Letter on Humanism -- Reading 4

This reading presents what seems to me a negative assessment of "humanism" as
something merely Roman, with the "slant" that the Romans were philosophically

I'm not well versed on Roman Dasein, but I do seem to remember from high
school Latin that some Roman said "I am a man, nothing human is alien to me".
Now this seems to me "philosophically" pretty good, since it thinks our
humanity (existence) from a *universal* and *hermeneutic*
(empathic-interpretive) standpoint, endeavoring to be *open to otherness*,
etc. Heidegger does not speak about this aspect of Roman culture which, to
anticipate from reading 5, does *not* seem to me to establish the humanitas
of homo humanus with regard to "an already established interpretation of
nature, history, world...", at least in any first-order (merely ontical /
metaphysical) as opposed to reflective / critical / transcendental sense.

Question: Does anybody know of a place where Heidegger addresses his teacher
Husserl's proposal that the telos of Western humanity lies is the universal
and ever-to-be-renewed reflective transformation of factical life into
self-responsible, self-accountable existence? It seems to me interesting
("denkwurdig") to compare, e.g., Husserl's Vienna Lecture -- Husserl's public
testimony concerning humanism in a time when "the lights had gone out over
Europe" and Heidegger, at best, seemed to be keeping a low profile -- with
Heidegger's statement concerning humanism, with which we are herewith

Brad McCormick

--- from list [email protected] ---


Partial thread listing: