Jaspers, Heidegger, and Arendt on Politics, Science, and Communication Babette Babich Fordham University [email protected]
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
Volume 4, No 1, Spring 2009 ISSN 1932-1066 Jaspers, Heidegger, and Arendt On Politics, Science, and Communication Babette Babich Fordham University [email protected] Abstract: Heidegger's 1950 claim to Jaspers (later repeated in his Spiegel interview), that his Nietzsche lectures represented a "resistance" to Nazism is premised on the understanding that he and Jaspers have of the place of science in the Western world. Thus Heidegger can emphasize Nietzsche's epistemology, parsing Nietzsche's will to power, contra Nazi readings, as the metaphysical culmination of the domination of the West by scientism and technologism. It is in this sense that Heidegger argues that German Nazism is "in essence" the same as Soviet Bolshevism and American capitalism. Jaspers himself had likewise emphasized the Will to Power by contrast with the doctrine of eternal recurrence. Heidegger differs from Jaspers (as from their mutual student Hannah Arendt) inasmuch as Jaspers preserves an enthusiasm for the possibility of scientific certainty while yet recognizing (as Heidegger does) a strong sense of the limits of science. None of the three can correctly be labeled anti-scientific. The essay closes by recalling Arendt's reflections on the very possibility of resistance using the example of Jaspers' own resistance to contemporary political events. A survey of continental philosophy I wrote for reception of the language of limit-situations, or indeed translation into Chinese included an entry on Jaspers' life-situations in general. Jaspers who followed a more Existenz-Philosophie, focusing, in part, on Jaspers' "world Kantian conventionality than did Heidegger but, and as philosophy": illuminated by Nietzsche's thought, conceived such limit situations in term of the individual shattering Especially toward the end of his career and in the wake against life and so foundering. Rather than annihilating of the moral devastation of the rational and cultural idea anxiety or despair in either Heidegger's or in Nietzsche's of Western civilization following the rise of Nazi Germany sense, Jaspers saw the chance or possibility of and World War II, Jaspers advocated a world philosophy transcendence. Jaspers' hopeful perspective grew out of on the basis of open communication, open-mindedness his articulation of periechontology (the ontology of das but not less the scrupulous integrity of the thinker. Umgreifende, the all-encompassing) but not less from his Interested in the dynamics of what he called limit- concern with origins and responsibility.1 situations both because of his professional formation as a medical psychologist or psychiatrist and also because of his own personal experience of life, profoundly 1 Babich, "Continental Philosophy in Britain and America," affected as he could not but be by his direct experience Dezhi Duan, trans., in The Map of Contemporary British and of the violence of two world wars, Jaspers interpreted American Philosophy and Philosophers, eds. Kang Ouyang and such limit-encounters differently from either Husserl's Steve Fuller (Beijing: People's Press, 2005), 22-82, here p. 40. conception of horizon or Heidegger's elusively nihilist Existenz: An International Journal in Philosophy, Religion, Politics, and the Arts 2 This excerpt introduces the reading of Jaspers I Heidegger's thought and this is in keeping with undertake here, beginning from Nazism as a very Jaspers' philosophical style in general and with his specific limit situation in order to examine the question relationship to Heidegger in particular. of politics, science, and communication and In his often-cited 1966 interview with Der Spiegel, emphasizing Heidegger's reading of Nietzsche and his Heidegger claimed that his university lecture courses own political claims for the same. on Nietzsche and Hölderlin constituted nothing less The Chinese encyclopedia in which my survey romantic—or far-fetched—than what he called his essay appears is of the kind that has been "resistance" to the National Socialist movement in proliferating as of late, a reference book only Germany.4 Using language that was Nietzschean but distinctive to the extent that it highlights the no less biblical, Heidegger affirmed that "[a]nyone with analytic-continental distinction many seem anxious ears to hear heard in these lectures a confrontation with to sweep under the rug, especially where there are National Socialism" (OGS 33). Later in the interview, fewer and fewer practitioners trained in classical Heidegger repeats the claim, declaring his Nietzsche continental philosophy and more and more lectures to have been, again, nothing less than a analytically formed continental philosophers, i.e., "confrontation