Talk:Authenticity (philosophy)

Typo?
The section "Views of authenticity" ends cryptically with the phrase "the notion of authenticity". 171.64.128.168 22:50, 16 November 2006 (UTC)

Tao Te Ching
I think the poem by Lao Tzu from the Tao Te Ching should be removed because it is unencyclopedic here. Andries 13:48, 21 Mar 2004 (UTC)

Authenticity today
British philosophy sees authenticity as the continuation of dualism? In that case they have very poorly read the philosophers involved - Heidegger's whole project revolves around cutting across that object/subject divide and contains fairly hefty criticsm of Descartes.

Heidegger is German. 206.74.74.42 03:24, 20 March 2007 (UTC) Willie

The Bad faith article needs help from available editors
The Bad faith article needs help from available editors. HkFnsNGA (talk) 06:15, 29 January 2011 (UTC)

Nietzsche and Kierkegaard
"Nietzsche’s view of authenticity is an atheist interpretation of Kierkegaard"—but we know that Nietzsche never read Kierkegaard, so his view cannot be an interpretation of Kierkegaard's. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 78.147.162.37 (talk) 17:48, 6 February 2015 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to 1 one external link on Authenticity (philosophy). Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:
 * Added archive http://web.archive.org/web/20120603121545/http://castle.eiu.edu:80/~psych/spencer/Existential.html to http://castle.eiu.edu/~psych/spencer/Existential.html

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at Sourcecheck).

Cheers.—cyberbot II  Talk to my owner :Online 08:15, 28 February 2016 (UTC)

Heidegger, Adorno
Adorno is mentioned in passing regarding music, yet he wrote an influential book called "The Jargon of Authenticity" (1964).

Without this book a source, the article suffers greatly. If nothing else, it's an early use of the term as currently understood. Adorno deplored the term -- you could say that's half the point of the book. It was translated in the 1970s and is widely known.

More accurately, the book takes digs at Heidegger and deplores the suddenly widespread and vapid post-war use of this (1927) Heideggerian term "authenticity." Seems there was a bit of righteous anger with Heidegger.

I don't think you give Heidegger enough credit for the term's current prevalence. Heideggerians would be outraged.

— Preceding unsigned comment added by 2600:1702:39A0:3720:44C7:D824:9D68:9BD6 (talk) 01:29, 28 August 2020 (UTC)

"Musical subculture" does not belong in this article
This is the "Authenticity (philosophy)" article, which defines authenticity as being authentic to oneself "despite external pressures to conformity". The musical subculture section has a conflicting definition, in which authenticity is defined not as being authentic to oneself, but instead to an external subculture's value system. The very idea of a "code of authenticity" for a "denizen" is in direct opposition to the philosophical definition.

The "Musical subculture" section belongs in the "Authenticity in art" article and not in this article about authenticity in philosophy.

Redirect pages
Perhaps genuineness and genuinity should have a redirect page to here? --Rashba (talk) 06:19, 31 January 2022 (UTC)