DOCSLIB.ORG

On Heidegger's Nazism and Philosophy

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
On Heidegger's Nazism and Philosophy On Heidegger's Nazism and Philosophy http://content.cdlib.org/xtf/view?docId=ft6q2nb3wh&chunk.id=0&doc.... Preferred Citation: Rockmore, Tom. On Heidegger's Nazism and Philosophy. Berkeley: University of California Press, c1992 1992. http://ark.cdlib.org/ark:/13030/ft6q2nb3wh/ On Heidegger's Nazism and Philosophy Tom Rockmore UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA PRESS Berkeley · Los Angeles · Oxford © 1991 The Regents of the University of California Preferred Citation: Rockmore, Tom. On Heidegger's Nazism and Philosophy. Berkeley: University of California Press, c1992 1992. http://ark.cdlib.org/ark:/13030/ft6q2nb3wh/ ― v ― Acknowledgments I owe an important debt to the increasing number of scholars, some of them with a considerable investment in Heidegger scholarship, who continue to seek the truth, even when it contradicts Heideggerian strategies for dealing with Heidegger's Nazism. To this general debt I would add more specific ones incurred to two anonymous readers of the manuscript, to Michael Zimmerman for helpful comments on the initial draft, to Debra Bergoffen, who read a draft of the chapter on Nietzsche, and to Theodore Kisiel, who commented on the entire final draft. None of them is responsible for the views expressed here. But I gratefully acknowledge that their attention to detail has saved me from numerous slips and in general helped me to strengthen the argument. I gratefully acknowledge as well that discussion with Joseph Margolis has provided insight useful in writing this book. His willingness to collaborate in bringing Farias's study of Heidegger and Nazism into English started me on the road that led to this book. Nicolas Tertulian initially called this problem to my attention. Edward Dimendberg, Philosophy Editor at the University of California Press, whose faith in this project made it possible, has been a constant pleasure to work with. His own insightful suggestions have improved the manuscript. I am grateful as well for the excellent copyediting by Nicholas Goodhue, which generally improved the manuscript and detected several errors. As always, I am deeply indebted to my family in ways that I cannot simply or even adequately express. ― 1 ― 1 of 263 5/21/2006 4:05 PM On Heidegger's Nazism and Philosophy http://content.cdlib.org/xtf/view?docId=ft6q2nb3wh&chunk.id=0&doc.... Introduction: On Heidegger's Nazism and Philosophy This book considers the nature and philosophical significance of the controversial relation between Heidegger's philosophy and his Nazism. The significance of this relation is clear in virtue of the importance of Heidegger's philosophical thought and its widespread influence not only in the philosophical discussion but throughout the cultural life of this century. Heidegger's supporters and even his most ardent critics agree that Heidegger's thought is important and cannot merely be dismissed. Heidegger is often held to be one of the most important contemporary philosophers, even the most important philosopher of this century, maybe even one of the small handful of truly great philosophers in the history of the philosophical tradition. Heidegger is certainly the most influential philosopher of our time. Heidegger's influence is widely felt in contemporary philosophy: in negative fashion in Husserl's final phase; in the positions[1] of Gadamer and Derrida, his two closest students; in the thought of Herbert Marcuse, the first Heideggerian Marxist; in the phenomenological theories of Jean-Paul Sartre, Maurice Merleau-Ponty, Emmanuel Levinas, and Paul Ricoeur; and more distantly in the writings of Foucault, Apel, Habermas, and Rorty, as well as in those of a host of other figures such as Hans Jonas, Hannah Arendt, and Leszek Kolakowski. The Heidegger literature has by now taken on such proportions that no one, not even the most industrious student, can possibly read it all. Heidegger is now ― 2 ― widely present in the discussions in Germany, even more so in the United States, but above all in France, where for several decades he has functioned as the main "French" philosopher, the unacknowledged but omnipresent master thinker whose thought continues to form the horizon of French philosophical thinking. Heidegger's influence, which is by no means limited to philosophy, is widely apparent throughout the recent discussion: in theology in the work of Paul Tillich, Rudolf Bultmann, and Karl Rahner; in psychoanalysis in the work of Jacques Lacan, Ludwig Binswanger, and Medard Boss; in literary