Martin Heidegger and National Socialism
The relationship of the German philosopher Martin Heidegger to National Socialism (also: The Heidegger case ) can be proven from the beginning of the 1930s and was already the subject of international criticism outside of the scientific disciplines in mid-1933.
In research, there is agreement that Heidegger was enthusiastic about what he called the “National Socialist Revolution” in the “ Third Reich ”. In 1930 he began to read the Völkischer Beobachter . In 1932 he elected the NSDAP . After the seizure of power by the Nazis he wanted to participate in the transformation of society, especially through the introduction of the leadership principle at the universities . On April 21, 1933 he was elected rector of the University of Freiburg by his colleagues and on May 1, 1933 he joined the NSDAP, which celebrated his accession in public and to which he belonged until the end of the Nazi regime.
Despite all of Heidegger's commitments to National Socialism, his behavior was ambivalent. As rector, he tried in several cases to alleviate the fate of Jewish university members as far as possible. On the other hand, he denounced a Jewish and a non-Jewish colleague. In political speeches, many of which were given to students, he paid homage to Adolf Hitler, who at the time had almost messianic features for him . On the occasion of the rally of the National Socialist Teachers 'Union (NSLB) on November 11, 1933 in Leipzig, he gave one of the constituent speeches on the German professors' commitment to Adolf Hitler in front of thousands of listeners . On December 1, 1933, Heidegger also joined the NSLB. In 1934 he resigned from his post as rector prematurely, but continued to stand up for Hitler and National Socialism, in particular with the declaration of the German scientists behind Adolf Hitler published in the Völkischer Beobachter and through his membership in the committee for legal philosophy founded by Hans Frank , in which he worked until at least 1936. Heidegger's "disenchantment" with regard to the National Socialists found the first contemporary documented response in 1938 - from the exiled Bruno Altmann . Despite the stated disillusionment, Heidegger continued to give lectures and write writings that became relevant in the controversy after 1945. Some of these texts belong to the inventory which, in accordance with his will, was only gradually published as an inheritance in the complete edition .
After the Second World War , Heidegger was banned from teaching until he retired in 1951. He decided to posthumously publish the few statements he gave after the settlement process during the Nazi era.
Heidegger research today is increasingly focused on the question of whether and to what extent the National Socialist ideology can also be demonstrated in his philosophical thoughts. Since the beginning of the publication of the Black Booklet in 2014, the aspect of anti-Semitism has been discussed. The thesis of participation in Nazi crimes was discussed internationally in 2017 and 2018 in the debate on Martin Heidegger and fake news .
.jpg)
Posture before 1933
Relationship to Weimar Democracy
Heidegger's call for "new people" and leaders
In the year in which the First World War began, Heidegger finally opened up to “factual life” as the “philosophical starting point” when his teacher Edmund Husserl turned away from the “transcendental I” in favor of a less abstract and more experienced “historical I”. With this rejection of the transcendental aspect of phenomenology and the turn to mere existence, Heidegger also took positions that corresponded to the “ Ideas of 1914 ” and, for example, in Max Scheler's Genius des War (1915), with the definition of war as the possibility Express revelation of true substance.
Still in the service of the civil administration of the German Army and responsible for post and weather observation, Heidegger wrote a letter to his wife on October 6, 1918 complaining about the "complete aimlessness u. Holiness and alienation of values “that dominated the life of the state. In the looming defeat of the war, his dissatisfaction with those politically and militarily responsible resulted in a demand that combined the new with the original and the spirit:
“Only new people who have an original relationship with the spirit and the like can help. carry his demands within himself and I myself recognize more and more urgently the need for leaders - only the individual is creative (also in leadership) - the masses never. "
These comments in personal letters are among the earliest testimonies to be criticized in the “Heidegger Debate”. Heidegger stamped “the masses who paid for their megalomania with their blood as uncreative” (Anton Fischer). Regarding the concept of leaders, it is said that he did not think of political, but of “spiritual” leaders ( Holger Zaborowski ). Because the Führer idea was very widespread even before the NSDAP was founded (1920) - not only in political contexts, but also among poets and philosophers such as Stefan George , Georg Simmel , Hermann von Keyserling or Hans Blüher , one of the central ideologues of the youth movement whose charismatic “Führer” idea contributed to the boom of this idea among Heidegger and others.
Holistic concept for the renewal of the university
Heidegger also saw the university in crisis. As early as 1918 he stated in a letter to his lover Elisabeth Blochmann: “This simple and calm line of spiritual being u. Life has been lost in our universities - anyone who has 'seen' this is not surprised at the inner helplessness of the academic youth, but also sees in programmatic reform proposals and the like. Theories about the 'nature of the university' just the same feeble confusion. Spiritual life can only be exemplified u. The idea of a renewal of the university based on the example of the Platonic Academy and the medieval monasteries moved Heidegger continuously until the rectorate (see below). He was concerned with restoring the connection between theory and practice, which requires a personal relationship between teachers and students at the university: “Relationships in life, however, are only renewed in the return to the real origins of the mind; as historical phenomena, they require calm and the security of genetic consolidation, in other words: the inner truthfulness of valuable, self-building life. ”For Heidegger, philosophy must determine academic life holistically in all subjects, in the sense of the“ habitus of a personal existence ”. This description of his ideal, which is still influenced by the philosophy of life , also includes an "exemplary example" by the teachers.
At a birthday party for Edmund Husserl in 1920 he found a partner in Karl Jaspers who was also close to the topic and who had similar thoughts. However, Jaspers reacted cautiously to the "combat community" sought after during a joint one-week retreat in the Jaspers von Heidegger house. “Both criticize the modern 'massing'; Jaspers does this from a liberal, Heidegger from a nationalist perspective. "
Doxography on the “fighting community” with Jaspers
Friendship with the disciples
According to his student Günther Anders , Heidegger had already represented a “ mentality not very far removed from Blubo ” in the 1920s . Heidegger was also friends with the brothers Ernst and Friedrich Georg Jünger in the 1920s , was influenced by their socio-political ideas and in turn influenced them both philosophically. Like her, he was close to the movement of the “ Conservative Revolution ”, which rejected the Weimar Republic and wanted to replace it with an elitist and authoritarian “ Third Reich ”. With many other literary representatives of the war youth generation , he shared a decided rejection of bourgeois morality, which was regarded as hypocritical after the First World War, in favor of a warlike realism . What Heidegger originally had in common with National Socialism was the turning away from liberal , socialist and restorative - conservative currents in the Weimar Republic . However, he was not politically active, but strove for an ordinariate .
Politicization during the ordinariate
With the beginning of the extraordinary position in Marburg in 1923, a self-portrayal emerged that continued with the Freiburg full-time professorship in 1928 and stood in contrast to the conventions of academic scholars: Heidegger dresses like the Bündische Jugend and presents himself as an unadapted, elitist outsider, the wants to radically renew the university philosophically and pedagogically. His student Max Müller testifies for this winter semester:
“None of his students thought of politics back then. No political word was used in the exercises. [...] Heidegger and his students had a completely different style than the other professors. They went on excursions, hikes on foot and on skis together. There, of course, the relationship to nationality , to nature, but also to the youth movement was expressed. The word 'völkisch' was very close to him. He wasn't thinking of just any party. His esteem for the people was also linked to certain scientific prejudices, e.g. B. with the absolute rejection of sociology and psychology as urban- decadent ways of thinking. [...] A romanticism held him to ' blood and soil ', and technicality drew him to the 'new society'! "
But the political aspect of this popular style emerged when Heidegger, in his lecture “Introduction to Philosophy” from 1928/1929, saw the philosopher at the university called “to take on something like a leadership in the respective whole of the historical coexistence”.
And the lecture the following year on "Basic Concepts of Metaphysics", in which he refers to Nietzsche's radical questioning of Christianity, was seen as a document of the growing politicization of Heidegger's philosophy. In this time of crisis in the Weimar Republic, he stated that boredom was the basic mood and now called on people not to counteract it, but to let them vote through, knowing that this demand did not fit into the “programmatism” of the time. In the political trivialities and party bickering of liberal democracy , “in all the organizing, programming and trying things out”, he saw only “a general, satisfied feeling of being safe”. The radicalism that scornfully ridicules “today's normal people and honest man”, who “becomes anxious and sometimes black in front of their eyes”, demand the great turn-around:
“We must first call again for someone who can terrify our existence. For what about our existence when such an event as the world war has passed us by essentially without a trace? "
Approach to the NSDAP
From worshiping Hitler to calling for a dictatorship
On October 2, 1930, Heidegger wrote to his wife: “I just had a Völkisch observer with me . Father was very interested in it. The Leipzig trial seems to revert to the famous accusers. There is a big Hitler party here on Saturday; There were huge posters everywhere: 'We're attacking!' ”In a Christmas letter from 1931, he suggested to his brother Fritz that he should come to terms with Hitler's Mein Kampf , and for Christmas he gave him a copy of it. He assessed Hitler as the person who alone could be trusted to save the West. For him he is the charismatic leader, distinguished by an infallible “political instinct”. Heidegger recommended books such as Hans Grimms Volk ohne Raum and Werner Beumelburgs Deutschland in Ketten , a work from 1931 that wanted to free the German nation, which was depressed by the Versailles Peace Treaty, from its “chains” and called on them to become the guardians of their fate .
At the turn of 1931/32, Heidegger's former doctoral student Hermann Mörchen from Marburg paid him a visit to the hut in Todtnauberg, where Elfride was also present. As Mörchen noted in his diary, his former teacher has now taken the political positions of his wife:
“Of course we didn't speak of philosophy, but above all of National Socialism. The once liberal supporter of Gertrud Bäumer has become a National Socialist, and her husband is following her! I would not have thought it, and yet it is not really surprising. He does not understand much about politics, and so his disgust for all mediocre half-measures leads him to hope for something from the party, which promises to do something decisive and thus above all to effectively counter communism. Democratic idealism and Brüning's conscientiousness could, once it got that far, achieve nothing. So today a dictatorship that does not shrink from Boxheimer means must be approved. Only through such a dictatorship can the worse communist one, which annihilates all individual personality structures and thus all culture in the occidental sense, be avoided. He hardly deals with individual political issues. Those who live up here have different standards for all of this. "
The remote hut existence described in this way in the context of the turn to National Socialism as its explanatory model is controversial in research. Heidegger poses as a lonely philosopher who, far from the “humanitarian plains”, “sits enthroned on solitary peaks of spirituality”. S. Vietta rates the local situation in Todtnauberg as a bad condition "to follow and understand political events." On the other hand, the objection is that "Heidegger is once again stylized as a thinker alien to the world and politics", "who is blind in something, that he was unable to overlook, stumbled into it. ”In addition to these interpretations for the beginning of the affinity to National Socialist ideology, researchers and others are debating. a. the possibility of an instrumentally sensible motive in which National Socialism appeared to him to be the only means against the “cultural destruction by communism”, and the possibility of an already existing character that “expressed itself in his texts”. The discussion as to whether and to what extent there was a direct connection between Heidegger's philosophical work and his political thinking is also broad. (More under reception)
Heidegger's steps towards the election of Adolf Hitler
At the beginning of 1932 Heidegger criticized his brother Brüning's efforts to pursue Hindenburg's re-election and recommended that Hitler be elected as Reich President. He dismissed objections to this and the vulgarity of the Nazis as "concerns of frightened citizens". In June 1932, for example, he wrote to his wife about the "bumbling and unclear stuff of the Nazis".
“The 'level' in Völkisch. Observer]. is z. Z. again under all criticism - if the movement did not otherwise have its mission, one could grasp the horror. […] The clearer it becomes to me where I belong and what else I can do from my work and the like. this time also has to demand from the innermost self [...] the more lonely it becomes [...]. "
In the context of the Weimar Republic, like many of his contemporaries, he regarded the NSDAP as a lesser evil, a group with a narrowly defined task:
"The Nazis demand so much effort from you, it is still better than this creeping poisoning to which we have been exposed in the last decades under the catchphrase 'culture' and 'spirit'."
In the Reichstag election of July 31, 1932 , Heidegger, according to his son Hermann, elected the Völkisch Württemberg farmers and wine growers' association . When Hitler gave his election speech in Freiburg two days earlier, his father did not come with us. In October 1932 there was once again a critical attitude towards the untrained and inexperienced National Socialists:
“Of course the Nat.soz. fail everywhere. ... But the assumption is confirmed that the Naz. no trained u. experienced people have. I find the article Zehrers u. his criticism of Naz.soz. very good."
In the next Reichstag election on November 6, 1932 (there was no parliamentary majority in July), Heidegger nevertheless elected the NSDAP. He still refused to join the party. In December 1932, Rudolf Bultmann wrote to inquire that he had heard of rumors "that you are now also politically active and have become a member of the National Socialist Party." In view of the "splendid National Socialist students" he himself had placed great hopes in the movement, yes are now the impressions "depressing". Heidegger replied that this was just a "latrine rumor" and that he would "never" be a member of the NSDAP. And he explains: “On the other hand, I am very positive about many things, despite the great inhibitions that I have for example. B. compared to the 'spirit' and the 'level' in 'cultural' things. "
On June 22, 1932, the writer Lion Feuchtwanger wrote to Ernst Simon (philosopher) : “Heidegger is the opening credits of the Nat.-Soz. u. is with his seminar the party long with skin u. Prescribed hair. "
On January 30, 1933, the day Hitler was appointed Chancellor, Heidegger gave a negative lecture on the writer Erwin Guido Kolbenheyer, whom Hitler admired . He did not sign the appeal “Die deutsche Geisteswelt für Liste 1” (NSDAP), which appeared in the Völkischer Beobachter on March 4, 1933 , the day before the next Reichstag election (two Freiburg professors were among the signatories). But at the end of the same month he wrote to Elisabeth Blochmann: “For me, the current events - precisely because a lot remains dark and unresolved - an unusual collecting power. It increases the will and to work the security in the service of a large order and to help build a popularly founded world. ”The“ path of the first revolution ”, which he saw in“ Hitler's work ”, should only be“ a second and prepare deeper "revolution. He expresses his disappointment over the first weeks of the National Socialist seizure of power in a further letter dated April 12: “Nevertheless, many people went there and back. are busy here, you can't see what has to be done with the universities. ”Although a lot is being done, this kind of activism does not lead to the right steps. It is true that the new state's mistrust of the universities, "where there is a lot of reaction right now," is right. However, this should not lead to “the opposite mistake of only handing over the tasks to party comrades”.
Relationship with Jews (1916–1933)
Heidegger's statements about Jews and his personal relationship with them are controversial in their evaluation today. For the period from 1916 to 1933, primarily documents that he wrote himself, but also testimonies from others, are used. In the private letters to his future wife Elfride, but also in less personal letters, there are formulations that, according to the opinion of the majority of researchers, correspond to anti-Semitic stereotypes. For example, he writes about his assistant: “Brock - I don't think he can work in the seminary. It's strange how the Jew is missing something. ”Personal relationships with Jewish colleagues like Ernst Cassirer and Hannah Arendt were also characterized by respect. The reports that Heidegger prepared at the end of 1932 and in 1933 on the Jewish philosophers Siegfried Marck and Richard Hönigswald are debated in the context of self-interest and the question of whether his attitude towards Jews had changed after 1933. Edmund Husserl saw in him in May 1932 the transition to “harsh anti-Semitism.” Whether Heidegger was anti-Semite, conditionally or not at all, is represented by the whole spectrum of conceivable opinions in research.
Relevant quotes in letters (1916–1932)
Letters to Elfride
Before 1933, Heidegger made several statements about Jews in private letters. In October 1916, in the context of the “ Jewish census ”, he wrote to his future wife Elfride: “The Judaization of our culture a . Universities, however, are terrifying and I think the German race should still muster as much inner strength as possible to get up. However, the capital ! ”In 1920 he wrote to her:
“There is a lot of talk here about the fact that so many cattle are now being bought from the villages by the Jews [...]. The farmers up here are also gradually becoming impudent u. everything is inundated with Jews and Slide. "
Shortly afterwards, he panned a work on Hölderlin with the expression "... sometimes one would like to become a spiritual anti-Semite". In the echo of research, these letter quotations appear partly only as a result of his anti-modernism and “anti-urbanism”, but partly as evidence of his anti-Semitism: through the formulation of “Jews and smugglers”, as a stereotype of the “haggling Jew”, “the one in every anti-Semitism represents one of the most familiar figures in Judaism ”. In 1924 he asked himself how his colleague Paul Jacobsthal managed to pay his assistant more than he, Heidegger, earned as an associate professor and answered: "The Jews!"
In 1928, now in Marburg, Heidegger wrote to his wife about his students: “Of course: the best are - Jews.” Insofar as Elfride is considered an anti-Semite, the interpretation of the sentence is open. Occasionally, however, there were expressions of appreciation towards Jews to her, possibly “in order to exert a moderating influence on his wife.” So he had written to her in 1920 that he “learned a lot while studying from Bergson” and on June 9, 1932: “Baeumler ordered the 'Jüdische Rundschau' for me, which provides excellent information and advice. Has level ". Against this again, on June 20 of the same year: “What you said about the Judenblatt u. Writing the tick [?] was already my thought. One cannot be suspicious enough here. "
The letter to Schwoerer and the word "Verjudung" (1929)
As in the private letter to Elfride (see above), Heidegger now also used the term "Judgment" in a more official letter. In order to receive a scholarship for Eduard Baumgarten and to win him over as an assistant, on October 2, 1929 he sent a request to the deputy president of the Notgemeinschaft der deutschen Wissenschaft , the independent administrative lawyer Victor Schwoerer:
"What I was only able to indicate indirectly in my testimony, I can say more clearly here: It is about nothing less than the indispensable reflection that we are faced with the choice of bringing real down-to-earth forces and educators back to our German intellectual life, or the growing ones Judgment in the further u. in the narrower sense finally to be delivered. "
Ulrich Sieg , who published the letter in 1989, comments: "Even if Heidegger may not have been an anti-Semite in the biological sense, there should no longer be any doubt about his anti-Semitic sentiments." Tom Rockmore also judges that Heidegger's anti-Semitism is clear and even with that Antibiologism compatible. The student of Heidegger and controversial conservative historian Ernst Nolte , on the other hand, claims that Schwoerer as “anti-anti-Semites” could have used “the word 'Judgment'” “without causing offense.” Schwoerer were completely alien to anti-Semitic prejudices. “Judgment” is set in opposition to being down-to-earth. Otto Pöggeler emphasizes that Nietzsche's wild attacks against Judaism as the root of all uprooting and moralization would "certainly" be leading if Heidegger at that time demanded "real down-to-earth forces and educators" against "the growing Judaism". Heidegger had also applied for a scholarship for Karl Löwith at Schwoerer a year earlier .
Doxography on the word "Verjudung" in writing to Schwoerer
Response to accusations of anti-Semitism (1932)
In 1932, Heidegger responded in the last letter to Hannah Arendt (until 1950) to her question about the rumors of his anti-Semitism that were heard among Jewish students. In it, he calls the allegations "defamation", but on the other hand he admits to anti-Semitism "in university issues":
“The rumors that worry you are calumnies that fit perfectly with the other experiences I've had in recent years. The fact that I cannot exclude Jews from the seminar invitations well may result from the fact that in the last 4 semesters I had no seminar invitation at all. The fact that I shouldn't greet Jews is such bad gossip that I will certainly remember it in future. To clarify how I relate to Jews, simply the following facts: I am on leave this winter semester and therefore announced in good time in the summer that I would like to be left alone and not accept work and the like. Anyone who comes anyway and urgently needs to and can do a doctorate is a Jew. Anyone who can come to me monthly to report on a major ongoing work (neither dissertation nor habilitation project) is a Jew again. Anyone who sent me an extensive paper for urgent review a few weeks ago is a Jew. The two scholarship holders of the Notgemeinschaft, which I got through in the last 3 semesters, are Jews. Anyone who receives a scholarship to Rome through me is a Jew. Whoever wants to call that 'enraged anti-Semitism' may do it. Incidentally, I am just as anti-Semite on university issues today as I was 10 years ago and in Marburg, where I even found the support of Jacobsthal and Friedländer for this anti-Semitism . This has nothing to do with personal relationships with Jews (e.g. Husserl, Misch , Cassirer and others). And it can certainly not affect the relationship with you. "
Whether “Heidegger has thus declared himself to be an 'anti-Semite' to Hannah Arendt” or rather denies that he is, is undecided in research. The self-accusation is "cynical" and "nebulous", says Bernd Grün. How the anti-Semitism mentioned by Heidegger is supposed to have found the "support" of two colleagues of Jewish origin has not yet been clarified either. It is also controversial whether the letter contains hostility, resentment (Zaborowski) or pride (Obermayer) towards Jewish students. Apart from the fact that Heidegger describes here as a favor, which is part of the duties of his office, it is clear in his defense that he divides the Germans into Jews and non-Jews.
The two reports on Siegfried Marck
Siegfried Marck , who was part of the critical Wroclaw School of Neo-Kantianism around Richard Hönigswald, was to be appointed as his successor at the Silesian Friedrich Wilhelms University there in 1929. The socialist of Jewish descent viewed the existential philosophy, especially that of Heidegger, in an opposing way, and referred to it as the "fashion philosophy of European fascism". In Marck's words, the emotional moments were "raised to cult, enveloped in romantic fog and sealed off from progress, reason and science." For the appointment to Breslau, however, two reports were requested from Heidegger, who was previously attacked by Marck in this way. On November 7, 1929 he wrote in the first report: “I saw Mr. Marck here in Rickert's seminar shortly before the war. His 'weighty' demeanor by no means encouraged me to get to know him. "
In the report, Heidegger states that he only knew of Marck's publication The Dialectic in Contemporary Philosophy , in which Heidegger's philosophy is criticized, which, according to him, is one of those undertakings that represent “no serious scientific needs and tasks”. The book lacks "just like the similar kind of the Frankfurt private lecturer Fritz Heinemann any substance and all heavy weights".
The first report concludes: “There is no need for me to go into the book here, because it does not belong at all to the class of publications that can be considered as proof of qualification for a professorship. In general, I am amazed that Mr M. is up for debate on this question of composition. ”In the second report, Heidegger recommended the psychologists Kurt Lewin , because of their“ scientific quality ”, and Adhémar Gelb , who had a“ certain philosophical instinct ”and was“ humane very excellent fellow ”. Commenting on the first publication of the expert report in 1989, N. Kapferer judges that Marck “was a philosopher from the point of view of his entire approach that Heidegger could not accept” and continues: “In addition, there is certainly also the fact that Marck had dared to criticize him . Will one be allowed to assume an anti-Semitic motive here? Kurt Lewin and Adhemar Gelb, recommended by Heidegger, both came from Jewish parents. ”Despite the negative reports from Heidegger, Siegfried Marck was appointed Hönigswald's successor at the University of Breslau in March 1930.
Relationship with Ernst Cassirer (1923–1932)
In December 1923, during a "discussion that the author was able to maintain occasionally in a lecture in the Hamburg local chapter of the Kant Society (...) with C.", the first of three encounters between Heidegger and his older and ubiquitous colleague Ernst Cassirer took place . In that first conversation, Heidegger said in Sein und Zeit , “there was a consensus in the requirement of an existential analytics”. In 1926 he was accepted into the appointment committee for the chair of philosophy at the University of Marburg , Heidegger wrote to Jaspers: “One part of the faculty has the only principle: no Jews and, if possible, a German national; the other ( Jaensch and his appendix): only mediocre and nothing dangerous. ”Three months later, a criticism of it reads: The philosopher of Jewish origin Ernst Cassirer was“ cut off in the introduction to the list as an honor (...) And what the worst was - factually, the gentlemen had no interest at all - it was only a matter of strengthening the German national and ethnic party in the faculty ”. According to Zaborowski, “these letters do not point to nationalist or anti-Semitic thinking by Heidegger at all - on the contrary”.
