Whether or not you can extrapolate an ideology from H's text
is a different question from the hermeneutical project of
seeing H's text as someway an issue of a living milieu, its
trends and predispositions, etc.
Positing "care" as the structure of Dasein, privileging the
affective over the cognitive, is consonant with
the zeitgeist...as "death" over "love",...radical negations
of major Western ethical traditions, Humanism and Christianity.
H thus "ontologized" a prevailing nihilism...and in that
degree was complicit in a political praxis and programme
of an inevitably barbaric structure.
He stands as a warning to all who prescind from Kant.
At the same time, few have ever been more imbued
with those traditions, so that H's dilemma, fate, etc.,
must have entailed a radical self-contradiction...with
all that infers re incoherence, opacity, duplicity, Silence...???
Obiter dicta: I swear I am no obscurantist. Just
a reader (not even remotely academic) all by himself
trying to "appreciate" MH on some level, and but
for isolated partial successes, finding it impenetrable...
so I probably grasp too eagerly at little points that
converge with my modest data base. Anyway
I want to understand B&T, the list helps, and formulating
questions, be they ever so vulgar, helps...kinda heuristic.
So please, just ignore me.
--- from list heidegger@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx ---
------------------