theory through Paul de Man; in feminism through Gayatri Spivak; in ecology through Albert Borgmann and Wolfgang Schirmacher; in political theory through Fred Dallmayr; and so on. The list of those influenced by Heidegger, which is impressive, rivals in scope that of such other conceptual giants of this century as Freud and Weber. Obviously, the impressive nature of Heidegger's thought and its extraordinary influence do not diminish but rather only raise the stakes of the present discussion. In view of the growing knowledge of the historical record and the ongoing publication of Heidegger's writings, one can overlook, or choose to ignore, but can no longer deny, the relation between his Nazism and his philosophy. To "bracket" this issue, simply to turn away from the problem, to refuse to confront it, is silently to accept what a number have seen as the totalitarian dimension in one of the most important theories of this century, itself largely marked by totalitarianisms of the right and the left, a theory apparently lacking in the resources necessary to come to grips with totalitarianism. In confronting Heidegger's Nazism, one inevitably questions as well the philosophical and wider intellectual discussion of our time and its ability to think the connection between philosophy and politics. The link between Heidegger's thought and politics has been known for many years. Its discussion began in the 1940s in the pages of the French intellectual journal, Les Temps Modernes , in a controversy initiated by Karl Löwith, Heidegger's former student and later colleague.[2] The initial phase of the debate ended quickly, but the theme has continued to resurface at intervals. It has recently received a fresh impetus in publications by Ott[3] and Farias.[4] The merit of Farias's book, in part based on Ott's research, is that for the first time it has brought the Heidegger affair to the attention of the wider intellectual readership. Since a relation between Heidegger's thought and his Nazism has been known for more than half a century, one must ask why it has not been studied earlier in greater depth. The reasons include the relative success at what can charitably be described as damage control on the part of his most fervent admirers—those for whom he can apparently do ― 3 ― no wrong, or at least none of lasting consequence for his thought—as well as a lack of insight into its philosophical significance. But the recent discussion has provided sustained attention to the series of issues surrounding Heidegger's thought and politics. It is now too late to put the genie back in the bottle, to deflect attention away from this relation, since the publications by Farias and Ott raise this 2 of 263 5/21/2006 4:05 PM On Heidegger's Nazism and Philosophy http://content.cdlib.org/xtf/view?docId=ft6q2nb3wh&chunk.id=0&doc.... issue in a way that in good faith cannot simply be ignored. Everything about this relation is subject to dispute. It has been asserted that it is philosophically insignificant, since the struggle concerning Heidegger is merely symptomatic of a weakness of contemporary thought. It has been claimed that Heidegger was not a Nazi, or at least not in any ordinary sense. It has been suggested that we must differentiate between Heidegger the thinker and Heidegger the man, for the former cannot be judged in relation to the latter. It has been argued that information recently made available is not new and was already known to any serious student. It has been held that everything that Heidegger ever did or wrote was Nazi to the core. It has been maintained that Heidegger's only problem was that he never said he was sorry, that he never excused himself or asked for forgiveness. Finally, it has been maintained with all the seriousness of the professional scholar, in a way recalling many a theological dispute, that Heidegger's thought is so difficult that only one wholly immersed in it, at the extreme only a true believer committed to his vision, could possibly understand it. Yet if it can only be comprehended by a "true" believer, then Heidegger's Nazism is beyond criticism or evaluation of any kind, since no "true" believer will criticize it. The view of the present study is that all of the above claims about the relation of Heidegger's thought and his Nazism are false. Attention focused on Heidegger's Nazi inclinations by Farias, Ott, and others (e.g., Pöggeler, Marten, Sheehan, Vietta, Lacoue-Labarthe, Derrida, Bourdieu, Schwan, Janicaud, Zimmerman, Wolin, Thomä, etc.) has created a momentum of its own. It has been realized that Heidegger's Nazism raises important moral and political issues that cannot simply be evaded and that must be faced as part of the continuing process of determining what is live and what is dead in Heidegger's thought. It is not inaccurate to say that as a result of recent discussion, at least two things have become clear: First, the problem cannot simply be denied since one can no longer even pretend to understand Heidegger's philosophy, certainly beginning in 1933, if one fails to take into account his Nazism. In a word, serious study of Heidegger's thought can no longer evade the theme of Heidegger's Nazism. Second, the issues posed by Heidegger's unprecedented turn to Nazism on philosophical grounds, ― 4 ― and the way the theme has been received in the discussion of his thought, point beyond his position to raise queries about the nature of philosophy and even the responsibility of intellectuals.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Jean-Luc Nancy and the Deconstruction of Christianity By
    Jean-Luc Nancy and the Deconstruction of Christianity by Tenzan Eaghll A thesis submitted in conformity with the requirements for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy Department for the Study of Religion University of Toronto ©Copyright by Tenzan Eaghll 2016 Jean-Luc Nancy and the Deconstruction of Christianity Tenzan Eaghll Doctor of Philosophy Department for the Study of Religion University of Toronto 2016 Abstract This dissertation is a study of the origins and development of the French philosopher Jean- Luc Nancy’s work on the “deconstruction of Christianity.” By situating Nancy's work in light of the broader Continental philosophical analysis of religion in the 20th Century, it argues that what Nancy calls the "deconstruction of Christianity" and the "exit from religion" is his unique intervention into the problem of metaphysical nihilism in Western thought. The author explains that Nancy’s work on religion does not provide a new “theory” for the study of religion or Christianity, but shows how Western metaphysical foundations are caught up in a process of decomposition that has been brought about by Christianity. For Nancy, the only way out of nihilism is to think of the world as an infinite opening unto itself, for this dis- encloses any transcendent principle of value or immanent notion of meaninglessness in the finite spacing of sense, and he finds the resources to think this opening within Christianity. By reading Christian notions like "God" and "creation ex nihilo" along deconstructive lines and connecting them with the rise and fall of this civilization that once called itself "Christendom," he attempts to expose "the sense of an absenting" that is both the condition of possibility for the West and what precedes, succeeds, and exceeds it.
    [Show full text]
  • Martin Heidegger, "Heraclitus, the Inception of Occidental Thinking and Logic: Heraclitus’S Doctrine of the Logos." Trans
    Document generated on 10/01/2021 11:38 a.m. Philosophy in Review Martin Heidegger, "Heraclitus, The Inception of Occidental Thinking and Logic: Heraclitus’s Doctrine of the Logos." Trans. Julia Goesser Assaiante & S. Montgomery Ewegen. Shawn Loht Volume 40, Number 1, February 2020 URI: https://id.erudit.org/iderudit/1068150ar DOI: https://doi.org/10.7202/1068150ar See table of contents Publisher(s) University of Victoria ISSN 1206-5269 (print) 1920-8936 (digital) Explore this journal Cite this review Loht, S. (2020). Review of [Martin Heidegger, "Heraclitus, The Inception of Occidental Thinking and Logic: Heraclitus’s Doctrine of the Logos." Trans. Julia Goesser Assaiante & S. Montgomery Ewegen.] Philosophy in Review, 40(1), 13–15. https://doi.org/10.7202/1068150ar Copyright, 2020 Shawn Loht This document is protected by copyright law. Use of the services of Érudit (including reproduction) is subject to its terms and conditions, which can be viewed online. https://apropos.erudit.org/en/users/policy-on-use/ This article is disseminated and preserved by Érudit. Érudit is a non-profit inter-university consortium of the Université de Montréal, Université Laval, and the Université du Québec à Montréal. Its mission is to promote and disseminate research. https://www.erudit.org/en/ Philosophy in Review Vol. 40 no. 1 (February 2020) Martin Heidegger. Heraclitus, The Inception of Occidental Thinking and Logic: Heraclitus’s Doctrine of the Logos. Trans. Julia Goesser Assaiante & S. Montgomery Ewegen. Bloomsbury 2018. 328 pp. $88.00 USD (Hardcover ISBN 9780826462404); $26.95 USD (Paperback ISBN 9780826462411). This text contains Heidegger’s most sustained engagement with Heraclitus and arguably his most thorough, focused study of early Greek thought.
