[Xmca-l] Re: Heidegger's Notebooks Renew Focus on Anti-Semitism - NYTimes.com

[David Preiss]

This is a truly interesting piece, although the last sentence left an acid taste in my mouth: "But beyond that it is perhaps best to think of Heidegger’s moral evasions and somersaults as intellectually productive. Rather than trying to insulate the profundity of his thinking from the awfulness of his behaviour, the disturbing answer might be that it was a spur to his creative powers." Come on! Really? If we follow that claim, there is no way we can subject thinkers to any sort of ethical accountability of their actions (and omissions). I can't empathise with the notion that there are members of hour species that are subject to rules that will not apply to everybody else, however magnificent their contributions may be.
David

On Apr 1, 2014, at 6:36 AM, Tom Richardson <tom.richardson3@googlemail.com> wrote:

> I do not know how useful my 'butting-in' here will be, but here is one view
> on the "If Nazi, then an invalid philosopher" question/problem:
> 
> http://www.metamute.org/community/your-posts/heidegger-fuhrer-principal
> 
> Tom
> 
> 
> On 31 March 2014 16:34, David Preiss <daviddpreiss@gmail.com> wrote:
> 
>> Hi Mike,
>> I yet don't know whether addressing the issue from the point of view of
>> Heidegger's writings is relevant. I am aware that for many people in the
>> philosophy departments what is attractive as a scholarly activity is to
>> elucidate whether his philosophy has substantive connections with a Nazi
>> worldview. I can understand why is interesting to them. And, yet, I doubt
>> that the masses adhering to nazism got it from reading Heidegger or other
>> philosophers as the nazism of the german populace was quite basic and quite
>> naturalized.
>> 
>> What I think is the real problem is how to judge the actions of
>> intellectuals during times where the worst side of humanity takes center
>> stage. Thus, I think that Heidegger has to be judged according to what he
>> did, what he publicly said as regards the Holocaust (before, during and
>> after). And we don't need to read the black notebooks to learn that his
>> moral stature is not compatible with the sensitivity he shows in some of
>> his writings.
>> 
>> Alas, poor Celan, whom expected something different from him until the end:
>> http://wings.buffalo.edu/epc/authors/joris/todtnauberg.html
>> 
>> David
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> On Mar 31, 2014, at 2:18 AM, mike cole <lchcmike@gmail.com> wrote:
>> 
>>> Among the many things to read, that was an interesting summary of the
>> black
>>> notebooks, David.
>>> 
>>> Am i correct in interpreting the link between heidegger and anti-semitism
>>> t, according to this account, to run through the sin of rationalism and
>> its
>>> epitome in mathematics as "calculation" presumably linking rationalism
>> and
>>> money lending, and hence the historical steretotype as in *Jew Suss*?
>>> Or is that too simple?
>>> 
>>> Is the anti-semitism endemic to the philosophy or contingent invasion of
>> a
>>> historical German cultural narrative?
>>> 
>>> (signed)
>>> The blind man with a stick
>>> mike
>>> 
>>> 
>>> 
>>> On Sun, Mar 30, 2014 at 7:47 PM, David Kellogg <dkellogg60@gmail.com>
>> wrote:
>>> 
>>>> Martin:
>>>> 
>>>> I've only seen short extracts from the "Black Notebooks", but what
>>>> I've seen suggests that the real problem is not time but precisely the
>>>> problem of "worlding" which was mentioned earlier.
>>>> 
>>>> Jews, according to the "Black Notebooks", are an "unworlded" people,
>>>> and because of that they are necessarily parasitic upon peoples who
>>>> are deeply and profoundly in the world, i.e. his truly.
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> 
>> http://www.nytimes.com/2014/03/31/books/heideggers-notebooks-renew-focus-on-anti-semitism.html?_r=0
>>>> 
>>>> It's a big world, and there are lots of other things to read. They are
>>>> only short extracts, but they are more than enough.
>>>> 
>>>> David Kellogg
>>>> Hankuk University of Foreign Studies
>>>> 
>>>> On 31 March 2014 10:02, Martin John Packer <mpacker@uniandes.edu.co>
>>>> wrote:
>>>>> Hi David,
>>>>> 
>>>>> Yes, this always the problem with Heidegger: his appalling politics,
>>>> both professional and personal.  However, the conceptual problem he was
>>>> working on was also important to philosophers with very different
>> politics.
>>>> For example, Lucien Goldmann found parallels between Heidegger and
>> Lukacs
>>>> (ref below). I find it helpful to (try to) understand what Heidegger was
>>>> trying to do, and also understand how a philosopher of human existence
>> was
>>>> unable to prevent himself from becoming a very unpleasant human being.
>> (The
>>>> problem lies in his treatment of time, in my view.)
>>>>> 
>>>>> Martin
>>>>> 
>>>>> Goldmann, L. (1979). Lukacs and Heidegger: Towards a new philosophy.
>>>> Routledge and Kegan Paul.
>>>>> 
>>>>> 
>>>>> On Mar 30, 2014, at 7:10 PM, David Preiss <daviddpreiss@gmail.com>
>>>> wrote:
>>>>> 
>>>>>> As an aside to the ongoing references to Heidegger... May be of
>>>> interest or not.
>>>>>> DP
>>>>>> 
>>>> 
>> mobile.nytimes.com/2014/03/31/books/heideggers-notebooks-renew-focus-on-anti-semitism.html?referrer=
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> Descarga la aplicación oficial de Twitter aquí
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> Enviado desde mi iPhone
>>>>> 
>>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> 
>> 
>> 
>>