the West influenced the East or the East influenced the West, but to explore the commonalities between Eastern and Western thoughts, or the universal laws they share. The ultimate goal is to find out the fusion of the horizons from different cultural traditions.