    [Show full text]
  • The New Heidegger MIGUEL OE BEISTEGUI New York: Continuum, 2005; 224 Pages
    Book Reviews / Comptes rendus 655 Nietzsche in order to arrive at similar conclusions to those of Menga. What Menga does that Oerrida does not do as clearly is show the textual heritage, to borrow an expression from Oerrida himself, which permits Heidegger to read Nietzsche in the way that he does. In the end, this book is excellent and will provide scholars and philosophers both with the background and reading necessary in order to situate and understand the relationship between Nietzsche, Heidegger, and Oerrida. ANTONIO CALCAGNO, University ofScranton The New Heidegger MIGUEL OE BEISTEGUI New York: Continuum, 2005; 224 pages. Novelty is rarely the standard by which philosophers profess the contri­ bution of a philosophical text. For this reason, readers of Miguel de Beistegui's The New Heidegger are likely to be concerned not only with the extent to which de Beistegui's Heidegger is actually a newHeidegger, but also with the philosophical need that this new Heidegger is intended to serve. What calls out for a new Heidegger? For some, the old Heidegger is already one Heidegger too many. Oe Beistegui's aim is to introduce an English-reading audiencewith no prior knowledge of Heidegger to the ebb and flow of Heidegger's thought by offering a thematic approach that concentrates on several of his fundamental ideas rather than on specific texts or lectures. There is need for such an intro­ duction, de Beistegui believes, largely because existing commentaries have focused on Heidegger's canonical works, and have thus far failed to include adequately the newer volumes of Heidegger's Gesamtausgabe that have been published in English translation over the last decade or so.
    [Show full text]
  • The “Ontological Difference” Again. a Dialetheic Perspective on Heidegger's Mainstay
    Open Philosophy 2018; 1: 143–154 Francesco Gandellini* The “Ontological Difference” Again. A Dialetheic Perspective on Heidegger’s Mainstay https://doi.org/10.1515/opphil-2018-0011 Received June 9, 2018; accepted August 16, 2018 Abstract: This paper intends to offer a new assessment of the “Ontological Difference” (OD), one of Martin Heidegger’s mainstays, in the light of the metaphysical view called “dialetheism”. In the first paragraph I briefly summarize the main argument of Heidegger’s contradiction of Being, where OD is present as a premise. In the second paragraph I introduce dialetheism, indicate two kinds of dialetheic solutions to the paradox and explain why they face comeback troubles from OD. The third paragraph is devoted to a review of Heidegger’s uses of OD and underlines the crucial role of negation in it. In the fourth paragraph I investigate the philosopher’s account of negation and show similarities with the account provided by the paraconsistent logic called “Logic of Paradox”. The fifth paragraph puts forward two possible readings of OD, the first based on the classical notion of negation and the second on the notion of negation pointed out in the previous paragraph. The second reading is proved suitable for dialetheists and in accordance with the exegesis of some textual passages from Heidegger’s late works. Keywords: Martin Heidegger, ontological difference, dialetheism, Logic of Paradox 1 Introduction Analytic philosophy’s adjudication to set aside old hates and resentments and to establish contact with Martin Heidegger’s philosophy is quite a recent phenomenon in the philosophical literature1. Casati and Wheeler2 have shown examples of this productive engagement in the fields of metaphysics and philosophy of mind.
    [Show full text]
  • Hermeneutics of Heidegger's Facticity and Its Religious Aspects
    Studia Philosophiae Christianae UKSW 50(2014)1 POVILAS AleksandravičIUS HERMENEUTICS OF HEIDEGGer’s FACTICITY AND ITS RELIGIOUS ASPECTS Abstract. The concept of facticity that was developed by Heidegger from 1919 to 1923 composes the basis of all his further thought: the conceptions of Dasein and ontological temporality will originate namely from this concept. The article analyzes various expressions of the factitious life (care, Er-eignis, life, Self- Destruction, meaningfulness, death), yet the special consideration is paid to its religious aspects. Really the essence of facticity is treated by Heidegger as a temporality that is essentially correlated with the Christian experience. The influence of Saint Augustine to Heidegger and the Heideggerian concept of methodical atheism are analyzed and this analysis raises the intricate problem of the relation of the Black Forest philosopher to Christian faith and to God. Keywords: Heidegger, hermeneutics, facticity, religious, care, Er-eignis, life, temporality 1. The emergence of the concept of facticity in Heidegger’s work. 2. The account of facticity. 3. Facticity as movement: care. 4. Er-eignis and the formation of the living world. 5. Facticity as life 6. Factical life as self-destruction. 7. Meaningfulness of factical life or the hermeneutic dimension of facticity. 8. Facticity as temporality. 9. Factical life and death. 10. Christian facticity. 11. St. Augustine’s influence on hermeneutics of facticity and the issue of God. 12. Methodological atheism and the mystery of life’s facticity. Povilas Aleksandravicius Mykolas Romeris University, [email protected] Institute of Philosophy and Humanities Ateities g. 20, LT-08303 Vilnius, Lithuania 174 Povilas aleksandravičius [2] On 9 January, 1919, a 30-year old Martin Heidegger wrote a letter to his friend, the canon Engelbert Krebs, informing him of his withdrawal from the Catholic Church and indicating the main reason for his choice: a scholastic system, where the Church aimed to squeeze Christian be- liefs, had become “problematic and unacceptable”1 to him.
