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:
MKTK
Inne pliki z tego folderu:
Hodge - Heidegger and Ethics - Routledge.pdf
(2110 KB)
Heideggers Being Time - Mulhall.pdf
(878 KB)
Heidegger Being And Time.zip
(1406 KB)
Heidegger VS Liberalism.pdf
(177 KB)
Heidegger And The Problem Of Idealism.pdf
(83 KB)
Inne foldery tego chomika:
Abramowski
Adorno
Agamben
Anscombe
Arendt
Zgłoś jeśli
naruszono regulamin