Heidegger's Nazism.pdf
(
142 KB
)
Pobierz
Heidegger's Thought and Nazism
Inquiry
,43,271–88
Heidegger’sThoughtandNazism
FrederickA.Olafson
UniversityofCalifornia,SanDiego
ThisarticlerejectstheideathatHeidegger’sNazismderivesfromhisphilosophical
thought.Noconnectionhasconvincinglybeenshowntoholdbetweentheontological
apparatusof
BeingandTime
andanypoliticalorientation.Theelaborationofthe
conceptofbeinginthelaterworkneedstobeunderstoodasHeidegger’sown
reactiontotheactivismofhisearlierthoughtwhichintheabsenceofanyprincipleof
respectforotherhumanbeingscouldprovidenomoralbasisforresistancetoNazi
ideology.ThetensionsbetweenthecircumstancesofHeidegger’searlylife–rural,
conservative,andCatholic–andtheNietzscheanmodernismofhisphilosophical
thoughtareexplored.Itissuggestedthattherewereanalogoustensionsbetween
traditionandthemodernworldinNazismandthatitwasHeidegger’shatredofthat
worldthatledhimtorespondfavorablytosome(butnotall)ofthethemesofNazi
thought.
AgreatdealhasbeenwrittenaboutMartinHeidegger’sNazismandits
implicationsfortheinterpretationandevaluationofhisthought.Thereare
thosewhothinkthateverythinginHeidegger’swritingsistaintedbyhis
havingenlistedhimselfandhisphilosophyunderHitler’sbanners;othersare
equallysurethatnosuchconclusionfollowsfromwhatis,nevertheless,
concededtobeaterriblydiscreditableepisodeinhislife.Forthosewhothink,
asIdo,thatHeideggerwasagreatphilosopher,aconceptionofthecentral
inspirationofhisthoughtashavingacharacterakintothatofNazismmustbe
agrossmisrepresentation.Thosewhoargueforsuchajudgmentonhimpretty
muchdismisshisthoughtasanobfuscatedversionofhispoliticalviews.
Totheextentthatonecanjudge,thechargethatHeidegger’sproperly
philosophicalthoughtwascomplicitinhisNazismseemstomeanthatanyone
whoheldsuchviewswouldipsofactohavehadamotivetojointheNazi
party.Thereis,ofcourse,thequestionaboutwhattheNazipartyandAdolf
Hitlerrepresentedin1933andwhattheyhadcometostandforby1945.This
isadistinctionthatisnotusuallygivenalotofweightwhenindictmentslike
thoseofHeideggerarebeinghandeddown;andaNazipastisusuallytakento
implyassentto,ifnotcollaborationin,alltheworsthorrorsforwhichthat
regimewasresponsible.Thosewhomakethesechargestypicallyinsistthat
theevidenceofwhatNazismmeantwasthereforalltoseefromtheoutset.In
asensethatistrue,butonestillhastoaskhowwellpeoplewhosupportedthe
Nazisunderstoodtheirintentions.Thereisalsothepossibilitythatinthecase
ofathinkerlikeHeideggerhisownpersonalhistorymayhavecountedfor
morethanhissystemofthoughtforpurposesofexplainingapolitical
#
2000Taylor&Francis
272
FrederickA.Olafson
af
Ž
liation.Asthinkers,suchpeopleareverylikelytoclaim,asHeideggerdid,
thattheirthoughtmotivatedthedecisionstheymade;buttheirevidenceon
thispointisnotnecessarilyconclusive.Nor,Ithink,doesasubsequent
refusal,likeHeidegger’s,toadmitthatonewasinthewrongmakethecasefor
theprosecution,thoughitcertainlyre
�
ectsdiscreditonthepersonwhoso
refuses.
Theseareall-importantdistinctionsandsomeofthemhaveaclearbearing
ontheHeideggercase;butIamnotgoingtotrytoexoneratehim,even
partially,onanyofthesegrounds.Iacceptthefactthathisconductwas
morallyindefensible;andmyconcernwillbeentirelywiththerolehis
philosophicalthoughtmayhaveplayedinhisbecomingandremaininga
memberoftheNaziparty.Thethesisofthisarticlewillbethatalthoughthe
viewspresentedin
BeingandTime
couldnothavesuppliedasubstantive
motiveforbecomingaNazi,therewasaconnectionbetweentheNaziepisode
andHeidegger’sthought–aconnectionthathastobeunderstoodintermsofa
certaincounterpointbetweenhisthoughtandhislife.Whatneedstobe
understoodisthatbothhisthoughtandhislifeweremarkedbydualitiesthat
undoubtedlygeneratedseveretensions.Afullerexplorationofthesetensions
mayenableustorenderamorenuancedjudgmentontherelationbetween
NazismandHeidegger’sphilosophicalthought.Theessentialoriginalityand
powerofthatthoughtarenotputinquestionbytheargumentthatismade
here.
1
ThecaseagainstHeideggertendstogobackandforthbetween
Beingand
Time
,togetherwiththewritingsthatfollowedcloselyuponit,andthosethat
cameduringandafterthefamous‘turn’or
Kehre
throughwhichhisthought
passedinthemid-1930s.Iwilldividemydiscussionaccordingly.Ingeneral,
theattemptsthathavebeenmadetoshowthattheprincipalthesesof
Being
andTime
,his
Ž
rstmajorphilosophicalstatement,wereimplicatedinhis
movementtowardNazismhavebeenweaklysupportedatbest.
2
Itsimplyis
notpossibletoassociateapoliticalmessagewithconceptslikethoseofbeing-
in-the-worldortemporality;andtheonlyresultoftryingtodosoisusuallyto
obscuretheirproperlyphilosophicalimport.Nevertheless,adeepfault-line
doesrunthroughtheaccountofhumanchoiceandofourrelationswithone
anotherthatispresentedin
BeingandTime
;andwhenitislocated,itmay
helpustoformatleastaroughideaofhowitwaspossibleforHeideggerto
seeNazismassomehowconvergingwithhisownphilosophicalposition.
Althoughthelaterwritingshavebeenahappyhunting-groundforthose
whowanttoindictbothHeideggerthemanandHeideggerthethinker,their
deepersigni
Ž
cancehas,Ithink,beenlostinthemidstofthisdetectivework.
Theirsigni
Ž
canceisnotthattheyprovidedarationaleforatotalitarian
orderingofsociety;itisratherthattheymarkareactiononHeidegger’spart
tocertainaspectsofhisownthoughtassetforthin
BeingandTime
.He
evidentlycametofeelthattheprojecttowhichthatworkwastocontribute
Heidegger’sThoughtandNazism
273
wasinfectedbyakindofNietzscheanhubris.Asaresult,ithadcometoo
closetothe‘subjectivism’thathethoughtwasendemicinmodern
philosophy.
3
ThesubjectivismHeideggerhadinmindcannothavebeenthe
epistemologicallymotivatedkindthatisassociatedwiththenamesof
DescartesandKant,since
BeingandTime
haddonesomuchtoputthatkind
ofphilosophyoutofbusiness.ForHeidegger,humanbeingwasindefeasibly
being-in-the-worldandthismeantthatitcouldnotwithdrawintoitselfor
adoptaskepticalattitudetowardthe‘external’world.Theissueof
subjectivismthatisrelevanttotheturnthatHeidegger’sthoughttookhad
todo,instead,withthewayinwhichselfandworldareassociatedwithone
anotherwithinbeing-in-the-world.
AccordingtoNietzsche,itistheselfthatsetsthesealofbeingonbecoming
andthusontheworld;anditslifeispreciselythisappropriative,meaning-
imposingactivity.EverythingintheaddressHeideggerdeliveredon
becomingRectoroftheUniversityofFreiburgaftertheNaziscameto
powerindicatesthatheunderstoodNazismasjustsuchahyper-activistic
responsetothehuman(andtheGerman)condition.Nazismwas,for
Heidegger,agrandioseenactmentofthesupremacyofthe(collective)self.
Thatwasalsowhathelaterwantedtorepudiate;anditishiscon
�
icting
attitudestowardanysuchexaltationoftheselfthatarethekeytoan
understandingofhisventureintothepoliticalworld.Accordingly,the
repudiationjustreferredtowasaddressednotinthe
Ž
rstinstancetoNazism
asapoliticalmovement,buttowhatitrepresentedinHeidegger’s
philosophicalinterpretationofit.Thisreactiontooktheformofan
extraordinaryalienationofallpersonalresponsibilityandfreedomandit
issuedinanextremequietism.Unfortunately,thereisadimensionofhuman
life–theproperlymoralone–thatisaseffectivelyobscuredinthisalienated
modeasitisintheassertionofself.