with National Socialism" (OGS 35). those who suppose that the only thing that makes Some fifteen years earlier, however, in an extended continental philosophy continental is the literal letter of self-explication and strained self-defense, we focus on the continent itself and not a matter of find almost the same assertion, using almost the very philosophical formation or style.2 Jaspers' own same words for the same claim (certainly the spirit of thinking is more accessible to the former the assertion is the same) in the letter Heidegger writes traditionally continental approach (indeed, it may to Jaspers on April 8, 1950. Claiming that teaching be argued that a rigorous engagement with Jaspers' Nietzsche constituted his resistance, Heidegger texts presupposes a continental formation) and to emphasizes the point to say, "I do not write this in order just this degree, taking cognizance of this traditional to claim that I accomplished anything although distinction between approaches to philosophy is no everyone who could hear clearly in the years 1935-1944 personal predilection but indispensable to a reading could have known that, at this university, no one dared of Jaspers (and so too Heidegger and Nietzsche, or, to do what I did."5 Heidegger continues: "I was then indeed, though many manage to get by without struck all the harder by what was undertaken against such a background, particularly in the context of me in 1945-48 and, actually, to this hour" (HJC 189). In political philosophy: Arendt). correspondence with Jaspers, again, Heidegger invokes his Nietzsche courses, noting that he had, at times, a Situating Limit: Heidegger's Nietzsche Nazi spy in his lectures. Jaspers, so I shall argue here, offers a more plausible 4 Originally published as "Nur noch ein Gott kann uns retten," account than does Heidegger of the complications of Der Spiegel, 30/23 (31 Mai 1976). In English as "Only a God Heidegger's involvement/non-involvement with Can Save Us: Der Spiegel's Interview with Martin National Socialism.3 While Jaspers offers no kind of Heidegger," in Philosophy Today 20, trans. Maria Alter and exoneration he does point to the complexity of John Caputo (1976), 267-284, and a year later in the New School Journal of the Graduate Philosophy Faculty (1977), 5-27; and included in numerous book collections including the 2 See further, Babich, "On the Analytic-Continental Divide in German Library edition Martin Heidegger, Political and Philosophy: Nietzsche's Lying Truth, Heidegger's Speaking Political Writings, ed. Manfred Strasser (New York: Language, and Philosophy," in A House Divided: Comparing Continuum, 2003), 24-48 (subsequent citations [henceforth Analytic and Continental Philosophy, ed. Carlos Prado called OGS] will refer to this edition). For a useful German (Amherst, NY: Prometheus/Humanity Books, 2003), 63-103. collection including Richard Wisser's interview with Heidegger, see Antwort. Martin Heidegger im Gespräch, eds. 3 I draw portions for the first section of this essay upon an Günther Neske and Emil Kettering (Pfullingen: Neske, earlier essay forthcoming in German, Babich, "Nietzsche: 1988), 81-118. Heideggers Widerstand. Nietzsche lesen als eine 'Konfrontation' mit dem Nationalsozialismus," in Heidegger 5 See Walter Biemel and Hans Saner, eds, The Heidegger-Jaspers Jahrbuch 5, ed. Holger Zaborowski (Freiburg im Breisgau: Correspondence 1920-1963, trans. Gary Aylesworth (Amherst, Alber Verlag, 2009). New York: Humanity Books, 2003), 189 [henceforth cited as HJC]. http://www.bu.edu/paideia/existenz Volume 4, No 1, Spring 2009 Existenz: An International Journal in Philosophy, Religion, Politics, and the Arts 3 Now there had been a break, painful to Jaspers shy away from using: namely guilt.6 Instructively, and arguably so for Heidegger as well, though not even Jaspers presents a perfect contrast to Heidegger by any standard was less of what we in Heidegger and the standard for what we expect New York call a Mensch than Jaspers, and it seems with regard to German guilt, as indeed German plain to me that Heidegger's greatest anxiety or shame can seem almost impossibly high.7 Theodore concern, at all times, was for himself and this Adorno has even made the case that Heideggerian perforce limited the kinds of things that caused him language (a claim which would include for Adorno grief. Despite this I think it also patent that many more thinkers than Heidegger alone) Heidegger valued his friendship with Jaspers both inevitably inhibited any attempt to come to terms before and after the war and something of the with the horrors of National Socialism. complex level of communication between the two What Heidegger did do was to admit his shame men (due, and I return to this at the conclusion, to and his regret to Jaspers and, in addition, Heidegger Jaspers' particular gift for philosophical