    [Show full text]
  • Assessing the Significance of Heidegger's Black
    Assessing the Significance of Heidegger’s Black Notebooks Jeff Malpas, Tasmania For much of his life, and certainly from the 1930s onwards, Martin Heidegger kept a series of black-bound notebooks into which he recorded ideas and observations. Known as the Black Notebooks , Schwarze Hefte , the material they contained was periodically edited by Heidegger, and he gave different titles to different volumes and sets of volumes. Of those so far published, the first three collected volumes are the Überlegungen , Considerations ,1 which run from 1931-1942 (though the first volume from 1931 is lost, destroyed by Heidegger himself), and the second are the Anmerkungen , Remarks , running from 1942- 1949. 2 Further volumes are to be published over the coming years (and the next volume is, in fact, already close to being ready for publication). The contents of the Notebooks are quite varied: they include philosophical ideas and commentary, but they also include personal observations and ruminations, and remarks on contemporary events. In contrast with public works from the same period, the Notebooks are relatively unrestrained, they contain many instances of dismissive irony or sarcasm, and, in the 1930s and early 1940s especially, they are frequently suffused with a degree of anger and even bitterness. The form of the Notebooks echoes that of Nietzsche’s Nachlass,3 and clearly Heidegger treated the Notebooks , not merely as a writing tool for his own personal use, but as literary works of a certain type and character, and as having a very particular role and position within the larger body of his work. They do not stand on their own however, and it would be a serious mistake to suppose that one could read the Notebooks in any serious fashion independently of the rest of Heidegger’s writings.
    [Show full text]
  • Nazi Soundscapes Sound, Technology and Urban Space in Germany, 1933-1945 CAROLYN BIRDSALL
    Nazi Soundscapes Sound, Technology and Urban Space in Germany, 1933-1945 CAROLYN BIRDSALL AMSTERDAM UNIVERSITY PRESS Nazi Soundscapes Nazi Soundscapes Sound, Technology and Urban Space in Germany, 1933-1945 Carolyn Birdsall amsterdam university press This book is published in print and online through the online OAPEN library (www.oapen.org) OAPEN (Open Access Publishing in European Networks) is a collaborative initiative to develop and implement a sustainable Open Access publication model for academic books in the Humani- ties and Social Sciences. The OAPEN Library aims to improve the visibility and usability of high quality academic research by aggregating peer reviewed Open Access publications from across Europe. Cover illustration: Ganz Deutschland hört den Führer mit dem Volksempfänger, 1936. © BPK, Berlin Cover design: Maedium, Utrecht Lay-out: Heymans & Vanhove, Goes isbn 978 90 8964 426 8 e-isbn 978 90 4851 632 2 (pdf) e-isbn 978 90 4851 633 9 (ePub) nur 686 / 962 Creative Commons License CC BY NC ND (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/3.0) Vignette cc C. Birdsall / Amsterdam University Press, Amsterdam 2012 Some rights reserved. Without limiting the rights under copyright reserved above, any part of this book may be reproduced, stored in or introduced into a retrieval system, or transmitted, in any form or by any means (electronic, mechanical, photocopying, recording or otherwise). Every effort has been made to obtain permission to use all copyrighted illustrations reproduced in this book. Nonetheless, whosoever believes to have rights to this material is advised to contact the publisher. Content Acknowledgements 7 Abbreviations 9 Introduction 11 1.