I
The
Ž
rstfactaboutHeideggertowhichattentionneedstobedrawnisthevery
greatantecedentimprobabilitythatabooklike
BeingandTime
wouldor
couldbewrittenbyanyonewhohadbeenformed,inhischildhoodandearly
life,asHeideggerwas.Hisupbringingwasrural,conservativeandCatholic;
andhiseducationwasintendedtopreparehimforthepriesthood.Initself,
thereisnothingunprecedentedaboutsomeone’sturningagainstthebeliefs
andvaluesofhisfamilyandhisbirthplaceandproducingworksofthoughtor
ofartthatexpressaverydifferentviewoftheworld.Heideggerdoesnot,
however,conformtoanyfamiliarimageoftherebel;andthereisevery
indicationthathistiestohisbirthplaceandtothewayoflifeitrepresented
remainedveryclose.Throughouthislife,hewasstronglycommittedtothe
274
FrederickA.Olafson
virtuesofthelittletownofMesskirch,wherehewasbornandwherehewas
buried,byspecialdispensation,intheCatholiccemetery.Thehistorian,Ernst
Nolte,hasevenaskedrhetoricallywhetherHeideggereverreallyleft
Messkirch.
4
Theanswer,Ithink,isthathedidindeedleaveit,butonaround-
tripticket;andintheend,intheonlywayheknew,hereturnedthereinspirit
aswell.Messkirch,andtheruralethosofhomeandtraditionitrepresented,
remainedforHeideggerthegreatsymbolicalternativetothehomelessnessof
modernlife–theurban,industrialworldthathedetested.Hedid,however,
rejecttheCatholicisminwhichhehadbeenreared.Sinceitformedthe
doctrinalcoreofthewayoflifetowhichhewassodeeplycommitted,
separatinghimselffromitcannothavebeeneasyforsuchaman.
Butseparatehimselfhedid;andhedidsomostemphaticallythroughthe
theseshesetforthin
BeingandTime
.Thatincompleteworkhasbeen
variouslyinterpreted;butitisclearthatitwasaradicallymodernwork.
Nothingshowsthismoreclearlythantheprofoundaf
Ž
nitywithNietzsche’s
thoughtthatiseverywhereevidentinit,ifnotinthedetailsofits
argumentationtheninthemoralatmospherethatpresidesovertheworkasa
whole.Heideggerhadalreadydeclaredphilosophyassuchtobecommittedto
atheism;andNietzsche’sconceptionofthedeathofGodwasadramatic
expressionofthenewsituationinwhichphilosophicalthoughthadtodoits
work.Itistruethat
BeingandTime
,inmountingitspolemicagainstthe
subjectivismofmodernphilosophy,harksbacktosomeoftheancientsources
ofChristianandCatholicthought.Itdoesso,however,inthecontextofa
philosophicalprojectofanaltogetherdifferentkind.
ThethesesHeideggerdevelopedin
BeingandTime
havebeenmost
commonlyunderstoodintermsofthetreatmentofindividualhumanlifethat
seemedtobeimplicitintheprominenceassignedtonotionslikethoseof
‘authenticity’and‘anxiety’.Thesebecametheidentifyingthemes–almost
themood-music–ofHeidegger’sthoughtinthepublicmind;andthesame
couldbesaidoftheassignmentofeverydaylifeandits‘values’toan
anonymous,publicmodeofselfhoodthathecalled‘dasMan’.‘Authenticity’
and‘resoluteness’,bycontrast,wereexistentialvirtuesthatconsistedmainly
innotclaiminganyindependentorpriorformofjusti
Ž
cationforwhatone
does.WhatHeideggerobjectstoistheclaimhetakestobeimplicitinmoral
codes–theclaimthatthe‘values’theyarebasedonaresomehowinscribedin
theworlditselfandarethuspriortoandindependentofthechoiceswemake.
