|
Philosopher Martin Heidegger joined the Nazi Party (NSDAP) on May 1, 1933, ten days after being elected Rector of the University of Freiburg. A year later, in April 1934, he resigned the Rectorship and stopped taking part in Nazi Party meetings, but remained a member of the Nazi Party until its dismantling at the end of World War II. Heidegger had held high hopes of reforming the university system with the help of Nazism as a Conservative Revolution, but, by the end of the war, had become expendable and was even prevented from teaching. The denazification hearings immediately after World War II led to Heidegger's dismissal from Freiburg, banning him from teaching. In 1949, after several years of investigation, the French military finally classified Heidegger as a ''Mitläufer'' 〔''Mitläufer'' (literally, "with-runner"; similar to "lemming-like"): a person who, unlike a fellow traveler, gives into peer pressure without participation nor resistance nor inner conviction.〕 or "() follower". The teaching ban was lifted in 1951 and Heidegger was granted emeritus status in 1953, but he was never allowed to resume his philosophy chair. His involvement with Nazism and the relation between his philosophy and National Socialism are still highly controversial, especially because he never apologized〔For critical readings of an interview published by ''Der Spiegel'' in 1966 as "Only a God Can Save Us", see the "Special Feature on Heidegger and Nazism" in ''Critical Inquiry'' 15:2 (Winter 1989), particularly the contributions by Jürgen Habermas and Blanchot. The issue includes partial translations of Derrida's ''Of Spirit'' and Lacoue-Labarthe's ''Of Spirit'' and ''Heidegger, Art, and Politics: the Fiction of the Political''.〕 and is only known to have expressed regret once, privately, when he described his rectorship and the related political engagement as "the greatest stupidity of his life" (''"die größte Dummheit seines Lebens"'').〔Heinrich Wiegand Petzet ''Encounters and Dialogues with Martin Heidegger, 1929-1976'', 1983 p. 37. See also Frédéric de Towarnicki, ''A la rencontre de Heidegger. Souvenirs d'un messager de la Forêt-Noire'', Gallimard 1993 p.125〕 ==Controversy == Controversy over Heidegger's affiliation with Nazism was provoked by the publication, in 1987, of Victor Farias' book ''Heidegger and Nazism''. Farias had access to many documents, including some preserved in the STASI archives. The book, which tries to show that Heidegger supported Hitler and his racial policies and also denounced or demoted colleagues, was highly acclaimed but also starkly criticised. The American philosopher Richard Rorty declared that "Farias' book includes more concrete information relevant to Heidegger's relations with the Nazis than anything else available",〔(Richard Rorty, review of ''Heidegger and Nazism'' in the New Republic, quoted on the Temple University Press promotional page for ''Heidegger and Nazism'' )〕 while French philosopher Roger-Pol Droit commented: "Mercilessly well-informed, this book is a bomb".〔''Le Monde'', 14/10/1987 http://www.editions-verdier.fr/v3/oeuvre-heidegger.html〕 Farias was accused, however, of poor scholarship and sensationalism. In Germany, Hans-Georg Gadamer, a former student of Heidegger, denounced Farias' "grotesque superficiality"〔Hans-Georg Gadamer: "Zurück von Syrakus?" in Jürg Altwegg (Hrsg.): ''Die Heidegger Kontroverse''. Frankfurt a. M. 1988, s. Anm. 20, S. 179.〕 and historian Hugo Ott remarked that Farias' methodology was unacceptable in historical research.〔''Paths and wrong Paths'', N & K p.138, quoted in Julian Young ''Heidegger, Philosophy, Nazism'' Cambridge University Press 1997 p.39〕 In France, philosopher Jacques Derrida said Farias's work was "sometimes so rough one wonders if the investigator (read ) Heidegger () more than an hour",〔Jacques Derrida, http://www.jacquesderrida.com.ar/frances/heidegger.htm#_edn1 "Heidegger, l'enfer des philosophes"], ''Le Nouvel Observateur'', Paris, 6-12 novembre 1987.〕 while Paul Celan's translator Pierre Joris described it as "a savage attempt to demolish Heidegger's thought"〔(Pierre Joris defends Heidegger ) in ''Heidegger, France, Politics, the University'' (1989).〕 François Fédier, one of Heidegger's friends and translators, claimed he could refute all Farias' allegations point by point.〔François Fédier, ''Heidegger. Anatomie d'un scandale'', Robert Laffont, Paris, 1988. ISBN 2-221-05658-2〕 The debate remains unresolved. Philosophers also disagree on the consequences of Heidegger's association with Nazism on his philosophy. Critics, such as Günther Anders, Jürgen Habermas, Theodor Adorno, Hans Jonas, Karl Löwith,〔Karl Löwith, ''Mein Leben in Deutschland vor und nach 1933: ein Bericht'' (Stuttgart: Metzler, 1986), p. 57, translated by Paula Wissing as cited by Maurice Blanchot in "Thinking the Apocalypse: a Letter from Maurice Blanchot to Catherine David", in ''Critical Inquiry'' 15:2, pp. 476–477.〕 Pierre Bourdieu, Maurice Blanchot, Emmanuel Levinas,〔("Martin Heidegger, Emmanuel Levinas\, and the Politics of Dwelling" ) by David J. Gauthier, Ph.D. dissertation, Louisiana State University, 2004, page 156〕 Richard Rorty, Luc Ferry and Alain Renaut claim that his affiliation with the Nazi Party derived from his philosophical conceptions and that it revealed flaws inherent in his thought.〔 His supporters, such as Hannah Arendt, Otto Pöggeler, Jan Patocka, Silvio Vietta, Jacques Derrida, Jean Beaufret, Jean-Michel Palmier, Richard Rorty, Marcel Conche, Julian Young and François Fédier, see his involvement with Nazism as a personal "error"a word which Arendt placed in quotation marks when referring to Heidegger's Nazi-era politics that is irrelevant to his philosophy. In 2005, the controversy was renewed after Emmanuel Faye published a book with the provocative title ''Heidegger: The Introduction of Nazism into Philosophy''. In it, Faye claims that Heidegger's philosophy inspired the Final Solution and that fascist and racist ideas are so woven into the fabric of his thought that it does not deserve to be called philosophy. Rather, according to Faye, Heidegger's work should be classified as part of the history of Nazism rather than as philosophy. A debate on the subject that involved Faye and François Fédier was broadcast on French television in 2007.〔 (Video Bibilothèque Médicis 23/02/2007 )〕 Faye was heavily criticized for his lack of competence in German and for faking or falsifying quotations by a group of specialists gathered by Fédier (''Heidegger, all the more reason''〔François Fédier (ed.), ''Heidegger, à plus forte raison'', Paris: Fayard, 2007 (Philippe Arjakovsky, Henri Crétella, Pascal David, François Fédier, Hadrien France-Lanord, Matthieu Gallou, Gérard Guest, Jean-Pierre Labrousse, François Meyronnis, Jean-Luc Nancy, François Nebout, Étienne Pinat, Nicolas Plagne, Alexandre Schild, Bernard Sichère, Éric Solot, Pierre Teitgen, Stéphane Zagdanski)〕). Numerous other Heidegger scholars, themselves critical of Heidegger's relation to Nazism, have taken issue with Faye's claims. For example, Richard Wolin, a close reader of the Heidegger controversy since Farias's book, has said that he is not convinced by Faye's position.〔''An Ethical Question: Does a Nazi Deserve a Place Among Philosophers?'' by Patricia Cohen. New York Times. Published: November 8, 2009. ()〕 And Peter Gordon, in a long review of ''Heidegger: The Introduction of Nazism into Philosophy,'' raises a handful of objections, including the accusation that Faye lets his own philosophical leanings prevent him from treating Heidegger fairly.〔Peter E. Gordon, Review of ''Heidegger: The Introduction of Nazism into Philosophy'', ''Notre Dame Philosophical Reviews: An Electronic Journal,'' 12 March 2010. ()〕 In his preface to Heidegger's ''Zollikon Seminars'', Medard Boss writes: "I made inquiries and Heidegger very clearly seemed to be the most slandered man I had ever encountered. He had become entangled in a network of lies by his colleagues. Most of the people, who were unable to do serious harm to the substance of Heidegger's thinking, tried to get at Heidegger the man with personal attacks. The only remaining puzzle was why Heidegger did not defend himself against these slanders publicly."〔Martin Heidegger, ''Zollikon Seminars: Protocols, Conversations, Letters'' Northwestern UP 2001 p.IX〕 Fédier comments it with Nietzsche's remark that "the philosopher has to be the bad conscience of his age." 抄文引用元・出典: フリー百科事典『 ウィキペディア（Wikipedia）』 ■ウィキペディアで「Martin Heidegger and Nazism」の詳細全文を読む スポンサード リンク
|