    [Show full text]
  • The Enigma of Art in the Thought of Martin Heidegger
    The Enigma of Art in the Thought of Martin Heidegger Russell Davies Goldsmiths College, University of London Thesis submitted for the degree of: Doctor of Philosophy July 2011 Declaration I declare that the work presented in this thesis is my own. Russell Davies Date 2 Abstract In crucial places in his path of thought, Martin Heidegger appeals to the notion of an insoluble enigma as a way of elucidating that thought, to such an extent that the enigma goes to the very heart of that thinking. All the words that are central to that thinking, the words that Heidegger uses to point towards the possibility of appearance and disclosure, are marked by this figure of the insoluble enigma. Whether writing about the opening of a world that art is, or the happening that is figured as Ereignis , Heidegger resorts to the enigma to illuminate his thinking. But what does it mean to inscribe an enigmatic insolubility into one’s very thinking and what kind of explanatory power can such a figure have? To answer these questions, this thesis traces the thought of the enigma through a series of readings of Heidegger’s ‘The Origin of the Work of Art’, his 1942 lectures on Hölderlin’s ‘The Ister’ and Sophocles’s Antigone , and his writings on the poem of Parmenides. Beginning with a consideration of the enigma of art, it moves on to the enigmatic activity of the river in Hölderlin’s poem and how this gives rise to the enigma of the here and now, before moving on to the enigma of the uncanny in Antigone and the law of becoming homely in being unhomely; the place of the law itself becomes critical here.
    [Show full text]
  • And Arendt,” Symposium: Canadian Journal of Continental Philosophy 24:2 (2020): 5–29, Available in Final Form At
    This is the accepted manuscript version of the following article: Jussi Backman, “Modernity in Antiquity: Hellenistic and Roman Philosophy in Heidegger and Arendt,” Symposium: Canadian Journal of Continental Philosophy 24:2 (2020): 5–29, available in final form at https://doi.org/10.5840/symposium202024210. Modernity in Antiquity: Hellenistic and Roman Philosophy in Heidegger and Arendt Jussi Backman (University of Jyväskylä) This article looks at the role of Hellenistic thought in the historical narratives of Martin Heidegger and Hannah Arendt. To a certain extent, both see—with G. W. F. Hegel, J. G. Droysen, and Eduard Zeller—Hellenistic and Roman philosophy as a “modernity in antiquity,” but with important differences. Heidegger is generally dismissive of Hellenistic thought and comes to see it as a decisive historical turning point at which a protomodern element of subjective willing and domination is injected into the classical heritage of Plato and Aristotle. Arendt, likewise, credits Stoic philosophy with the discovery of the will as an active faculty constituting a realm of subjective freedom and autonomy. While she considers Hellenistic philosophy as essentially apolitical and world-alienated—in contrast to the inherently political and practical Roman culture—it nonetheless holds for her an important but unexploited ethical and political potential. L’article examine le rôle de la pensée hellénistique dans les récits historiques de Martin Heidegger et Hannah Arendt. Dans une certaine mesure, tous les deux voient, avec G. W. F. Hegel, J. G. Droysen et Eduard Zeller, la philosophie hellénistique et romaine comme une « modernité dans l’antiquité », mais avec des différences importantes. Généralement, Heidegger dédaigne la philosophie hellénistique et finit par la considérer comme un tournant historique décisif qui introduit un élément protomoderne de volonté et de domination subjective dans l’héritage de Platon et Aristote.
