Wilton,
I'm sorry that it has taken me so long to acknowledge your
conciliatory reply to my message.
My sense is that in the thirties, Heidegger was very much taken
with the possibility of functioning as something like a
philosopher-king. He borrows the framework for his restructuring of the
German university, announced in the Rectorial Address, from the
tri-partite structure of the Republic. He cites the Republic with a
rather unususual translation. But I think the critical text is An
Introduction to Metaphysics where the implicit argument is that the
function of the creative questioner is to lead the [political] leader
into the ground of metaphysics.
Where Socrates refers to the "good," Heidegger refers to "greatness."
The reason why he is so cautious in acknowledging his relationship to
Plato on this point is that he sees the Idea of the Good as the distant
progenitor of the notion of value. That is, he does not see himself as
following Plato but as creatively rethinking the very notion of a
philosopher-king. This is my way of saying that his entry into politics
is philosophically motivated. I think that he catastrophically
under-estimated the Nazis and that he was incapable of saying that he
was wrong.
But the temptation to identify philosophy with a claim to speak for
the community in an authoritative way is rooted in the history of
philosophy itself.
Anyway, that's a rough summary of my thinking about this much
discussed issue.
Joel
--- from list heidegger@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx ---
I'm sorry that it has taken me so long to acknowledge your
conciliatory reply to my message.
My sense is that in the thirties, Heidegger was very much taken
with the possibility of functioning as something like a
philosopher-king. He borrows the framework for his restructuring of the
German university, announced in the Rectorial Address, from the
tri-partite structure of the Republic. He cites the Republic with a
rather unususual translation. But I think the critical text is An
Introduction to Metaphysics where the implicit argument is that the
function of the creative questioner is to lead the [political] leader
into the ground of metaphysics.
Where Socrates refers to the "good," Heidegger refers to "greatness."
The reason why he is so cautious in acknowledging his relationship to
Plato on this point is that he sees the Idea of the Good as the distant
progenitor of the notion of value. That is, he does not see himself as
following Plato but as creatively rethinking the very notion of a
philosopher-king. This is my way of saying that his entry into politics
is philosophically motivated. I think that he catastrophically
under-estimated the Nazis and that he was incapable of saying that he
was wrong.
But the temptation to identify philosophy with a claim to speak for
the community in an authoritative way is rooted in the history of
philosophy itself.
Anyway, that's a rough summary of my thinking about this much
discussed issue.
Joel
--- from list heidegger@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx ---