Heidegger reception

from Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Martin Heidegger is considered one of the most influential philosophers of the 20th century. His thoughts had a direct effect on modern philosophy outside of Germany as well as on other humanities through a few students. The “Heidegger case” is the part of the reception that deals with Heidegger's involvement in the “ Third Reich ” and the question of whether and to what extent his philosophy was influenced by National Socialism.

Effect and reception in the occidental tradition

Jean-Paul Sartre

Sartre expressed his great gratitude and appreciation to Martin Heidegger . However, Sartre went beyond Heidegger in his own way. From 1938 he read a few translations, then in 1939 the Being and Time , which he had acquired in 1934 ; He explained that the reading was not easy for him because of the idiosyncratic vocabulary. In terms of content, Heidegger was a “shock” for him because of the radical break with the traditional way of philosophizing. In 1943, Das Sein und das Nothing appeared by him , whereby its title was not only based on Being and Time , but also much of the content was based on Sartre's Heidegger reading. Heidegger responded to Sartre's essay Existentialism is a Humanism from 1946 in a letter to Jean Beaufret , the so-called letter of humanism , in which he made it clear that his and Sartre's ways of thinking were incompatible.

“Orthodox” Heideggerians criticize a number of misunderstandings when adopting Heidegger's ideas. Thus the concept of being is no longer understood, as in Heidegger's ontological difference, in opposition to beings, but here nothing takes the place of time on the one hand and takes over the opposition to being on the other. Proceeding from this, the search for being with Sartre takes an ironic and absurd course, because being is contrasted with not being, the human being in the “for-itself” is insurmountable against the “in-itself”. A dualism that continues in Sartre's concept of existence (as physical being) and essence (as freely definable) and leads to the fact that when philosophizing, the subject as “I think” has to be used again.

Sartre also adopted Heidegger's concept of facticity , which describes that people always - without their conscious decision - find themselves in a world and see it exposed. (Heidegger: “Dasein actually exists.”) Which in turn results in a dualism of situation and freedom. Based on Heidegger's analysis of Man , Sartre carried out some sweeping phenomenological analyzes of insincerity ( mauvaise foi ), which not least contributed to the popularity of existentialism .

Sartre's analysis of the “other”, that is, the relationship to fellow human beings, shows great differences. Sartre accused Heidegger of leveling the multiplicity and diversity of the different “consciousnesses” by restricting himself ontologically to being-in-the-world. Sartre sets Heidegger's - for his own terms - purely formal definition of being with a more concrete model, which, in his opinion, also makes possible struggles and conflicts plausible. However, it is controversial whether this deficiency is found in Heidegger. Sartre also misunderstood the central importance of the context of items introduced by Heidegger, of understanding (which he inadmissibly equates with intellect) and speech.

In later years, Sartre's references to Heidegger became more sparse, and from the early 1950s Sartre refrained from reading Heidegger thoroughly. Heidegger, on the other hand, according to Jean Beaufret's statements, never read more than a hundred pages of Being and Nothing . Despite recognition of Sartre, Heidegger saw in his work only a newfangled version of metaphysical subjectivism. A visit by Sartre to Heidegger in 1952 turned out to be sobering for the latter, probably also because both the city intellectual and the university professor who was close to nature came from different backgrounds. Sartre then expressed his disappointment: “He detests the commitment. I told him about it. I was watched with infinite compassion. In the end I talked to his hat. "

Hans-Georg Gadamer

Gadamer , a student of Heidegger, took up Heidegger's hermeneutic approach. However, Heidegger himself pointed out the difference: "The hermeneutic philosophy, oh, that's Gadamer's business." (Quoted in: Gadamer-Lesebuch, Tübingen 1997, p. 281) Gadamer founded modern hermeneutics with his major work “ Truth and Method ” , published in 1960 , in which he primarily emphasized the role of art in ontological discovery of truth. In the experience of art, Gadamer saw an understanding, however not as a dominant and comprehending one, but as a process, as an event. What is essential is "the universal role of language, which thereby exposes an ontological dimension of hermeneutics." (Gadamer, cited ibid., P. 285) The parallels to Heidegger's lecture “The Origin of the Artwork” and the understanding of Dasein highlighted as existential in “Being and Time” are clear . In 1979 Jürgen Habermas paid tribute to Gadamer's work with the often-cited expression “urbanization of the Heidegger province”.

Hannah Arendt

Arendt showed herself to be strongly influenced by Heidegger in her early writings ( “ The concept of love in Augustin ” ). After her break with Heidegger in 1933, she distanced himself from him. In her 1946 essay “ What is Existential Philosophy? “ (German: 1948) she criticized Heidegger's philosophy for the lack of a subject who could take on moral responsibility on a political level. After this renunciation, however, Arendt approached Heidegger again with her late philosophical work “ Vita activa or Vom aktivigen Leben ” : the book, according to Arendt in a private letter to Heidegger, owes him “pretty much everything in every respect”. She regretted not being able to dedicate it to him for the known reasons. In this work she took up Heidegger's concept of the world , which she interpreted as a space for political action. Totalitarian rule is a state of “worldlessness” because it pushes people out of a common world. In her eulogy for Heidegger's 80th birthday in 1969, she practiced almost all of Heidegger's apologetics with regard to his work, but also his attitude towards National Socialism.

Herbert Marcuse

Marcuse attended Heidegger's early Freiburg lectures in the 1920s. Later he tried to make Heidegger 's philosophy presented in “Being and Time” fruitful for Marxism . Marcuse was particularly fascinated by Heidegger's anchoring of philosophy in the factuality of existence and the high practical relevance that it gives. However, according to Marcuse, Heidegger's existential analytics must be supplemented by historical materialism. His best-known book "The One-Dimensional Man" can be seen as an attempt to bring this together. Later, however, Marcuse broke away from Heidegger. In a letter to Heidegger, he accused him of never having taken a position on his political actions in 1933/34.

Emmanuel Levinas

Levinas came to Freiburg in 1928/29 to hear Husserl there, where he also discovered Heidegger for himself. He saw Heidegger as the most important philosopher of the 20th century. He mainly referred to “Being and Time” . However, Levinas Heidegger began to read critically early on. Above all, he criticized the way of thinking anchored in the European tradition of placing the general over the individual, being over being. Instead he tried to find a “way from being to being”. He did not share Heidegger's criticism of technology; instead, he saw technology as an instrument of liberation.

Maurice Merleau-Ponty

Maurice Merleau-Ponty's argument with Heidegger was almost always positive. With his concept of “être-au-monde” (To-be-to-the-world), he tied in with Heidegger's being-in-the-world and emphasized above all the dynamic character of the relationship to the world as a process that is always in progress. This was in contrast to Sartre's existentialist Heidegger reception. In contrast to Heidegger, his phenomenology emphasized the physical aspect of dealing with the world: while Heidegger focused on established actions for opening up the world, Merleau-Ponty saw orientation and anchoring in situations more through sensual and physical experiences.

Michel Foucault

For Michel Foucault , Heidegger was “always the authoritative philosopher” and he saw his “entire philosophical development” determined by reading Heidegger. However, there is no consistent line of impact in Foucault's Heidegger reception, instead Foucault tied in with a multitude of individual ideas.

Jacques Derrida

With his deconstruction, Derrida tied in with Heidegger's program of destroying metaphysics, at the same time he wanted to distance himself from Heidegger with the term. He accused Heidegger of still remaining in metaphysical-categorizing thinking through the division “within metaphysics” and “outside of metaphysics”. However, this also shows that Derrida Heidegger's late thinking - that of a different beginning , in which Heidegger tries to overcome precisely this problem - no longer accepted.

Richard Rorty

Richard Rorty demonstrated a confident handling of Heidegger's approaches. Feeling committed neither to analytical philosophy nor to “ continental philosophy”, he saw Heidegger's philosophy as a “toolbox” and “quarry” from which it is worthwhile to keep good things and to drop bad things.

Gianni Vattimo ( pensiero debole )

In more recent Italian philosophy, Gianni Vattimo in particular ties in with Heidegger with the concept of pensiero debole (weak thinking). Against this Heidegger fascination in his country, the philosopher Paolo Rossi turns decisively .

Heidegger influenced numerous other philosophers such as Hermann Schmitz and Ernst Tugendhat .

Heidegger reception by analytical philosophers

Overall, most of the analytically trained philosophers are critical of Heidegger, especially in the early phases of analytical philosophy, when the majority of these were defined by a relatively strict orientation towards language-analytical methods and empirical criteria of meaning.

On the basis of language-analytical considerations, the production of various pseudo-problems is criticized by linguistic and conceptual confusion. This was primarily has Carnap's criticism contributed quite early prevail. Carnap did not criticize the fact that Heidegger's use of words was not based on any sensory data or that new word creations contradict common usage. Rather, it does not correspond to the rules of logic, because this, according to Carnap, had shown that z. B. the concept of nothing is neither a noun nor a verb - Heidegger, on the other hand, used it in both meanings. However, Carnap was clear that Heidegger could not be criticized because Heidegger had put logic as the basis of all philosophy in its place. Carnap's criticism is therefore broader when he demands that philosophy, like the natural sciences, should be more like a building on which everyone can help build according to generally accepted rules. Friedman describes this philosophical-political orientation as a new objectivity , a movement that committed itself to internationalism in an objective, scientific and anti-individualistic reorganization. In Friedman's assessment, Carnap's social and political motivation is essential for his attacks on Heidegger - Carnap himself spoke of the “fight against metaphysics”. In his study of the history of philosophy, Friedman shows the great contrast between the “continental” and the analytical tradition based on Heidegger and Carnap. Regarding the relationship between the two traditions, he sums up:

“We can either, with Carnap, hold on to formal logic as the ideal of universal validity and consequently limit ourselves to a philosophy of the mathematical exact sciences; or we can, with Heidegger, detach ourselves from logic and 'exact thinking', with the result that we ultimately give up the ideal of truly universal validity. If I am not mistaken, then it is precisely this dilemma that lies at the root of the split between 'analytical' and 'continental' tradition typical of the 20th century. "

In addition, there was the geographical split due to the migration of Carnap (and Cassirer ) after the Nazis came to power. Friedman, however, sees in Cassirer's work the best opportunity to bring both traditions to a dialogue, because Cassirer himself had always endeavored to integrate the most diverse ways of thinking into his philosophy of symbolic forms .

More recently, analytical reconstructions and defenses of some of Heidegger's views have also been presented. Worth mentioning are, for example, the work of Taylor Carman , who on the whole largely Kantian basis ascribes Heidegger to an interesting alternative position to the theories of intentionality of, for example, Daniel Dennett or John Searle .

The benevolent reception of Hubert Dreyfus is also known . The focus is on the first part of “Being and Time” and here again on the pragmatic approaches to be interpreted as well as the aspects to be made fruitful against Cartesian theses. Dreyfus opposes this Searle's conception of intentionality.

Other important analytical interpretations of partial aspects of Heidegger's work come, for example, from John Haugeland , Robert Brandom , William Blattner or John Richardson . There is also critical work, for example by William Valicella . Even Richard Rorty , who can apply for at least with his early work as an analytical philosopher, wrote about Heidegger. On the other hand, Rorty's development and its controversial assessment, partly also with the aforementioned analytical Heidegger interpreters, is itself a good example of the fact that the boundaries drawn earlier between “analytical” and “continental” tradition have become problematic in several respects.

Heidegger and East Asian thinking

Heidegger is the first great European thinker who not only found a broad reception in the East Asian region, but whose path of thought was also constantly accompanied by discussions with East Asian philosophers. As early as the twenties, many of the later important Japanese philosophers took part in his seminars, for example Tanabe Hajime , Miki Kiysoshi, Kuki Shuzo, Watsuji Tetsurō , Nishitani Keiji , Hisamatsu Shin'ichi and Tsujimura Kōichi as the most important. This led to a broad dialogue for both sides. Heidegger also tried to translate Daodejing together with the Chinese Paul Shih-yi Hisao in 1946 .

In “What does thinking mean?” Heidegger spoke for the first time of the “inevitable conversation with the East Asian world”. Elsewhere, he then started the process of encounter for 300 years. Heidegger sought dialogue and was of the opinion that it cannot simply be a matter of adopting, for example, Zen Buddhist or other Eastern world experiences.

There are currently seven Japanese translations of “Sein und Zeit” , as well as a Japanese complete edition , which is being developed parallel to the German one. Broad Heidegger research has also developed in Japan. As Tanabe emphasizes, Heidegger's strong reference to death is responsible for the comprehensive reception. B. in Daoism and Zen Buddhism is fundamental. Nishitani Keiji and Tsujimura Kōichi were particularly interested in Heidegger's (his) historical interpretation of nihilism and technology, since in their opinion historical aspects are lacking in Zen Buddhist thought.

In South Korea, Park Chong-Hong and Ha Ki-Rak, who dealt with Heidegger's work, should be mentioned above all. The Korean Cho Kah Kyung , who has been teaching in the USA for a long time, tries to build a bridge there between Western thinking and East Asian tradition. In China, the name Chang Chung-yuan should be mentioned, who organized the 1969 Honolulu symposium "Heidegger and the Eastern Thought".

In addition to East Asia, Heidegger was also well received in India. His most important student is Jarava Lal Metha, who also had direct contact with Heidegger and who, through his books, tries to make Heidegger's thinking known in India.

Reception in other areas

Heidegger's effect was not limited to philosophy. Heidegger influenced the psychoanalysts Medard Boss , Jacques Lacan and Ludwig Binswanger primarily through his work “Being and Time” . Heidegger's thinking has had a strong influence on Protestant theology since the 1920s (especially on Rudolf Bultmann - with whom Heidegger was friends - and his pupils). Gustav Siewerth , Johann Baptist Lotz , Karl Rahner , Bernhard Welte , Max Müller and Karl Lehmann are included in the "Catholic Heidegger School" ( Erich Przywara ) . A significant Heidegger effect can also be demonstrated in literary studies ( Emil Staiger ) and in translation studies ( George Steiner , Fritz Paepcke, Radegundis Stolze). In art history, the influences on Hans Jantzen and Kurt Bauch can be traced in particular.

Current Heidegger research

The current German-language Heidegger research is confusing, but three different institutions can be distinguished that are important players in Heidegger research: The Martin Heidegger Society was founded in 1985 and has been organizing a scientific conference about every two years on a topic of Heidegger's philosophy, most recently in 2013 in Tübingen. The current chairman of the board of the Heidegger Society is the Austrian philosopher Helmuth Vetter . The second chairman of the Heidegger Society is Klaus Neugebauer. (As of January 2015).

Alfred Denker and Holger Zaborowski established the so-called Heidegger research group, which has compiled a detailed bibliography of Heidegger's writings and which meets regularly, also about every two years, for the so-called “Messkicher Heidegger Conference” in Heidegger's hometown. The fifth conference on “Freedom and Dexterity” is scheduled for spring 2014. Since 2013, in cooperation with the Meßkircher Martin Heidegger Foundation, fellowships for work on the Meßkircher Martin Heidegger Archive have been awarded.

The first Martin Heidegger Institute in the German-speaking area has been in existence at the Bergische Universität Wuppertal since autumn 2012, under the direction of Peter Trawny . It deals critically with the works and teachings of Heidegger. According to Klaus Held, the idea of ​​founding such an institute is already over 40 years old, but often failed because of Heidegger himself. The institute is run by international Heidegger researchers, numerous renowned philosophers and the Heideggers family, who have already made rare documents available , supported. With their participation, international events are to take place in Wuppertal on a regular basis . The philosopher Friedrich-Wilhelm von Herrmann came to the university for the founding act .

In courses and lecture series, the aim is, among other things, to transfer Heidegger's originality to his reception. The editing work on Heidegger's complete edition is a key issue . To this end, the institute cooperates with the Institute for Phenomenological Research, which is also located at the Bergische Universität . At the end of May 2013, a three-day international conference on “Heidegger's Esotericism? On the relationship between philosophy and the public ”, the edition of individual volumes is being planned. In November, an international research day took place in the guest house on the Freudenberg campus of the university, in which the Albert Ludwigs University of Freiburg and the Alexander von Humboldt Foundation also took part. Experts from several countries were invited, including the Slovenian philosopher Dean Komel .

Parodies

Heidegger in satire

Heidegger was the subject of satires , mainly because of his peculiar way of dealing with language . For example, in Gabriel Marcel's play "La dimension Florestan" in which it ironic allusion to Heidegger's supposedly tautological 's parlance: "The pear birnt , you said, the apple apple t , you have added me yet unabweislicherer authority." Günter In his novel “Dog Years”, Grass lets a sergeant inspired by Heidegger appear with the words: “And the very word existence fits everywhere: 'Exist me a cigarette […]. If you don't shut up, I'll give you one. ' [...] Weekend vacation was called a break in existence. ” In her play “ Totenauberg ”, Elfriede Jelinek finds the phrase“ master of being ”in reference to Heidegger's letter of humanism . Her Austrian writer colleague Thomas Bernhard put a grotesque rant against Heidegger and the Heidegger reception in German intellectual circles in the mouth of the main character of his novel Alte Meister , the art critic Reger. Heidegger is referred to as a “foothills weak thinker”, Reger remarks on Heidegger reception: “The Heidegger cow has long been emaciated, but Heidegger milk is still being milked.” Thomas Pigor even wrote a “Heidegger song” in which listeners listened to Caribbean rhythms up and down the Black Forest is "heathed". The satirists Jörg Metes and Tex Rubinowitz have held up a mirror in front of Heidegger's style with the (naturally invented) "seven misrepresenting misprints in the first edition of Heidegger's 'Being and Time'", for example:

"S. 85 Middle: "The ontologically understood letting go is the prior release of beings to their inner-environmental handiness." Not however: "The ontologically understood letting go is the prior release of the rope ends on ..." "

The Nietzsche researcher Erich F. Podach criticized, in his opinion, far-fetched and intentionally incomprehensible interpretations of Nietzsche, such as those he saw in Heidegger, among others. To illustrate this, he gave an interpretation of Nietzsche's poem Under Daughters of the Desert in the style of Heidegger - but to expose the "desert daughters" as prostitutes in a rather profane way:

“[...] the playfulness of the absence testifies to the presence; It is the being at hand that is now important, and the metaphysical reproach of the right questioned here, was guaranteed by the fact that visitors to the oasis not only have one leg, but also the other of the desert daughter. [...] Certain parts of the interpretation can, despite their being encrypted, be unlocked to the question of deepening reading, such as the contribution to the monological in the return of what is known and called of the desert daughters. [...] "

Fritz Heidegger on his brother

In an unmistakable criticism of the modern economy that wants to recycle everything, he remarked in the Swabian-Alemannic dialect : "Martin hot me for nothing, he knows philosopher worre." (You couldn't use Martin for anything clever, there is he just became a philosopher.)

literature

To the reception in general

  • Dieter Thomä (ed.): Heidegger manual. Life - work - effect. Metzler Verlag, Stuttgart 2003.
  • Helmuth Vetter: Heidegger floor plan. A handbook on life and work. Verlag Meiner, Hamburg 2013.

To the reception outside of Germany

  • Hartmut Buchner (ed.): Japan and Heidegger: Commemorative publication of the city of Meßkirch for the hundredth birthday of Martin Heidegger. Thorbecke, Sigmaringen 1989.
  • Dominique Janicaud: Heidegger en France. 2 volumes. Albin Michel, Paris 2001.
  • David Pettigrew: French interpretations of Heidegger: an exceptional reception. SUNY Press, Albany, NY 2008.
  • Samuel Fleischacker (Ed.): Heidegger's Jewish followers: essays on Hannah Arendt, Leo Strauss, Hans Jonas, and Emmanuel Levinas. Duquesne Univ. Press, Pittsburgh, Penn. 2008.
  • Gabriel Liiceanu, Thomas Kleininger: Heidegger's Reception in Romania (1931–1987). In: Studia Phaenomenologica. I (2001) 1-2, pp. 25-43.
  • Andreas Michel: The French Heidegger reception and its linguistic consequences: a contribution to the investigation of specialist language varieties in philosophy. Winter, Heidelberg 2000.
  • Tom Rockmore: Heidegger and French Philosophy. from the American. and Franz. von Thomas Laugstien. To Klampen, Lüneburg 2000, ISBN 3-924245-96-7 .
  • Gwang-Il Seo: The Heidegger reception in Korea: with an insight into the problems of Heidegger research and interpretation. Dissertation. Düsseldorf 1991.
  • Translating Heidegger's Being and Time. (= Studia Phaenomenologica. Volume V). 2005, ISBN 973-50-1142-5 . (The subject of the volume is the worldwide reception of Heidegger's first major work)
  • Martin V. Woessner: Heidegger in America. Cambridge University Press, New York et al. 2011.

For reception in other disciplines

  • Larisa Cercel: Hermeneutics of Translation. Heidegger, Gadamer and translation studies. In: Studia Phaenomenologica. V (2005), pp. 335-353.
  • Larisa Cercel (Ed.): Translation and Hermeneutics / Traduction et herméneutique. Zeta Books, Bucharest 2009, ISBN 978-973-1997-06-3 .
  • Carlos Astrada, Kurt Bauch, Ludwig Binswanger, Robert Heiss, Hans Kunz, Erich Ruprecht, Wolfgang Schadewaldt, Heinz-Horst Schrey, Emil Staiger, Wilhelm Szilasi, Carl Friedrich von Weizsäcker: Martin Heidegger's influence on the sciences. Written on the occasion of his sixtieth birthday. Francke, Bern 1949.
  • Otto Pöggeler: Philosophy and hermeneutic theology: Heidegger, Bultmann and the consequences. Fink, Munich / Paderborn 2009.
  • Renate Maas: Hans Jantzen's analysis of Ottonian art: the pictorial space as a symbol of historical beginnings and ontological origins. In: Ingrid Baumgärtner et al. (Hrsg.): Raumkonzepte. V&R unipress, Göttingen 2009, pp. 95–123.
  • Renate Maas: Diaphanous and poetic. The artistic space with Martin Heidegger and Hans Jantzen. Kassel 2015, ISBN 978-3-86219-854-2 .