    [Show full text]
  • The Experience of Nature in Heidegger
    OPO 6 Conference Memphis, TN January 4, 2019 The Experience of Nature in Heidegger Yuto KANNARI1 In phenomenology, “Nature (Natur)” has a highly complex character, which has been extensively discussed in the literature. In Husserl, three types of nature can be identified: 1) the nature as physical, causal, mechanical nature in the naturalistic attitude: 2) the living nature as the natural basis of the spiritual Ego: and 3) the primal nature, which should have been given before any sedimentation of spiritual products.2 Nature appears as what is constituted, what constitutes and the premise of what constitutes. The circumstances are similar for Heidegger. While nature appears in the context of criticizing the traditional concept of the world in Being and Time (BT), it appears as ready-to-hand (Zuhandenes) and present-at-hand (Vorhandenes) in everyday life. Furthermore, after BT, apart from nature as individual entities, nature is the presupposition of the factical existence of Dasein. On the other hand, nature is connected with the truth (ἀ-λήθεια), the happening (Ereignis), and the fourfold (Geviert), which are the keywords in middle and late Heidegger. What is nature? How can we describe the experience of nature? The whole picture of the concept of nature has not been disclosed. In this article, by following the development of the concept of nature in Heidegger, we clarify indices that distinguish nature, and what is the experience of nature that is the presupposition of experience. This article proceeds as follows. First, we will organize the multiple meanings of nature that are ambiguously used in BT through criticizing several previous studies (Section 1).
    [Show full text]
  • The Masks of Heidegger: National Socialism and Anti-Semitism
    Bard College Bard Digital Commons Senior Projects Fall 2015 Bard Undergraduate Senior Projects Fall 2015 The Masks of Heidegger: National Socialism and Anti-Semitism Julia Lauren Haerr Bard College, [email protected] Follow this and additional works at: https://digitalcommons.bard.edu/senproj_f2015 Part of the Continental Philosophy Commons This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-Noncommercial-No Derivative Works 4.0 License. Recommended Citation Haerr, Julia Lauren, "The Masks of Heidegger: National Socialism and Anti-Semitism" (2015). Senior Projects Fall 2015. 36. https://digitalcommons.bard.edu/senproj_f2015/36 This Open Access work is protected by copyright and/or related rights. It has been provided to you by Bard College's Stevenson Library with permission from the rights-holder(s). You are free to use this work in any way that is permitted by the copyright and related rights. For other uses you need to obtain permission from the rights- holder(s) directly, unless additional rights are indicated by a Creative Commons license in the record and/or on the work itself. For more information, please contact [email protected]. ! ! The Masks of Heidegger: National Socialism and Anti-Semitism Senior Project submitted to The Division of Social Studies of Bard College by Julia L. Haerr Annandale-on-Hudson, New York December 2015 Acknowledgements I would like to thank Professor Ruth Zisman for her excellent guidance throughout this project. Professor Daniel Berthold, for introducing me to Nietzsche’s Beyond Good and Evil. Professor Peter Skiff, for being a great advisor, telling me great stories, and helping me navigate my interests in the first few years of my time at Bard.
    [Show full text]
  • Oxford: Peter Lang, 2019)
    In: Feuchtwanger Studies, Vol. 6 Feuchtwanger and Judaism, History, Imagination, Exile Paul Lerner and Frank Stern (eds) (Oxford: Peter Lang, 2019) Adrian Feuchtwanger Caught Between Cultures: Lion Feuchtwanger's Flavius Josephus Lion Feuchtwanger's 1932 novel Der jüdische Krieg portrays Flavius Josephus as a young man caught between the conflicting cultures of Rome and Jerusalem and forced to make difficult choices. The novel also makes an implicit comment on the precarious position of European Jews in the early 1930s. This article outlines the principal elements and themes of the novel, and places it in the context of other German literary works of the period, in particular Hanns Johst’s proto-Nazi play Schlageter. Principal elements of the novel Over the centuries, Christians and Jews have held conflicting views of Flavius Josephus. The former considered his writings, with their accounts of early Christianity, to be near-canonical; the latter refused to read his histories and remembered him merely as the traitor who defected to the Romans in the First Jewish War—the uprising which led to the fall of Jerusalem, with all its associated symbolism for the Jewish diaspora.1 Lion Feuchtwanger, as a pacifist, anti-chauvinist commentator writing during the Weimar Republic, took a more agnostic view: in his version of the Josephus story, archetypal Jewish dilemmas are played out, and the novel as a whole makes an indirect comment on the situation of European Jews in 1932. The reader first encounters Joseph ben Matthias (Josephus's original name) seeking an amnesty for three fellow Judeans unjustly imprisoned by the Romans for stirring up unrest.
    [Show full text]