Fromthisitfollowsthatifwesimplycomplywitharule,whatwecallour
‘choice’willnotexpressanythingthatisdistinctivelyours.Bymakingit
appearthatwearechoosingwhenweare,atmost,goingalongwithan
anonymousdirectivethatisthechoiceofnoactualperson,weintroducean
elementoffalsityintoourlives.Inordertoliveauthenticallywehavetostop
playingdelusorygameswithourlivesthataremotivatedbytheaspirationto
confersomespeciousauthorityuponthem;andifthatrequiresadismissalof
Heidegger’sThoughtandNazism
275
alltraditionalconceptionsofmoraltruth,theHeideggerof
BeingandTime
seemedtobewillingtoacceptthatconsequence.Thiswas,inanycase,the
messagethat
BeingandTime
carriedtotheworld;andinitsSartreanversion
itwasthecoreofthe‘existentialism’thatHeideggerwaslatertoreject.In
doingso,heseemedtosuggestthatithadbeentheresultofasimple
misunderstandingbySartreofwhat
BeingandTime
wasabout.
Thisrepudiationitselfneedsscrutiny.Itdatesfrom1948andthusfroma
time,wellintohislaterperiod,whenHeideggerhadsetasidemanyofthe
themesofthatworkthatSartrehadappropriated.Itistruethatthereare
signi
Ž
cantdifferencesbetweenHeidegger’saccountofhumanbeingas
DaseinandtheradicallyvoluntaristiccharacterittakesoninSartre’s
rendering.Heideggersurelywouldnothavewantedtoassociatehimselfwith
apositionthatcarriedviewshehadhimselflargelyabandonedtonew
extremes.Nevertheless,asitstands,thepicturethat
BeingandTime
givesus
ofhumanlifeiscenteredontheindividualhumanbeingandonthe
alternativesofauthenticityandinauthenticitybywhichthatlifeisde
Ž
ned.As
farashumansociety–whatpeoplearelikeandwhattheydointheir
associationwithoneanother–isconcerned,inauthenticityappearstobethe
dominantmodalityoftheircommonlife.Asaresult,societyisunderstoodby
HeideggerprincipallyasanegationofeverythingthatcouldmakewhatIdo
trulymineandthussomethingforwhichIwouldberesponsible.Theonly
principleofauthorityforwhat‘one’doesresidessimplyinthefactthatitis,
anonymously,thedonething.Anindividualhumanbeingwhotriestoemerge
fromthisregimeofconformismintoaformoflifeinwhichthereistrue
choiceandthusresponsibilityandfreedomcandosoonlyonthestrengthof
thecallof‘conscience’thatturnsouttobehisownvoiceremindinghimthat
heiscapableofauthenticagencyinhisownright.Butwhyhewoulddosoor
beabletodosoremainslargelyunexplained.
ItseemsfairtoassumethatHeideggermusthavefeltaneedtodevelopa
conceptionofapossiblesocietyinwhichauthenticitywouldsomehowat
leastpartiallyreplacetheinauthenticitythatwasthesignatureoftheexisting
socialorder.(Heideggerinsists,forreasonsthatneednotbediscussedhere,
thattherecanbenoquestionofalife,individualorsocial,thatisunalloyedly
authentic.)Thereis,infact,onesectionin
BeingandTime
inwhichhis
thoughtseemstobemovinginthisdirectionandsuggeststhepossibilityofa
conceptionofsocietyassomethingotherthananincubatorforinauthenticity.
Heideggergivesasketchofwhathecalls
Mitsein
–thewayinwhichhuman
beingsarewithoneanotherintheirownsharedmodeofbeing.
5
Thisisa
modeofbeingthatisconstitutedbythedisclosureofotherentities–things
andpeople–aswellasself.Thereareclearindicationsthatinthecaseofthe
disclosureofotherlikebeingssucharelationhasatleastaproto-moral
characterasforexamplewhenHeideggersaysthatweare‘essentiallyforthe
sakeofothers’.
6
Inmyjudgment,thesehintscouldhavebeendevelopedinto
Plik z chomika:
sinderella
Inne pliki z tego folderu:
Critique Of Dreyfus.pdf
(245 KB)
Heidegger And The Political.pdf
(85 KB)
Heidegger And The Problem Of Idealism.pdf
(83 KB)
Heidegger And Wittgenstein.pdf
(97 KB)
Heidegger On Art.pdf
(94 KB)
Inne foldery tego chomika:
Anarchism
Art
Bauman
Critical Theory, Post-structuralism
Gender
Zgłoś jeśli
naruszono regulamin