See also

Individual evidence

  1. ↑ Martin Heidegger: Being and Time ( GA 2), p. 181.
  2. ↑ Domenique Janicaud: Heidegger and Jean-Paul Sartre - recognition and rejection. In: Dieter Thomä: Heidegger Handbook. Metzler Verlag, Stuttgart 2003, p. 414.
  3. ↑ Domenique Janicaud: Heidegger and Jean-Paul Sartre - recognition and rejection. In: Dieter Thomä: Heidegger Handbook. Metzler Verlag, Stuttgart 2003, p. 415.
  4. ↑ See Simone de Beauvoir's report in her book Der Lauf der Dinge , Rowohlt, 1970.
  5. ^ Jean Cau: Croquis de mémoire. Julliard, Paris 1985, p. 253. (online)
  6. ↑ Jürgen Habermas: Urbanization of the Heidegger Province: Laudation to Hans-Georg Gadamer on the occasion of the award of the Hegel Prize of the City of Stuttgart, 1979. In: Hegel's legacy. Frankfurt am Main 1979, pp. 9-31.
  7. ^ Hannah Arendt, Martin Heidegger: Letters 1925–1975 and other testimonials. Frankfurt am Main 1999, p. 149.
  8. ↑ Martin Heidegger is eighty years old . In: people in dark times. Munich, Zurich 2001 (Tb)
  9. ↑ Michel Foucault: The return of morality. Conversation with Barbedette and André Scala . trans. by Wilhelm Miklenitsch, in Pravu Mazumdar: Foucault . dtv Verlag, Philosophy series now! Munich 1998, p. 492.
  10. ^ Cf. Robert Bernasconi: Heidegger and the deconstruction . in Dieter Thomä (Ed.): Heidegger Handbook . Stuttgart 2003, p. 443.
  11. ^ Rudolf Carnap: Overcoming metaphysics through logical analysis of language. In: Knowledge. 2, 1931/32.
  12. ↑ See Michael Friedman: Carnap, Cassirer, Heidegger, Divided Paths . Fischer Verlag, Frankfurt am Main 2004, pp. 25ff.
  13. ↑ Quoted from Michael Friedman: Carnap, Cassirer, Heidegger, Divided Paths . Fischer Verlag, Frankfurt am Main 2004, p. 31.
  14. ↑ Michael Friedman: Carnap, Cassirer, Heidegger, Divided Paths . Fischer Verlag, Frankfurt am Main 2004, p. 161.
  15. ↑ For the beginnings cf. also Dieter Thomä: Heidegger manual. 463ff
  16. ↑ Cf. Rolf Elberfeld : Heidegger and the East Asian thinking . in Dieter Thomä (Ed.): Heidegger Handbuch , Stuttgart 2003, p. 469f.
  17. ↑ What does thinking mean? ( GA 8), p. 136.
  18. ↑ Cf. Rolf Elberfeld: Heidegger and the East Asian thinking . in Dieter Thomä (Ed.): Heidegger Handbook. Stuttgart 2003, p. 469.
  19. ↑ Cf. Rolf Elberfeld: Heidegger and the East Asian thinking . in Dieter Thomä (Ed.): Heidegger Handbook. Stuttgart 2003, p. 471.
  20. ↑ Cf. Rolf Elberfeld: Heidegger and the East Asian thinking . in Dieter Thomä (Ed.): Heidegger Handbook. Stuttgart 2003, p. 472.
  21. ↑ Cf. Larisa Cercel: Hermeneutics of Translating. Heidegger, Gadamer and translation studies. In: Studia Phaenomenologica. V (2005), pp. 335-353.
  22. ↑ Renate Maas: Hans Jantzens analysis of Ottonian art: The image space as a symbol of historical beginning and ontological origin. In: Ingrid Baumgärtner et al. (Hrsg.): Raumkonzepte. V&R unipress, Göttingen 2009, pp. 95–123.
  23. ↑ Renate Maas: Diaphan and poetry. The artistic space with Martin Heidegger and Hans Jantzen. Kassel 2015.
  24. ^ Meetings of the Martin Heidegger Society. On: heidegger-gesellschaft.de.
  25. ↑ Alfred Denker, Papers. On: academia.edu.
  26. ↑ Professor Dr. Dr. Holger Zaborowski. On: pthv.de.
  27. ↑ Martin Heidegger Research Group. ( Memento of the original from November 20, 2014 in the Internet Archive ) Info: The archive link was inserted automatically and has not yet been checked. Please check the original and archive link according to the instructions and then remove this notice. On: heidegger.org.  @1@ 2Template: Webachiv / IABot / www.heidegger.org
  28. ^ Announcement of the Heidegger Fellowships 2014. On: martin-heidegger.eu.
  29. ↑ Meßkircher Martin Heidegger Foundation. ( Memento of the original from April 9, 2015 in the Internet Archive ) Info: The archive link was inserted automatically and has not yet been checked. Please check the original and archive link according to the instructions and then remove this notice. On: heidegger.org.  @1@ 2Template: Webachiv / IABot / www.heidegger.org
  30. ↑ In November the dissertation should be as good as finished. The Catalan Raimon Pàez Blanch spent two months doing research in the Heidegger archive in Meßkirch. On: schwaebische.de.
  31. ↑ Martin Heidegger Institute. On: uni-wuppertal.de.
  32. ↑ Unique: New university institute researches Heidegger's teachings. On: wz-newsline.de. January 20, 2013, accessed April 29, 2013.
  33. ↑ Quoted from Dieter Thomä (Ed.): Heidegger Handbuch . Stuttgart 2003, p. 511.
  34. ↑ Thomas Bernhard, Old Masters . Frankfurt am Main 1985.
  35. ↑ Song as MP3 ( memento of the original from July 19, 2011 in the Internet Archive ) Info: The archive link was inserted automatically and has not yet been checked. Please check the original and archive link according to the instructions and then remove this notice. (Excerpt) and lyrics ( memento of the original from September 28, 2007 in the Internet Archive ) Info: The archive link was inserted automatically and has not yet been checked. Please check the original and archive link according to the instructions and then remove this notice.  @1@ 2Template: Webachiv / IABot / www.pigor.de @1@ 2Template: Webachiv / IABot / www.pigor.de
  36. ↑ Jörg Metes, Tex Rubinowitz: The sexual fantasies of the great tits. Lists that explain the world. Kiepenheuer and Witsch, Cologne 1997, ISBN 3-462-02548-1 , p. 85.
  37. ↑ From the Dionysus Dithyrambs , modified version of the chapter of the same name in the fourth part of Also Spoke Zarathustra ; KSA 6, pp. 381-387.
  38. ↑ Erich F. Podach: Friedrich Nietzsche's works of collapse. Wolfgang Rothe Verlag, Heidelberg 1961, pp. 362-364. The passage actually refers to an interpretation by K.-H. Volkmann-Schlucks , whose style, however, clearly follows Heidegger's.