NIK. You've been busy today, man. I just want to reply briefly to yor
question, to me I guess, about Heidegger and politics. I'm not sure why
you say thinking about this is "uninteresting," though, and I think
Heidegger himself would disagree with you about his philosophy and
politics being two separate endeavors.
You keep coming at this question by analogies: first the "children of a
lesser god," and now the "Mozart"-analogy (not perhaps as compelling a
composer to have selected as, say, Strauss, who is also being discussed
on the list). These analogies serve to illustrate and support a
distancing of elements (the philosophical and political) which you want
to keep apart -- but which may belong together, and may in fact co-found
each other.
For example, Heidegger uses his lectures on Book Theta of Aristotle's
Metaphysics (which I mentioned earlier: an examination of how the
tradition understands dunamis and enargia) to set up and cross over to a
discussion of how poesis and praxis work in Aristotle's Politics (Jacques
Taminiaux has written about this; and Walter Brogan's introduction to his
translation of the Aristotle lectures discusses it as well). The ontic
and ontological is never "uninterested" in the political in Heidegger.
That is in part what makes reading him so challenging, and what I think
also makes the question of his association with National Socialism so
compelling.
Another interesting place to look is at the Rectorate Address and the way
it uses the words "lead," "leader," "leadership" -- all of which play on
the German "furher" (sorry if the spelling is inept). Here, he was
creating an analogy of his own, between the German University and
National Socialism. The way he talks in the Address of the University's
being out front, in advance of, and at the same time founding, grounding,
seems to duplicate the way the Furher was characterized at the same time
as leading and as being somehow mystically "with" each German (this was
the point of putting loud speakers in every public place). In the
preface to the Kantbook, where Heidegger describes the grounding activity
of fundamental ontology -- that it both grounds and forms alongside of
the thing grounded -- the sense of time and of being in two places at
once is at work.
I think these issues may be difficult, frightening, and even repugnant,
but never "uninteresting."
Michael Harrawood
--- from list heidegger@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx ---
------------------
question, to me I guess, about Heidegger and politics. I'm not sure why
you say thinking about this is "uninteresting," though, and I think
Heidegger himself would disagree with you about his philosophy and
politics being two separate endeavors.
You keep coming at this question by analogies: first the "children of a
lesser god," and now the "Mozart"-analogy (not perhaps as compelling a
composer to have selected as, say, Strauss, who is also being discussed
on the list). These analogies serve to illustrate and support a
distancing of elements (the philosophical and political) which you want
to keep apart -- but which may belong together, and may in fact co-found
each other.
For example, Heidegger uses his lectures on Book Theta of Aristotle's
Metaphysics (which I mentioned earlier: an examination of how the
tradition understands dunamis and enargia) to set up and cross over to a
discussion of how poesis and praxis work in Aristotle's Politics (Jacques
Taminiaux has written about this; and Walter Brogan's introduction to his
translation of the Aristotle lectures discusses it as well). The ontic
and ontological is never "uninterested" in the political in Heidegger.
That is in part what makes reading him so challenging, and what I think
also makes the question of his association with National Socialism so
compelling.
Another interesting place to look is at the Rectorate Address and the way
it uses the words "lead," "leader," "leadership" -- all of which play on
the German "furher" (sorry if the spelling is inept). Here, he was
creating an analogy of his own, between the German University and
National Socialism. The way he talks in the Address of the University's
being out front, in advance of, and at the same time founding, grounding,
seems to duplicate the way the Furher was characterized at the same time
as leading and as being somehow mystically "with" each German (this was
the point of putting loud speakers in every public place). In the
preface to the Kantbook, where Heidegger describes the grounding activity
of fundamental ontology -- that it both grounds and forms alongside of
the thing grounded -- the sense of time and of being in two places at
once is at work.
I think these issues may be difficult, frightening, and even repugnant,
but never "uninteresting."
Michael Harrawood
--- from list heidegger@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx ---
------------------