The second meeting with Cassirer, which followed three years later, took place in the spring of 1929 during the Davos disputation and is often considered evidence of the assumed contradiction between Heidegger and Jewish philosophy. Ernst Cassirer's wife Toni, who sat next to him for two weeks in the evenings during the Davos university days while Cassirer was ill, reported in retrospect in 1948 that she had been expressly prepared for “Heidegger's strange appearance (...):“ his rejection of any social convention was known to us; likewise his hostility to the neo-Kantians , especially to Hermann Cohen . His tendency towards anti-Semitism was not alien to us either. ”According to Toni Cassirer, Heidegger was willing to“ dust the work of the Jewish founder of Neo-Kantianism and destroy Ernst if possible ”. However: “I started such a naive conversation as if I knew nothing of his philosophical or personal antipathies.” Soon she saw herself with pleasure, “this hard dough like a bread roll that has been dipped in warm milk soften. "Finally:" When Ernst got up from the sickbed, it was a difficult situation for Heidegger, who now knew so much about him personally, to hold out the planned hostile attitude. "However, Heidegger had already visited the sick Cassirer at the sickbed, and whether it was has actually given a "planned hostile attitude" is otherwise unproven and questionable in view of the first respectful meeting. During the third meeting, which took place at Heidegger's in Freiburg in 1932, he appeared to his interlocutor Cassirer to be “open-minded and very friendly”.
Doxography based on Toni Cassirer's quote
The time of the Freiburg rectorate (1933–1934)
In research, the election of Heidegger as the new rector of the Albert-Ludwigs-Universität Freiburg on April 21, 1933 was recognized as exemplary for the National Socialist “ Gleichschaltung ” of German universities. The background of the events that led to his predecessor, the democratically minded professor of anatomy Wilhelm von Möllendorff , resigning after only six days in office, are still unclear. The focus is, among others, to debate the impact had the two decrees on the new personnel policy that the later Reich Governor in Baden and Gauleiter Robert Wagner decided on 6 April 1933 and the role of the Nazi party through intermediaries such as the philologist Wolfgang Aly it took and finally, to what extent Heidegger himself helped to take over the rectorate of the university. Heidegger began the implementation of the reorganization of the educational institutions in the sense of holistic concepts there with the establishment of the Führer principle and in Todtnauberg with the so-called science camp, in which he at least allowed a lecture on race theory.
Rector of the NS "Gleichschaltung"
Beginning of NSDAP rule and Heidegger's election
On December 17, 1932, Wilhelm von Möllendorff was elected as the new rector of the Freiburg University , and on April 15, 1933, he duly assumed his office. But after the changed balance of power as a result of the Reichstag election of March 1933 , from which the NSDAP emerged as the strongest party in Baden with 49 percent of the votes, the National Socialists demanded the resignation of the Baden government, whereupon Robert Wagner on March 9, 1933 with the SA and SS -Units in front of the Home Office and took over government. The NSDAP Gauleiter, who had already participated in the Hitler putsch and was later one of those responsible for the Wagner-Bürckel action , then, as the new ruler in Baden, had the so-called "Baden Jewish Laws" (see below) announced on April 5, 1933 without any legal basis the next day and before the law for the restoration of the civil service of April 7, 1933 came into force and provided for the removal of all Jewish scientists from university service. In addition, Wagner issued a decree calling for the election of new university senates.
The boycott of Jews begun nationwide on April 1, 1933, had been supplemented by the Freiburg Nazi campaign paper “ Der Alemanne ” with a boycott list, which had been added: “The Jewish teachers and doctors at the universities are listed in a special way,” which was in the Freiburg University led to "confusion". On April 9, Freiburg's mayor, Karl Bender, was forced to resign and was replaced the next day by the NSDAP district leader Franz Kerber . Two days later, Cologne University took the lead in the process of the self-chosen "synchronization" of the German universities, in that the rector, Godehard Josef Ebers , resigned from the office that was held by Ernst Leupold , a member of the Stahlhelm, Bund der Frontsoldaten and confidante of the NSDAP, What the Nazi minister of education Bernhard Rust called a "trend-setting example" was adopted and will have justified the beginning of the resignation of the still incumbent rector of Freiburg University, Joseph Sauer , and the designated rector von Möllendorff at the rectors' conference in Wiesbaden on the following day : They hardly saw themselves in a position to prevent the synchronization in Freiburg. Von Möllendorff was already thinking of resigning.
When von Möllendorff, who was hostile to the National Socialists for his democratic convictions, became the rector of the university on April 15 according to the vote of the previous year, talks had already begun behind the scenes to end his term of office immediately in favor of a candidate whose election the new one Took power relations into account. It is undisputed that Sauer and the classical philologist Wolfgang Schadewaldt negotiated before von Möllendorff took office to propose the rector's office to Heidegger, who is a friend of Schadewaldt, although it is unclear whether Heidegger used his friend and colleague as a middleman or rather let himself be convinced by him and what role he played NSDAP and SA member Wolfgang Aly fell to it, who presented himself as a "gray eminence" in the background. A diary entry shows that Sauer hesitated because he did not trust Heidegger with the office.
The new rector was attacked in the Alemannen on the Tuesday after the Easter holidays. Under the heading “Herr von Möllendorff as rector of the university unsustainable” it said on April 18: “We cannot imagine how a sphere of trust can arise between Professor von Möllendorff and the predominantly National Socialist student body. (...) We encourage Prof. Möllendorff to take the opportunity and not stand in the way of a reorganization of the university. ”On the same day, von Möllendorff reported on the Jewish decrees in a senate meeting and announced that he would have the senate re-elected, whereupon the Rector and Senate announced their resignation on April 20. The next day the plenum met with partly new members - 13 Jewish participants had meanwhile been on leave due to the racial legislation and were replaced by non-Jewish colleagues - and on von Möllendorff's proposal, Heidegger was almost unanimously elected as the new rector.
Doxography on von Möllendorff's resignation and Heidegger's candidacy
Heidegger's resolutions on Nazi racial policy
Due to the new racist legal situation, but also due to corresponding activities in the predominantly National Socialist student body, Heidegger, as the elected rector of the Gleichschaltung of the university, had to make several decisions in this regard before taking office.
- The resolution on the Wagner decree A 7642
The decree issued on April 6, 1933 by Nazi Gauleiter Wagner to remove Jewish scientists from the Baden universities did not contain a “ front-line combatant privilege ”, according to the scholars of Jewish origin who served in World War I in Section 3 (2) of the Professional Civil Service Act (BBG) had been spared from the scheme. After a request from the University of Freiburg on April 22, 1933 regarding the priority of both laws, the new, still acting minister of education, Otto Wacker , replied on April 26 that the Wagner decree “will not be affected” by the state-wide law. Thereupon Heidegger, in his capacity as the designated rector, put the Wagner decree into force by resolution 4012 at the university against the exception regulation.
“The representative of the Reich (...) saw himself compelled to order (...) in the interest of the Jews living in Baden that all (...) members of the Jewish race are to be taken off duty with immediate effect until further notice. (...)
Robert Wagner, April 6, 1933. ”
“I ask you to ensure that the decree of April 6, 1933 (…) is fully and clearly implemented, otherwise the university runs the risk of making any advocacy for threatened colleagues futile.
(...) Heidegger, April 28, 1933. "
On the same day, in the priority dispute with the BBG, the Minister of Education and Cultural Affairs Wacker immediately revoked decree 7642 and thus some leave of absence "until final clarification".
Doxography for the Wagner decree
- On May 3, Heidegger limited the number of “non-Aryan” students to 1.5 percent in accordance with the law against overcrowding in German schools and universities . In Freiburg, however, fewer students of Jewish origin were matriculated for the summer semester of 1933, so this provisional maximum limit was not reached in any case.
- On May 4, Heidegger signed a decree by the Baden university advisor and SA member Eugen Fehrle , which granted discounts to students "who have been in the SA, SS, or military associations in the last few years in the fight for the national survey": On the other hand, discounts may no longer be given to Jewish or Marxist students. ”However, at the University of Freiburg students of Jewish descent have been granted fee waivers.
- On the prohibition of the poster "Against the un-German spirit" ("Judenplakat")
Heidegger stated in writing in 1945 - almost verbatim in the Spiegel interview in 1966 - he had, as rector, prevented it from being hung:
“My first official act on the second day of my rectorate was the prohibition of hanging up the 'Jewish poster' in any rooms belonging to the university. The poster was already up at all German universities. (...) About eight days later there was a telephone call from the SA University Office to the top SA leadership from an SA group leader Dr. Baumann. He asked for the poster for Jews to be displayed. If I refuse, I would have to expect my dismissal, if not the closure of the university. I continued to refuse. "
This statement is also controversial, as there is no written evidence for Heidegger's version.
Doxography for the poster "Against the un-German spirit"
- Inaction in the Neo-Friburgia case
On May 16, the house of the Jewish student association “Neo-Friburgia”, which had to disband on April 20, was besieged without permission from the NS student union. But Heidegger did nothing. After the house was looted and destroyed by the mob on June 28, 1933, the rectorate declined to investigate.
Heidegger's entry into the NSDAP
On May 1st, National Labor Day , Heidegger and his wife Elfride joined the NSDAP in a public ceremony. According to Martin to Fritz Heidegger , this happened “not only out of inner conviction”, but “also out of the awareness that this is the only way to purify and clarify the whole movement. Even if you do not make up your mind to do so at the moment, I would advise you to prepare yourself internally for entry and in no way pay attention to what is going on around you in terms of low and less pleasant things. "
The time of joining is considered well considered: he initially wanted to secure his rector's office and maintain room for maneuver vis-à-vis colleagues who were now surprised by the move. In his autobiography, Jaspers described his reaction when Heidegger joined the NSDAP: “'How should a person as uneducated as Hitler rule Germany?' - 'Education is completely indifferent', he replied, 'just look at his wonderful hands!' [...] I was at a loss. Heidegger had not told me anything about his National Socialist inclinations before 1933. “According to Gerhard Ritter, however, Heidegger had been known as a National Socialist long before 1933.
Doxography on Heidegger's entry into the NSDAP
To the "Gleichschaltung" and to the national struggle
- Adolf Lampe rated as "politically unreliable"
In May 1933 Heidegger prevented the extension of the representation of a chair that his opponent, the later resistance fighter of the "Freiburg circles" Adolf Lampe , had taken over, who was thus provisionally placed under § 4 of the Professional Civil Service Act, which was the "political unreliability" in the National Socialist Meaning.
- Circular letter on conformity to Hitler
On May 20, at the request of Karl Lothar Wolf , the National Socialist rector of the University of Kiel, Heidegger signed a circular telegram to Hitler requesting that the reception of the board of the Association of German Universities be postponed until the "Gleichschaltung “The leadership of the university association would also be Nazi-minded.
Doxography for the telegram to Hitler
Speeches and lectures
- First lecture as rector
On May 4th Heidegger gave his first lecture since his election as rector: “The basic question of philosophy and the basic events of our history. The intellectual-political mandate as a decision on the basic question ":
“The German people as a whole come to themselves, i. H. finds his guidance. In this leadership the people who have come to themselves create their state. The people, shaping themselves into the state, creating permanence and steadiness, grows up to become a nation. Such a people win their spiritual mission among the people and create their own history. This event reaches far into the difficult future of a dark future. And with this development, the academic youth is already on the move and they stand by their calling. And that means: She lives from the will to find the discipline and education that makes her mature and strong to the spiritual-political leadership that is to be assigned to her from the people for the state in the world of the peoples. All essential leadership lives from the power of a great, basically hidden determination. And this is first and foremost the spiritual and popular mission that the fate of a nation has reserved. The knowledge of this mission must be awakened and rooted in the heart and will of the people and their individuals. "
- Matriculation speech
On May 6th, the new rector gave his first speech on the occasion of the enrollment of the students. The matriculation means the "transfer into the fighting and educational community of those for whom the spiritual mission of the German people is the first and last". And inferred from this, with Heidegger's earliest documented mention of the word “ Volksgemeinschaft ”: “Admission to the highest school of intellectual-political education obliges you to be extremely strict and tough against yourself in all internal and external things, obliges you to be exemplary (... ) in the midst of (...) the national community. "
- The philosophical glorification of the death of Schlageter
On May 26th, Heidegger gave his first public speech at the commemoration ceremony for the tenth anniversary of the death of Albert Leo Schlageter , a former student of the University of Freiburg who had carried out bombings against the French occupation of the Ruhr as a Freikorpsler in 1923 . The “young German hero” Schlageter basically realized the existential ideal of being and time, according to Heidegger, when he accepted the “worst and greatest death” as his own possibility in solitude. He is said to have drawn his strength from "the mountains of his homeland" (the Black Forest and "Alemannic Land"). So Heidegger tried for the first time, the day before the rectorate ceremony, in front of a large public, a political application of his philosophy.
Taking office and inaugural speech
The solemn assumption of office, at the center of which was Heidegger's inaugural speech, took place on May 27, 1933 and was prepared in detail by the rector-designate himself. To this end, Heidegger asked Freiburg's NS mayor Kerber to expand the university's orchestra “to give this year's celebration an appropriate expression”. As early as May 23, Heidegger had communicated in writing that after the inaugural speech, the Horst -Wessel song should be sung, with the right hand raised at the repetition stanza and followed by the call "Sieg Heil". As a result, a certain aversion spread among the professors, which is why Heidegger announced that raising his hand “does not mean that he is a member of the NSDAP”, but that he belongs to the “national uprising”. Eventually it was agreed that the right hand would only be raised on the fourth stanza. “The leadership role of the rector and the deans” was then prescribed “by details of the pageant. For the first time, the deans should step one step in front of the respective faculties ”.
The day before Heidegger took office, W. Aly, the oldest NSDAP member of the professorships, informed him by letter that the "broadcast of your speech on radio tomorrow, which was requested by numerous colleagues and supported by the local NSDAP district leadership" had been "rejected by the Reich Commissioner", what he regrets. It is unclear what reasons prompted Wagner to reject this. However, B. Martin concludes that the letter proves that Heidegger as rector “was also considered by the party to be the ideal man for this post”, even if one seemed to be reluctant to really let him have his say.
Inaugural address: "The self-assertion of the German university"
In the speech, Heidegger mentioned neither National Socialism nor the party, nor the name Hitler, but gave a draft for the reorganization of the university in line with the Führer principle. Due to the diverse interpretations of the speech, the following topics are listed that were partly already commented on in earlier reactions or that are mostly highlighted in the debate today.
- The extended leader principle: self-assertion
Heidegger begins his inaugural address by explaining a leadership principle that has been expanded by the fate of the people: “Taking over the rectorate is the obligation to lead this high school spiritually. (..) But this being comes seriously to clarity, rank and power if the leaders themselves are led first and foremost at all times - led by the relentlessness of that spiritual mandate that forces the fate of the German people into the stamp of its history. "
The guided leaders - this idea underlies the speech and its title of self-assertion, since it is the “German university” that should discipline those “leaders”: “The self-assertion of the German university is the original, common will to their being. We consider the German university to be the high school which, out of science and through science, takes the leaders and guardians of the fate of the German people into education and discipline. "
- The questioning and the anti-Christian and technology-critical discourse
Heidegger explains that asking questions is the beginning of science and thus also of Greek philosophy, and that asking questions is still ongoing. But the “Christian-theological interpretation of the world, as well as the later mathematical-technical thinking of the modern age” have moved away from this beginning of mere questioning. Heidegger quotes Nietzsche's saying that God is dead and explains the questioning of the modus operandi of the possibility in such “abandonment of man” to “unlock” the essentials of all things and to overcome the isolation of the academic disciplines: “The questioning (...) becomes itself the highest form of knowledge. (...) We choose the knowing struggle of the questioners ", the" fighting community of teachers and students. "
- Knowledge and skill
In order to still subordinate the "superior power of fate" to knowledge, which in view of this must first develop its "highest defiance" in order to be effective, Heidegger refers to a verse by the Greek tragedian Aeschylus, from The Fettered Prometheus :
τέχνη δ᾽ ἀνάγκης ἀσθενεστέρα μακρῷ ("The craftsmanship is much weaker than the necessity")
Heidegger, on the other hand, translates: “But knowledge is far less powerful than necessity.” To this he immediately adds the following interpretation: “That means: every knowledge of things remains previously at the mercy of fate and fails before it. Precisely for this reason, knowledge must unfold its highest defiance, for which the full power of the concealment of beings only arises in order to really fail. "
- To blood and soil
"And the spiritual world of a people is not the superstructure of a culture, any more than the arsenal for usable knowledge and values, but it is the power of the deepest preservation of its earthly and blood-like forces as the power of the innermost excitement and the greatest shock of its existence." The knowledge is therefore subject to the fate of the people, but can defiantly build up against it from the earthly and blood-like forces.
- The law of the essence of the German university
Heidegger continues: “From the determination of the German student body to withstand German fate in its extreme need, comes a will to the essence of the university. This will is a true will, provided that the German student body has placed itself under the law of its being through the new student law (...). "
The reference to “the new student law” introduces the section on the three obligations that arise from the freedom to give oneself the law with which Heidegger apparently reacted to the anti-Semitic Prussian student ordinance of April 12, 1933, “which are precisely these three Made services binding for all students ”and with which a requirement of the German student body , which has existed since the Weimar Republic, to oblige all students to labor service and student military sports in the SA, was realized in the form of“ military and labor service and physical exercises ”.
- The motif of the three "bonds" and the three "services"
According to his ideas of a holistic university, Heidegger then names the three “ties” that are to be made possible by three “services” and which, although he mentions neither Plato nor Politeia in this context, interpreted as a - partly perverse - analogy to the class structure in the Platonic city-state were.
- The first bond is that of the "national community" - this bond is "rooted in student existence through the" labor service "."
- “The second bond is that of the honor and destiny of the nation in the midst of other peoples. It demands a willingness to work down to the last, secured in knowledge and ability and tightened by breeding. (...) This bond encompasses and pervades the entire student life as "military service". "
- The third bond is “that of the intellectual mission of the German people.” - “A student youth who dares to get involved in manhood at an early age and expands their will about the future fate of the nation, forces themselves to serve this knowledge from the ground up. For her, the knowledge service will no longer be allowed to be the dull and quick training for an 'elegant' profession. "" These three ties (...) are of the same origin as the German being . "
- The use of the storm metaphor
The speech ends with a quote from Plato's Politeia . First of all, Plato says: “A difficult proof is still missing. - Which one? - In what way a polis deals with philosophy without going under. ”Then follows the sentence:“ Because all great things are endangered. ”- which Heidegger adapts to the metaphor of the storm that he frequently used at the time. “We want ourselves. Because the youngest and most recent force of the people, which reaches beyond this, has already decided on it. But we only fully understand the glory and grandeur of this awakening when we carry ourselves into that deep and wide prudence from which the ancient Greek wisdom spoke the word:
τὰ… μεγάλα πάντα ἐπισφαλῆ 'Everything great is in the storm'. (Plato, Politeia, 497 d, 9) "
"This idiosyncratic, basically wrong translation has brought Heidegger almost as much criticism as his philosophical consecration of the National Socialist national community in his remarks on the unity of labor, military and knowledge service."
The beginning of the Heidegger debate
With the assumption of office and the Rector's speech, initially published in excerpts, the occasion for encouragement and criticism was given, which has already been documented nationally and internationally for the months following the speech and which, with their polarized assessments and reactions, justify the so-called Heidegger debate. In Germany, the assumption of the rector's office was sometimes met with “enthusiastic accents”, while abroad “in quite a few cases with rejection and accompanied by severe criticism.” The text of the speech was initially only “reproduced in abbreviated form” by the local press, to which Rudolf Bultmann refers in his letter criticism (see below). Seven weeks after the rectorate ceremony, however, a publishing house in Wroclaw printed them in full, which provided “the apparently desired publicity at the national level”. The Völkischer Beobachter reported on it on July 20, 1933 under the heading: “The three ties”, and R. Harder, who sympathized with the National Socialists, praised the lecture as “a battle speech, a thought-provoking appeal, a determined and compelling self-determination -the-time-places. "
- One of the first critical voices was sent to Heidegger personally: in his letter of June 1933, Bultmann, a friend of his, called the lecture an adaptation to the hubris of the zeitgeist. He is not “blind” to the “positive achievements of the new empire”, but: “'We want ourselves!' you say when the newspaper reports it correctly. How blind this will seems to me! How much this volition is at any moment in danger of failing itself. How much has the turnaround created a υβρις [hubris] that is deaf to the demand for the spiritual world to fight over and over again under extreme exposure to the powers of being. "
- In Basel, the theologian F. Eymann wrote in the preface to Karl Ballmer's criticism of the speech: “As theoretical as this struggle may be, its results immediately become human reality as soon as they are taken seriously as such. They become dangerous when they deny HUMANS as a knowing being and thus the possibility of a recognizable truth. Because at the same time freedom as self-determination is abolished. "
- In Ballmer's text of July 1933, the principle of “taking the leaders into discipline” finds a first reaction: “Herr Heidegger, by taking Adolf Hitler 'into education and discipline', is performing an achievement that others modestly step back from. Herr Heidegger is therefore a special case in contemporary German history. ”Heidegger's limitation to asking questions is also attacked:“ By virtue of his philosophical leadership, Martin Heidegger, as rector of a German university, revealed in the spring of 1933: The task of science is not to provide knowledge spread. The task of science is not to know, but to ask. The spiritual bread that science has to give to the people is, as the highest and last, a question, a steadfast heroic perseverance in questioning. - Anyone who up to now has been of the unbiased opinion that science is knowledge, absolutely knowledge - (...) - will have to give up such popular opinion under the discipline of the masters of philosophy. "
- Karl Jaspers wrote in a letter on August 23, 1933 that the speech had a “credible substance” through the approach “in early Greek culture”, although something in it “seems a little forced” and some sentences “seem to have a hollow sound”.
- The neo-Kantian Jonas Cohn named the advantage that Heidegger saw the people as “spiritual and historical beings”, but regretted that the “determination” remained empty, that he did not mention the philosophy of the modern age, that he neglected research and, above all, the specialization of Students refuse.
- The politically liberal-minded philosopher Benedetto Croce spoke up from Italy. As the author of monographs on Goethe and Hegel and a pen pal of Thomas Mann, he had a close relationship with German poets and thinkers. Croce attacked Heidegger as the adept of a historicizing philosophy who lacked the humane, first in a letter, then in the magazine La Critica .
“At last I have read all of Heidegger's speech, which is stupid and servile at the same time. I am not surprised at the success that his philosophizing will have for a while: the emptiness and the general always succeed. But it does not produce anything (...) it dishonors philosophy, and that is also a damage for politics, at least for the future. "
- In January 1934 he specified: Heidegger
“Today suddenly plunges into the depths of a highly erroneous historicism, into that who denies history, for whom the course of history is conceived flatly and materialistically as an affirmation of ethnicisms and racisms, as a celebration of the deeds of the wolves and foxes, the lions and jackals, with the only and true protagonist absent: humanity. "
- In November 1933, the National Socialist rector of the University of Hamburg, Eberhard Schmidt , referred to Heideggers in his inaugural speech: "I don't dare to adopt the proud word Heidegger used to describe the rector's office as the 'spiritual leadership' of the university".
Doxography on the reactions to the inaugural address
The book burning in Freiburg
In a conversation with Spiegel in 1966, Heidegger said that he had "banned the planned book burning that was to take place in front of the university campus," for which there is no evidence. It is unclear whether the burning of indexed books planned for May 10th by the German student body in Freiburg also took place on this day. While the common researcher opinion is based on the fact that this was not the case - because, as in other places in Germany, heavy rains disrupted the project - there are contemporary witnesses who testified that there were books on the square in front of the university library that day were burned. In the presence of Freiburg's Lord Mayor Franz Kerber, the cremation act, with which the books removed from the public libraries by the “Commission for the fight against dirt and trash in literature” were destroyed, was to take place on June 17th with the participation of the city schools which, again due to the weather, was postponed to another day. On June 24th, Heidegger gave a short speech in front of the solstice fire in the university stadium. A second, “strangely small fire from the books of a ladder cart” burned on the edge, according to Käthe Vordtriede. Quote from Heidegger's fire quote:
"Fire! Tell us: You must not go blind in battle, but you must remain bright for action. / Flame! Your blaze tells us: The German revolution does not sleep, it reignites and illuminates the way for us, on which there is no turning back. / The days are falling - our courage increases. / Ignites flames! Heart burns! "
Opinions, dismissals, advocacy
The Hönigswald case
Since April 1933, NS students at the University of Munich had demanded the dismissal of the Jewish neo-Kantian Richard Hönigswald by means of the newly enacted anti-Semitic professional civil servants law, but those in charge of the faculty had refused to comply. The Bavarian Ministry of Culture then asked Heidegger for an expert report on Hönigswald. He considered applying for his successor in order (as he wrote to his also Jewish student Elisabeth Blochmann) "to get close to Hitler". On June 25, 1933, Heidegger, who had already judged Siegfried Marck from Hönigswald's Breslau school negatively (see above), also gave a devastating judgment on his colleague in Munich.
“Hönigswald comes from the school of Neo-Kantianism, which represented a philosophy that is tailored to liberalism. The essence of man was then dissolved into a free-floating consciousness in general, and this ultimately diluted into a generally logical world reason. In this way, under apparently strictly scientific philosophical justification, the gaze was diverted from the human being in his historical roots and in his popular tradition of his origins in soil and blood. This went hand in hand with the deliberate suppression of every metaphysical question, and humans were now only considered servants of an indifferent, general world culture. The writings (...) of Hönigwald grew out of this basic attitude. But there is also the fact that Hönigswald now defends the ideas of Neo-Kantianism with a particularly dangerous acumen and an idle dialectic. The main danger is that this hustle and bustle gives the impression of the utmost objectivity and strict scientificity and has already deceived and misled many young people. Even today I have to describe this man's appointment to the University of Munich as a scandal, which can only be explained by the fact that the Catholic system prefers people who are apparently ideologically indifferent, because they are harmless to their own aspirations and are 'objective-liberal' in the familiar way. I am always available to answer further questions. With excellent appreciation! Hail Hitler! Your devoted Heidegger. "
The explicit recourse to “ blood and soil ” is a sign of further political radicalization of Heidegger after the rector's speech, if not an anti-Semitic attitude, because Heidegger is the first to add the concept of blood to his linguistic images of the soil. Mainly because of this expert opinion - mostly seen as a political denunciation - the then 58-year-old Hönigswald was forced to retire on September 1, 1933, which began his odyssey in National Socialist Germany, which was continued with the revocation of the philosophical doctorate in 1938 and him after Brought the November pogrom to the Dachau concentration camp, from which he was released weeks later because of international protests. Heidegger's report ended Hönigswald's academic career forever, as he could no longer find a job in exile in the USA.
The Baumgarten case
After a rift between Heidegger and his assistant Eduard Baumgarten , who was still supported in the letter to Victor Schwoerer (see above), another letter, which was later heavily criticized, came about: Baumgarten had applied for admission to the Flieger-SA and to the Nazi lectureship , but the report that Heidegger wrote on the occasion on December 16, 1933, thwarted this project. The original of this document is lost, but Baumgarten himself, after learning about it, was able to inspect the files of the Göttingen Nazi Lecturers' Association through personal connections and write a copy there. Karl Jaspers used this on December 22, 1945 for his opinion on Heidegger in the adjustment committee and spoke of it in a letter on which the extracts from Constantin von Dietze were based, to which Heidegger referred in a letter of January 17, 1946. In it he stated that the part in which he had commented on Baumgarten's suitability in a "structure of the party" was "probably the copy of a party official report", which was made according to the "usual careless method" - which is now doubted becomes. A version that differs slightly from Baumgarten's comes from the "Baumgarten files" in the Göttingen University Archives, the so-called "copy of the second copy". This document states:
"Dr. Baumgarten attended my lectures from 1929–1931 (…) with the intention of (…) doing his habilitation. In the course of the time mentioned it turned out that he was neither scientifically nor characteristically suitable. (...) Dr. Baumgarten comes from the liberal-democratic circle of intellectuals around Max Weber in Heidelberg as a family member and in keeping with his intellectual attitude. During his stay here he was anything but a National Socialist ... After Baumgarten had failed with me, he dealt very lively with the Jew Fränkel, who had previously worked in Göttingen and is now released here. I suspect that Baumgarten took up residence in Göttingen on this way, which may explain his current relationships there. At the moment I consider his admission to the SA to be just as impossible as that of the lecturer. "
As a result, Baumgarten - he was a private lecturer in Göttingen - was dismissed because he was considered a “fellow Jew”. After an affidavit that he did not know Fraenkel and had never seen him, the discharge was reversed. Karl Jaspers, who was able to see a copy of Marianne Weber, Max Weber's widow , in 1934, was "deeply affected". For him, this moment was, as he wrote in a letter to Heidegger in 1949, "one of the most decisive experiences of my life." It was pointed out, however, that Heidegger's warning against Baumgarten, since he had only superficially adapted to the new circumstances, was 'entirely in the consequence of his revolutionaryism'. Isolated doubts expressed about the authenticity of the discrediting evaluations of the report are now considered unfounded.
The Staudinger case
In July 1933, Heidegger asked the Zurich-based physics professor Alfons Bühl , a representative of " German / Aryan physics ", unofficially and "secretly", because of rumors about the chemist Hermann Staudinger - who worked in Zurich from 1912 to 1926 - about "political unreliability" to pursue his behavior in the First World War. Bühl soon found what he was looking for when Staudinger had also applied for Swiss citizenship during his time in Zurich and was pacifist during the First World War. In addition, the German defense at the Bern embassy investigated whether Staudinger had advised opponents of the war on the manufacture of weapons-grade chemicals. This allegation was later dropped. On September 29, 1933, Heidegger reported the rumors to the Baden university clerk, Fehrle, whereupon Fehrle filed a complaint against Staudinger on the following day for “political unreliability” (§ 4 GWB). Because of this Heidegger's initiative, the Gestapo took action in the Staudinger case, as evidenced by an entry in the file. The action was given the code name "Sternheim". The historian Hugo Ott, who came across the incident in 1984, speaks of a “process of clear political denunciation by Rector Heidegger”, and the majority of researchers follow him in the judgment of the denunciation. On February 6, 1934, the Ministry of Culture asked Heidegger to comment on the material collected by the Gestapo and thus also to issue a legally relevant judgment. On February 10, Heidegger replied that studying the files gave the following to the question of whether § 4 should be applied: All reports spoke of the transfer of German chemical manufacturing processes by St. to (hostile) foreign countries. According to the Consulate General in Zurich in 1918, Staudinger never made a secret of the fact that he was in sharp contrast to the national tendency in Germany. Significantly, the later Marxist envoy Adolf Müller described Staudinger as an idealist. These facts made it necessary to apply Section 4 to restore the civil service. Since the facts about Staudinger have become widely known, the reputation of the University of Freiburg also demands action, especially since Staudinger is now posing as a 110 percent friend of the national survey. Dismissal rather than retirement is more likely to be an option.
In accordance with Heidegger's suggestion, the Baden Minister Wacker demanded Staudinger's dismissal from civil service on February 22, 1934. But now the Lord Mayor of Freiburg Kerber and the Mayor Leupold intervened for the world-famous chemist and later Nobel Prize winner, and “with regard to the position that the named person enjoys in his science abroad”, Heidegger came to the conclusion that although “in the matter can of course not change ”, but a“ foreign policy burden should be avoided if possible ”. Finally, Staudinger was forced to sign his own dismissal pro forma, which would have come into effect if there had been “renewed concerns”. Until the end of his life, Staudinger never found out who initiated the Gestapo investigation against him. From a psychiatric point of view, Ott's résumé found confirmation that only a “depth psychological interpretation” could reveal the reasons for Heidegger's denunciation initiative. However, a desire for recognition and self-importance on the part of the rector who had gained political influence were also mentioned as possible motives for this. In addition, Heidegger's son Hermann agreed with the interpretation, which is widespread in research, that his father was annoyed by "the ingratiating opportunism of his colleague". Finally, the philosophical reading is debated that Staudinger fell into Heidegger's sights because he represented a "purely technical view of science that Heidegger had fought against from the start".
The defense of Hevesy and Fraenkel
For the chemist George de Hevesy and the philologist Eduard Fraenkel , who were threatened with dismissal due to their Jewish origins, Heidegger wrote a joint letter of recommendation to the Ministry of Education on July 12, 1933, whereby he first emphasized, “in full awareness of the necessity of the indispensable execution of the Law for the Restoration of the Professional Civil Service ”and then referred to the“ unusual scientific reputation of Mr. von Hevesy in the entire academic world ”. Therefore, it would be "an unjustifiable unevenness of treatment (...) if Mr. von Hevesy could stay, but Mr. Fraenkel were given permanent leave", since his reputation abroad is no less. He could also vouch for their “impeccable behavior”, “as far as human judgment goes”. In the letter of July 19, 1933, Heidegger affirmed that Fraenkel was considered to be the “main representative of German antiquity, especially in Italy, Holland, Sweden, England and the United States” and that the university could maintain it as a “leading figure”. "Despite this second advocacy and the two declarations of honor that the Philosophical Faculty gave for him under Schadewaldt's deanery, Fraenkel was dismissed." In Fraenkel's case, Heidegger joined this initiative by Schadewaldt. George de Hevesy - possibly "for foreign policy reasons" - stayed until October 1, 1934, when he was "released from Baden's civil service at his own request" and went to Copenhagen.
Layoffs and advocacy
Most of the layoffs at Freiburg University during the Nazi era were carried out in the first two years, i.e. during Martin Heidegger's tenure. These therefore took place exclusively on the basis of the GWB (the RBG did not come into force until 1935). As rector, Heidegger also tried to help the Jewish students and colleagues affected by the racist legislation - provided he recognized their achievements - as in the above-mentioned Hevesy and Fraenkel cases. Private lecturers and assistants, on the other hand, could hardly rely on his support. He did not sit down for the historian Paul Theodor Gustav Wolf , the almost completely blind mathematician Alfred Loewy (Heidegger had studied with him from 1911 to 1913, he retired early on December 1, 1933), the pharmacologist Paul Noether and the legal scientist Andreas Bertalan Schwarz a. Rather, they too were removed from the university by Heidegger on the basis of racist legislation in the course of 1933. Soon afterwards, on April 6, 1934, Noether committed suicide.
Doxography for the discharge of Paul Theodor Gustav Wolf
- Werner Gottfried Brock, Heidegger's assistant, lost his teaching license on September 27, 1933 due to his Jewish origins. At first, the rector recommended him to the Swiss philosopher Paul Häberlin for a habilitation and then supported his studies at Cambridge University.
- Paul Oskar Kristeller helped Heidegger with letters of recommendation to find a job in Italy.
- In February 1934 Heidegger rejected measures against the Jewish geophysicist Johann Georg Königsberger, who was reported to the ministry by his colleague Wilhelm Hammer because of his Marxist past.
- Heidegger presumably campaigned for Elisabeth Blochmann in Berlin circles and at the end of October 1933 wrote a benevolent testimony for the job search in England.
- He probably also advocated Professors Siegfried Thannhauser , Jonas Cohn and Edmund Husserl at the Baden Ministry of Education, for which there is no written evidence. However, Cohn was still removed from Heidegger (on August 24, 1933), and Thannhauser was removed from the university during Heidegger's tenure (April 17, 1934), then demoted to the position of unskilled worker in Heidelberg.
The attempt at a holistic educational establishment
The “leadership constitution” of the university
About a month after taking office, on July 3, 1933, Heidegger wrote a circular to “all German universities” in which he announced that the university's chancellor would now “draw on behalf of the rector”. At Prussian universities it was difficult to imagine a relationship of subordination between the state representative and head of administration to a Führer-Rector ”, although the circular was sent with the intention“ that this model would also set an example elsewhere and that the rector in his competencies as a leader of the University should strengthen. ”On August 21, 1933, Baden's Minister of Education and Cultural Affairs, Wacker, until“ the university reform is carried out uniformly and throughout the entire Reich ”, by letter A 22296, abolished all existing parliamentary competencies of the university committees, senates and faculties in Baden, which were provisional University constitution came into force on October 1, 1933. From then on, the ministry appointed the rector and Section I, point 1 decreed: “The rector is the leader of the university”. This appointed the chancellors and deans. Wacker was the first minister to introduce the Fuehrer Constitution at a German university.
The day after Wacker's letter, the former Rector Joseph Sauer noted in his diary: “ Finis universitatum - End of universities. This fool von Heidegger, whom we elected rector, got us into that he would bring us the new spirituality of the university. What irony! ”Also in the opinion of the research, Heidegger is sometimes considered to be a“ promoter of this new leadership constitution ”, but sometimes it is only pointed out that he could not contradict when the clean-up commission determined in 1945“ that he had worked diligently ” . "The new university constitution", so the summary of H. Ott, "stood in the context of the reasoning of his thinking and acting."
Heidegger announced the resolution on August 24, 1933 - as a basis "for the internal expansion of the university in accordance with the new overall tasks of academic education." From now on, representatives of the student body, assistants and university employees could also be called to the meetings of the Senate, in which paradoxical "approaches to democratization" can be recognized, since the rule of the ordinaries was broken and "an, albeit modest, participation of the other curiae of university lecturers and students" was achieved, but the faculties had completely lost their right to self-determination. Instead of the self-assertion of the university proclaimed by Heidegger, it came to its “self-decapitation”. Just a week after Wacker's decision, the Bavarian university administration followed suit ("The Rector is the leader of the university"), whereby "the Baden model (...) must have been the model." The Prussian Education Minister Rust, in turn, orientated himself with his decree of 28. October 1933 based on the Bavarian model. With the takeover of the 13 Prussian universities, the leadership constitution was enforced at most German universities and could no longer be prevented as a model for a Reich-wide regulation.
Appointment as "Führer-Rector"
As planned, Heidegger was appointed by Wacker on October 1, 1933, "the first Führer-Rector of the University of Freiburg". He appointed his predecessor von Möllendorff as well as his confidante Schadewaldt (philosophy) and Erik Wolf (law and political science) as deans. Like the other appointees, neither were party members, although at that time Schadewaldt was still particularly involved in the National Socialist sense. The appointment of the lawyer Erik Wolf as dean - who in 1934 still published the essay The Legal Ideal of the National Socialist State, which was arrested in the Nazi racial concept - since "he was not accepted by his colleagues because of his 'Heidegger-bondage'" was one of the occasions for later Heidegger's resignation from the rectorate.
At the Senate meeting on November 29, 1933, the new “Führer-Rector” also spoke of the “sense of an honorary order”, and the philosophy lecturer Georg Stieler, corvette captain in World War I, presented the draft of an “honorary court order” for the lecturers, based on this to those of the officers. In a comment by Heidegger it is said that the corporation should be cleansed of "inferior elements" and that "future degeneracy campaigns" should be prevented. Ultimately, the spirit of “true comradeship” and “genuine socialism” was sought, “which does not see colleagues as competitors in the struggle for existence”, which, in Hugo Ott's judgment, “clearly reflects the confusion of National Socialist ideology” be. In a circular to the faculties on December 20, 1933, Heidegger let the university's teaching staff know that from the beginning it was his goal to implement the “change in scientific education based on the forces and demands of the National Socialist state”. Only the “indomitable will for the future” would give “the present endeavors meaning and support”. And he continued: “The individual, no matter where he stands, counts for nothing. The fate of our people in their state is everything. "
Although the Fuehrer Constitution was gradually being implemented nationwide at the universities and Heidegger was the Fuehrer Rector, sometimes in military simulations, at the beginning of 1934 he was convinced that the Nazi “revolution” had not yet begun in the school system. In a reply to the writer Erwin Guido Kolbenheyer, who in a speech in Freiburg referred to a quote from Adolf Hitler that the revolution is over, evolution is beginning, Heidegger said on January 30th: “Yes - we want to do not engage in counterfeiting. Evolution - of course, but just where the revolution ends. But where as in the spiritual and z. B. in the school system the revolution is not only not over, but has not even begun - how is it? "
Heidegger also made it clear on other occasions that the change in society in National Socialist Germany did not go far enough for him: “And there is a danger that the overzealous killers of liberalism will soon turn out to be so-called 'representatives' of a liberal National Socialism, that of harmlessness and honesty and youthful emotion just so oozes. "
Labor service, knowledge service, military sports
On June 16, 1933, and only on massive reproaches from his predecessor von Möllendorff, Heidegger called the Senate together for a first constituent session. Senate Senior Alfred Hoche and economist Walter Eucken urgently asked Sauer to influence Heidegger in this way. At this meeting, Eucken expressed the university's internal opposition to the rector's claim to leadership. Points of contention were the harmonization practiced at meetings of the university association and the rectors and the position of labor service and military sports in the course. Since in the meantime many NS students and fellow students who sympathized with them saw the essential point of training at the university in military sports, marches and tent camps, the lecture and exercise operations were considerably disrupted. In addition, there were no uniform guidelines on the type of military sport training and its integration into the courses.
Since June 1933, however, the Freiburg University was "surrounded by labor camps in the immediate vicinity" which were "also supervised by teachers at this school". And the connection between knowledge service and labor service remained a priority for Heidegger, and "the labor camp was the institution that was supposed to take over the educational mission of the university (...) in the struggle for knowledge in the National Socialist state spirit". Even the cynicism of the motto of the later National Socialist extermination camps can be found here, according to the judgment of H. Gehle, in a philosophical reading, because “work first grants the basic experience of decisiveness and determination, and work first creates freedom. 'The animal' it is called, 'and everything that just lives cannot work. He lacks the basic experience to do this: the decision-making commitment to a task, the ability to be determined and to stand firm in an accepted assignment, in short the freedom . '"
Heidegger was the first rector to whom the student body was represented at the Senate meetings - even before the new university constitution was passed. On July 10 and 11, 1933, he and Alfred Baeumler took part in the first training conference of the Office for Science of the German Student Union in Berlin, where the principle of leadership was also adopted for the student level. From now on, the department heads should be able to appoint their employees themselves. This new structure corresponded to Heidegger's ideas of student self-administration - which was "in the hands of National Socialist officials from the summer semester". The University of Freiburg was also the first to build a work and dormitory for students and workers in order to enable students to be more closely integrated into the “national community”.
This political radicalization disappointed the Freiburg professors who supported Heidegger's election. Gerhard Ritter reported in 1962: “In reality, the disappointment was enormous, because Heidegger was now proceeding with full sails in the National Socialist waters, rather dictatorially, giving speeches to the student body in which he profoundly blasphemed about academic tradition and about military service, teaching and Labor service, juxtaposed in a distinctly National Socialist way, called. "
Regardless of this, on June 14, 1933, in his address “Labor service and university”, he celebrated the state forced labor as a mystical merging event with the people: “A new and decisive educational power has arisen with the labor service. The labor camp moves next to the parental home, the youth union, the military service and the school. In the labor camp, the site of a new, direct revelation of the national community is being realized. ”According to H. Zaborowski, labor service seemed to have been much more important to Heidegger than“ military service ”or“ military sport ”.
According to a directive from Adolf Hitler dated September 9, 1933, SA university offices were soon set up at all universities, which had to ensure that "the German students are trained physically and mentally in the interests of the pioneers of the German revolution" (Hitler). In Freiburg, SA-Sturmführer Hilmar Wilmanns was appointed leader of the SA-Hochschulamt, who was represented at the Senate meetings in the future. “The German students should not only align themselves to the lockstep of the Sturm departments, but above all should be educated spiritually in the sense of the National Socialist worldview. Correspondingly, Heidegger explained in a speech on November 30, 1933 in Tübingen: “The new student is no longer an academic citizen, he goes through the labor service, is in the SA or SS, and does off-road sports. The course is now called Knowledge Service. "
On January 22nd, 1934, Heidegger explained to 600 unemployed people in the university's largest lecture hall that “the National Socialist state” would change “all previous ideas and thinking” because all activity should be understood as work and, conversely, any work could claim To be “something spiritual”: “The knowledge of real science does not differ in essence from the knowledge of the farmer, the woodcutter, the earthworker and mine worker, the craftsman. [...] Workers and work, as National Socialism understands these words, does not divide them into classes, but binds and unites the people and classes in the one great will of the state. [...] To the man of this unheard-of will, our Führer Adolf Hitler, a threefold: 'Sieg Heil!' "
The Todtnauberger Experiment
The idea of a new form of academic holism in the sense of the National Socialist national community and for the purpose of the political education of selected students found expression nationwide in so-called science camps. Beyond university operations and his role as rector, Heidegger organized such a camp in his hut in the Black Forest from October 4 to 10, 1933, what he called the "Todtnauberger camp", in which students from Freiburg, Heidelberg and Kiel took part. Heidegger informed the selected students: “The goal will be reached by walking from Freiburg, in SA or SS uniform, possibly a steel helmet uniform with an armband”. The “daily duty roster” was structured militarily and ranged from waking at 6 in the morning to the tattoo at 10 pm. The purpose of the company was rather general, including the “lively bringing closer to the goals of a National Socialist revolution in higher education”. And: “A few lectures in front of the whole camp community should create the basic mood and attitude.” In accordance with the “ritual of National Socialist camp discipline”, Heidegger directed the camp, Rudolf Stadelmann was the subordinate of the Freiburg group, Otto Riss headed the students from Kiel and Johannes Stein those from Heidelberg.
However, "political differences between the camp participants" soon became apparent, "relating, for example, to the importance of the racial idea for National Socialism", because the Heidelberg and Kiel group defended a "militant anti-Semitism" that was based on the still Catholic convictions of the Freiburg did not harmonize. Stein, at the time already "part of the SS team at Heidelberg University, which acts as a science-political power vector much stronger than Heidegger's basically solitary National Socialist emphasis", was the representative of the "racial theorists" in Todtnauberg. A few months later he worked closely with the later "euthanasia" perpetrator Carl Schneider; During the Second World War, he advocated racial investigations on Indian prisoners of war in the Stalag VC camp in Offenburg.
Heinrich Buhr, who took part in the camp as the only theology student, later testified that Heidegger had given a harsh lecture there against Christianity and thus against the tradition of the Freiburgers: already the divine creation and “that being is merely something made as made by a craftsman - that must first be discarded. ”But how the conflict between Nazi racial theory and Catholicism was influenced or decided in the science camp by Heidegger is unclear. There is no doubt that the “political upbringing” there also “included racial studies”, as U. Arnswald put it.
In a note that was still missing in the facts and thoughts from 1945 report, Heidegger reports that Stein, as the leader of the Heidelberg group, "suddenly appeared unannounced" on the "morning of the second day" together with the "Gaustudentenführer" Gustav Scheel . Both had "talked to the Heidelberg participants in the camp", "whose 'function' was slowly becoming clear." Because: "The Heidelberg group had the order to blow up the camp." The note says: "Dr. Stein asked to be allowed to give a lecture himself. He talked about race and the racial principle. The lecture was noted by the camp participants, but not discussed further. "It was objected that the finding from the correspondence between Heidegger and his confidante Stadelmann, the leader of the Freiburg, contradicts the later" representation of Heidegger very clearly ": Stadelmann, For the sake of “pacifying the camp atmosphere”, “as a sacrificial lamb, as it were”, although he had taken on “a general lecture on the new science”, Heidegger's orders had to forego it and even leave the camp.
The "science camp" in Todtnauberg is considered a failed attempt and is today partly rated as a "scientific concentration camp" and compared with the camps of Stalin and Mao, partly as an "example of Heidegger's National Socialist university idea (...) - a mixture of appeal, morning exercise, uniformed hiking in the fresh air and 'sharp' debates about the idea and form of organization of the future highest places of German leadership formation ”, but finally also as“ completely normal camp life with people who were actually past the age of Pimpfen ”, and that at Being together and singing to the guitar should invent a new spiritual community.
Heidegger and the Nazi "racial hygiene"
For the compulsory lecture of Nazi "Racial Studies"
Alfred Nißle has been giving lectures at the Medical Faculty on "genetic biology" and "racial hygiene" in Freiburg since 1920. When the so-called "racial studies" was declared by the Baden Minister of Culture Wacker on December 19, 1933 by decree 3656 to be a compulsory lecture for students of all faculties, Nißle, believing that he should also give these lectures, applied for an increase in the budget for teaching materials the next day Ministry of Culture in Karlsruhe. Thereupon the ministry informed the rectorate that it was important “that the lecturer, in addition to a knowledge of racial hygiene, is an ideologically impeccable representative of National Socialism” and that Nißle was “not known as an advocate of the National Socialist worldview”. On April 13, 1934, Heidegger asked in his written answer to “refrain from extending the teaching assignment for Prof. Nissle. For months I have been trying to find a suitable person to teach this field and then apply to the ministry for the establishment of an associate chair for racial studies and genetic biology. ”In the following summer semester Nißle held the lectures on racial studies“ for students of all faculties ”, And the ministry did not set up an extraordinary chair, but the task was then“ taken over by Theodor Pakheiser, who was loyal to the National Socialists ”, health advisor in the Baden Ministry of the Interior and district officer of the Nazi German Medical Association, who was appointed honorary professor and received 100 Reichsmarks per month. The topics of the first such lectures, held in the winter semester of 1934, were “ National Socialist Worldview and Rassegthanke, Volk und Rasse”. Nißle meanwhile continued to give the regular lectures. The letter in which this is assessed as unsuitable for the compulsory lectures was one of the closing official acts of Heidegger as rector, the next day he offered to resign.
On Eugen Fischer's influence on Heidegger
With regard to Heidegger's relationship to Nazi “racial hygiene” , “eugenics” and “hereditary biology”, some of his measures as rector and some statements on racial concepts and human breeding are partly due to the influence of the “racial theorist” who was friends with him for decades. Eugen Fischer or a collaboration with him. Heidegger and Fischer had met at the latest at the Badische Heimattage of 1930, and they maintained friendly relations until the 1960s. Fischer was (with Erwin Baur and Fritz Lenz ) the author of a standard work on eugenics, which influenced Hitler's racism in the mid-1920s and later became a reference for the murder of patients, which was transfigured into "euthanasia", initially legally prepared and then carried out. Between 1918 and 1927 Fischer was full professor and director of the Anatomical Institute of the University of Freiburg, from 1927 and until 1942 full professor of anthropology at the Friedrich-Wilhelms-Universität Berlin , taking into account "issues of racial studies in research and teaching". In 1927 he founded and headed the Kaiser Wilhelm Institute for Anthropology, Human Heredity and Eugenics in Berlin , where he provided “scientific justifications for the inhuman race and birth policy of the Nazi state” and “made an active contribution to selection ” until his retirement in 1942 and murder ”. From 1935 to 1940 he was "Chief Justice at the Hereditary Health Court in Berlin and had to judge whether a subject suffered from an illness within the meaning of the" Law for the Prevention of Hereditary Offspring "and thus had to be forcibly sterilized."
R. Wolin counts to Eugen Fischer's effect on Heidegger, referring to V. Farias, that Heidegger, as rector, had a questionnaire on racial origin distributed to all professors, that their "racial unity" had to be sworn by them and that he was responsible for the establishment of the SS Race Office of the student body at the university, headed by Heinz Riedel, a former student of Fischer.
Heidegger's speech on the law of health and disease
Only about two weeks after the law for the prevention of genetically ill offspring was passed on July 14, 1933, Heidegger made a speech at the beginning of August on the occasion of the 50th anniversary of the Institute of Pathological Anatomy at the University of Freiburg.
“For example, what medicine wants to understand as 'disease' will depend entirely on what it previously understands as the essence of health. (...). For the Greeks z. B. 'healthy' means to be ready and strong to act in the state. The doctor was no longer allowed to come to those who no longer met the conditions of this action, even in the case of 'illness'. (...) For what is healthy and sick, a people and an age give themselves the law, depending on the inner size and breadth of their existence. The German people are now in the process of finding their own being again and making themselves worthy of their great fate. Adolf Hitler, our great Fuhrer and Chancellor, created a new state through the National Socialist Revolution, through which the people should once again secure the permanence and continuity of their history. (…) Every people has the first guarantee of its authenticity and greatness in its blood, its soil and its physical growth. If this good is lost or only largely weakened, every state-political effort, all economic and technical ability, all intellectual activity remains useless and aimless in the long run. "
The dinner speech in the anatomical institute is almost unanimously rated as one of the justifications for the Nazi ideology of the disenfranchisement of certain groups of people. If Heidegger's willingness to "give thought to prostitution" is still seen in this, the majority of the criticism goes in the direction that in the speech "a cure for life that is unworthy of the state" is recognized as correct and with "a regression on blood ', on' ground 'and the subordination under the leader principle ”. It is said that the speech is a contribution to the “Nazi idea of eugenics” and glorifies it. In philosophical analyzes u. a. argues that Heidegger "turns the not-having into a not-allowed in Plato," And due to the "agreement of some of Heidegger's statements (...) with the National Socialist euthanasia program", insofar as the history of being "is translated into concrete instructions for action in the former, the biological necessarily becomes the biopolitical". Heidegger's biographer H. Zaborowski sums up the end of the criticism: “In view of these statements, one will no longer be able to defend Heidegger”, “From a philosophical perspective he justifies National Socialist racism”.
Heidegger's glorification of Adolf Hitler
During his tenure as rector, Heidegger gave speeches and wrote papers in which he glorified Adolf Hitler and called for his support. So he called Hitler the "great leader" and declared him law. Heidegger was also one of the constituent speakers of the German professors' commitment to Adolf Hitler , which was announced in the Alberthalle in Leipzig. The relevant texts at a glance:
- May 18, 1933: "Speech at a rally of the University of Freiburg on the occasion of Hitler's speech on leaving the League of Nations"
- June 30, 1933: “The University in the New Reich”, lecture in Heidelberg
- November 3, 1933: At the beginning of the semester. “German students!” In the Freiburg student newspaper
- November 10, 1933: Call for the election of “German men and women” in the election number of the Freiburg student newspaper
- November 11, 1933: Leipzig speech at the NSLB rally in the Alberthalle
Germany's exit from the League of Nations served Heidegger to glorify Adolf Hitler. The day after his speech on May 18, 1933, he propagated the decision in his capacity as rector to transfer it to the university stadium:
“The Chancellor of the Reich, our great leader, has spoken. The other nations and peoples should decide now. We ourselves are decided. We are resolved to walk the difficult course of our history that is called for by the honor of the nation and the greatness of the people. (...) readiness and camaraderie. A German victory salvation to our great leader Adolf Hitler. "
The two university-internal texts in which Heidegger appeared as Hitler's laudatory speaker equated Hitler with the being and reality of the German people. In Heidelberg on June 30th, Heidegger spoke of “People's Chancellor Hitler” who would bring the “new Reich” to reality. "Christian and humanizing ideas" should be overcome by a struggle in which Hitler acted "as guarantor", as A. Schwan comments in his academic study on the "Heidegger case". And in the Freiburg student newspaper it was said on November 3rd: “The rules of your being are not doctrines and 'ideas'. The Führer himself and alone is the present and future German reality and its law. (…) From now on, every thing demands a decision and everything done requires responsibility. ”In his appeal on November 10, Heidegger expanded the circle of addressees beyond the university to include all German men and women. The text is almost identical to his speech in Leipzig the following day.
On November 11, 1933, the National Socialist Teachers 'Association (NSLB) Saxony organized a rally in the Alberthalle in Leipzig under the direction of the "Gauobmann" Arthur Göpfert in support of the manipulated referendum, which was based on a unified list ("Ein Volk, ein Führer, ein' Ja '“) The day after, retrospectively, was supposed to justify Germany's withdrawal from the League of Nations in October. On this occasion, Göpfert initiated the German professors' commitment to Adolf Hitler . The rally took place in the presence of several thousand listeners, to whom nine professors spoke and justified that confession. As the first of the nine speakers, Heidegger's “racial hygienist” Eugen Fischer (see above) held one of the lectures. Heidegger then put Hitler's decision to leave the League of Nations in the context of the terms “Dasein”, “Volkischer Dasein”, “Will”, “Daseinwillens” and “Truth”:
“German teachers and comrades! German national comrades! The Fuehrer called the German people to vote; But the Führer does not ask for anything from the people, rather he gives the people the most immediate possibility of the highest free decision whether the whole people want their own existence or whether they do not want it. Tomorrow the people will choose nothing less than their future. (...) This last decision reaches out to the extreme limits of the existence of our people. (...) The will to take responsibility is not only the basic law of the existence of our people, but at the same time the basic event of the establishment of its National Socialist state. (...) Not ambition, not lust for fame, not blind stubbornness and not striving for violence, but only the clear will to unconditional self-responsibility in enduring and mastering the fate of our people demanded the leader to leave the 'League of Nations'. (...) The people regain the truth of their will to exist (...). (...) From this origin science arises. It is tied to the necessity of a self-responsible völkisch existence. (…) Our will to national self-responsibility wants every people to find and preserve the greatness and truth of their destiny. (…) The Führer has brought this will to full awakening in the whole people and welded it together into a single decision. No one can stay away on the day of the manifestation of this will. Hail Hitler!"
Göpfert's opening remarks and the nine speeches were then signed by 961 scholars as the German professors' commitment to Adolf Hitler , a commitment to the subordination of scientists under Adolf Hitler. Heidegger, reported Karl Löwith, “had the Freiburg students march together to the polling room and cast their yes vote en bloc on Hitler's decision. (At other universities, like in Marburg, you could still vote with yes or no, although the choice was only pro forma secret.) "In philosophical terms, Heidegger's argument for leaving the League of Nations is sometimes more benevolent than" the national one Higher level thesis from Being and Time "interpreted," that getting involved with others has to be preceded by securing one's own self ". Safranski, on the other hand, describes the Leipzig speech as “applied folk fundamental ontology”. Heidegger's political commitment, as Theodor W. Adorno stated in general, "resulted from a philosophy that identifies being and leader."
Almost three weeks after the NSLB rally in Leipzig's Alberthalle, NSDAP member Heidegger also joined this second Nazi institution on December 1, 1933, to which he belonged until the Allies dissolved it in 1945.
Suspension of the ripuaria
On January 27, 1934, the Catholic German Student Union Ripuaria Freiburg im Breisgau was founded by the Freiburg "Sturmführer" and "Sturmbannadjutanten des NSDStB-Sturmbannes 6 der SA", Heinrich von zur Mühlen , NSDAP member since 1932, at the instigation of the "Reichsführer" of the National Socialist German Student Union (NSDStB) Oskar Stäbel suspended "for deliberately damaging our National Socialist movement".
This was preceded by the honorary court exclusion of the SA “Scharführer” Bernatz in November 1933 from the connection, which he did not want to accept: On January 17, 1934, Bernatz penetrated the house with a group, including von zur Mühlen and the SA Standartenführer Lenzen the connection and confiscated the files. At the urging of the head of the Freiburg SA University Office, Stäbel became active. But the Cartell Association (CV) of the Catholic connections was headed by the Reichstag member Edmund Forschbach , and in view of the Reich Concordat, Stäbel lifted the suspension on January 31, 1934, taking into account its jurisdiction, which caused the student leader from zur Mühlen, who presented the suspension officially issued, prompted his resignation.
Thereupon Heidegger wrote to Stäbel on February 5, 1934 and stood up for his party comrades: “This public victory of Catholicism here in particular must not remain under any circumstances. It is a damage to the whole work in a way that cannot be imagined any bigger at the moment. (...) I will therefore definitely cover the approach of the student union leader. Catholic tactics are still unknown . And one day it will be hard to take revenge. "
Resignation from the rectorate
In a letter dated April 14, 1934, Heidegger told the Minister of Education, Wacker, that he would make his office as rector available. It says that "after a thorough examination of the current situation of the universities" he came to the conviction that he had to "return to immediate (...) educational work within the student body and the younger lecturers". The course and reasons that led to this decision were presented differently in Heidegger's reports. Even today they are rated differently.
There is agreement that a letter from Wacker, in which he had asked Heidegger two days earlier to retire Erik Wolf as dean, as the reason for the letter of April 14th was also the reason for the announcement of his resignation there. Together with his unconditional follower Wolf, who was only 31 when he took office, and a staunch National Socialist in 1933/34, Heidegger had previously tried against his university-internal adversary Walter Eucken to find Adolf Lampe, who was also critical of the Nazis, as the successor to the chair in 1933 to prevent emeritus economist Karl Diehl . And even before that, Wolf's restructuring of the legal curriculum - which was added to the establishment of the SA service and the military sports camps - had manifested conflicts with the group of defenders of the old order. Wolf had therefore offered to resign on December 7, 1933, which Heidegger rejected with the declaration that, according to the new university constitution, trust in the rector and not in the faculty was decisive. But when the Minister of Education and the Rector's employer also opposed Wolf as dean, Heidegger immediately gave up his office. Since Wacker did not yet have a successor, he ordered that the decision be kept secret for the time being. However, after Heidegger found out that Adolf Lampe had in the meantime filed a complaint against Wolf with the ministry, he believed he had been betrayed and informed the Chancellor and the deans of his decision on April 23, who made their offices available with him. On April 27, 1934, the resignations were accepted by the Ministry.
Reasons for resignation
The deeper causes for the premature end of the rector's office are generally considered to be the failure of Heidegger's concept of wanting to run a university according to the Führer principle, which aroused displeasure in both the lecturers and students and led to the “palace revolt”. He was in a dispute with the Freiburg SA University Office over the National Socialist program of military training, which he viewed as too much interference in university operations. In addition to conflicts with the Ministry of Education and Cultural Affairs, there were other reasons for the considerable tensions within Freiburg University: According to a version of facts and thoughts published in 1983 , Heidegger looked back on the failure of the “Todtnauberger Camp” (see above ), which was an “example” for his “ National Socialist university idea ”was a“ peculiar omen for his fall. ”In this version he also accuses“ circles of the university ”, who otherwise were outraged by the National Socialists,“ with the ministry and the group that determined it "Had conspired to" force me out of office. "The" group "meant the" Gauleiter "Scheel and the Frankfurt Rector Ernst Krieck. The "Trias Baeumler- Heidegger- Krieck ", which existed in Nazi university policy up to the turn of the year 1933/34, had turned into the opposition when it "overturned at the turn of the year", which had led to "primitive abuse", "the Heidegger from Krieck in his People in Becoming magazine happened since the spring of 1934 ”. This was exacerbated by an expert opinion on Heidegger's philosophy, which his former Marburg colleague Erich Jaensch , who was in league with Ernst Krieck and Alfred Rosenberg, prepared in February 1934 at the request of Walter Groß , the founder of what later became the so-called Racial Political Office NSDAP . Heidegger did not want a group of the party that had "formed since the spring of 1934 at the latest" to be "regarded as a 'philosopher of National Socialism'". However, there is no evidence that circles at the university that are critical of the regime worked with the Nazi ministry against Heidegger and that it provoked sharp objections.
Doubts about Heidegger's version
Other parts of Heidegger's own account of his resignation were also questioned due to a lack of evidence and lack of consistency. In addition to the point in time - Heidegger states in facts and thoughts that he had already announced his resignation to Fehrle and then Wacker in February 1934 - the objections are directed against the fact that the ministry should not only approve the resignation of Wolf, but also that of Heidegger Möllendorff's predecessor is said to have demanded, for which there are no indications. Wacker's letter of April 12th “cannot be brought into line with Heidegger's version at all,” says Hugo Ott, who adds as a summary of his research in the archives of the Baden ministry: “The rest of the Karlsruhe files do not support Heidegger's account in the least, either Opposite". In addition, Heidegger's characterization of his confidante Wolf for the years 1933/34 caused contradiction in research. The fact that Wolf would not have been agreeable to the party either lacks logic: "This might have been true for Möllendorff, whom Heidegger had appointed dean of medicine, but not for Erik Wolf, who was then ardently National Socialist and loyal to Heidegger." Heidegger in 1945 and later pointed out that in Erik Wolf in 1933 he had, so to speak, appointed an opponent of National Socialism as dean, then he added the later Wolf. “The objections to Wolf were not of a political nature.
It can be concluded, however, that Heidegger himself was “deeply disappointed” with his failure as rector: he refused to take part in the traditional handover of the rectorate with a formal reason. His successor was Eduard Kern , a lawyer who had previously been replaced by Wolf as dean . The failed rectorate is seen today as an example of the fact that a university “cannot be governed with the leader principle and the hammering in of a political ideology”. With Heidegger's resignation, "according to the judgment of many contemporary witnesses (...) a relative relaxation" and with the new Rector Kern, "peace and order" had come into effect.
On the question of racism
Heidegger and the Philosophy in National Socialism
A certain relationship between Heidegger and an official “Nazi philosophy” has since been rejected by researchers because it did not exist as such and National Socialism was philosophically indifferent. Not a single philosopher was 'only' sent to prison or a concentration camp because of his “ philosophical doctrines”, said G. Wolters. There was also no clearly defined “anti-Semitic doctrine”. However, the claim was widespread among philosophers who, as members of the NSDAP or, since the admission ban in May 1933, as applicants for membership, saw themselves called to formulate a valid Nazi philosophy, but could not be fulfilled: " Whether Heidegger or Krieck, whether Rothacker, Baeumler or Dingler - anyone who wants to establish the philosophy of National Socialism fails. "
Relationship to other philosophers of the NSDAP
Heidegger had been in friendly contact with Erich Rothacker, who was also one of the philosophers who had joined the NSDAP on the last day before the ban on membership, on May 1, 1933, since the beginning of the 1920s. Rothacker was temporarily head of the "Popular Education" department in Joseph Goebbels' Ministry of Propaganda and was appointed Dean of the Philosophical Faculty in Bonn in October 1933. In addition, at the beginning of the National Socialist rule, Heidegger was in the "triad" (see above) with the philosopher, educator and NSDAP member Alfred Baeumler and NSDAP member Ernst Krieck , who had neither a high school diploma nor a degree but was nevertheless promoted to professor by the National Socialists for pedagogy and philosophy and after the seizure of power became rector in Frankfurt: “Each of the three,” says historian H. Ott, “Heidegger, Baeumler and Krieck - wanted to play their part, together they wanted to achieve certain goals in the National Socialist understanding . ”Through Baeumler, who had already joined the anti-Semitic Kampfbund für deutsche Kultur in 1930 , there was also contact to its founder Alfred Rosenberg , who was later sentenced to death in the Nuremberg trial of the main war criminals and executed in 1946. Heidegger first met the Nazi chief ideologist Rosenberg in May 1934 at the latest at the opening meeting of the Committee on Legal Philosophy , in which he was active until 1936. In the same year, 1934, Rosenberg was personally appointed by Hitler as “the Führer’s representative for the supervision of the entire intellectual and ideological training and education of the NSDAP” and was given an office for this purpose, the Rosenberg Office .
Erich Jaensch, who later wrote a damning report on Heidegger, and Hans Heyse, who, according to his own statement in "long, friendly discussions" with Heidegger in the spring of 1933, also came to the conclusion on May 1, were also among the fellow philosophers at the same time. May, the last day before the four-year membership ban to join the NSDAP. From 1933 to 1935 rector in Königsberg, Heyse looked "like Heidegger with the Greeks for an answer to the question of the leadership of the future university (and Germany)".
On the Nazi racial ideologies
Assessing Heidegger's positions on the question of the people and race in relation to the various racial ideological concepts that were debated and propagated in public and academic discourse during the Nazi era continues to be a research task. As there was no clearly defined anti-Semitic doctrine, the Nazi racial ideology was also not uniform. Rosenberg said that “racial consciousness is linked to the principle of honor”, and Rothacker placed the race theory in the context of the cultural “lifestyle theory”, which is compatible with the so-called “Führer thought”, as this is within “Staatsgedanke, Deutschtumsgedanke, Folk thought "figured out" and that "not without internal tension to the other central ideas." In 1933 Hitler had " clearly emphasized 'the heroic attitude and worldview corresponding to the Nordic inheritance ' over 'the exclusively somatic'". Correspondingly, the NSDAP initially remained "undecided and wavering in order to decide, by 1935 at the latest, in favor of the 'Nordic' race theory and against the acceptance of a 'German race'". The latter theory meant “a blood and moral structure that consists of an interplay of several races” and according to which it could not have been clarified “why not also 'Jews and hereditary diseases' could have participated in the natural racial assimilation”. The “Nordic” race theory, on the other hand, was based on the national racist anti-Semitism propagated by A. de Gobineau and HS Chamberlain at the end of the 19th century, which led to the catchphrase of “Aryan descent”.
Heidegger's position in the dispute over the race
Regardless of the party-political decisions, Heidegger's position in questions of race theory remained largely constant during that period according to the current state of knowledge and can be reduced to the “cumulative phrase” he himself coined (S. Kellerer): “'not just' blood, 'but also' spirit ". In the winter semester 1933/34 he lectured in the lecture On the Essence of Truth also some key sentences on this relationship:
“'Blood and soil are powerful and necessary, but not sufficient conditions for the existence of a people. Other conditions are knowledge and spirit, not as an addendum in a juxtaposition, but knowledge first brings the flow of blood in one direction and in a path, first brings the ground into the pregnancy of what it is able to carry; Knowledge gives nobility on the ground to discharge what they can carry. '"
There is a parallel with the question of race: a necessary but not sufficient condition for the existence of a people.
“Race - what is a necessary and indirectly expressed condition of historical existence (thrownness) is not only falsified as the only and sufficient one - but at the same time as what is being talked about. The 'intellectualism' of this attitude, the inability to distinguish between racial upbringing and theorizing about race. A condition is made the unconditional. "
On Martin Heidegger's speech on January 30, 1934 - National Socialism and Revolution
According to the information given in the complete edition, Heidegger took the first anniversary of the National Socialist seizure of power, January 30, 1934, as an opportunity to reply to the writer Erwin G. Kolbenheyer, who had spoken about it the day before in Freiburg, and others. a. to criticize its exclusive fixation on the importance of biologism and evolution (see below), since "to historical being" the "decision to a certain will to be and fate - commitment to action, responsibility in enduring and perseverance, courage, confidence, faith, sacrifice “Belong. The claim made by Heidegger in his self-portrayal after 1945 that he thereby distanced himself from National Socialism is rejected with various arguments.
Heidegger's criticism of purely biological racism, to which numerous scholars point out, is debated in recent research as a rejection of the pseudo- Darwinian elements in it and, in relation to the dogmas in this regard, received a relativizing classification during the National Socialist period, according to which “racist anti-Semitism as a core element The National Socialist ideology always merged the biological and the mental in variable forms. ”In a letter to K. Bauch dated October 30, 1936, Heidegger commented on the decision to have new rooms at the Freiburg University painted by the folk painter Hans Adolf Bühler:“ I think it would be great if, in addition to the painted Freiburg servants, there were also a race theory painted on the walls. "
Doxography on the question of biologism in Heidegger
The conflict with Baeumler, Krieck, Rosenberg and Jaensch
The community with Baeumler and Krieck, which primarily served the purpose of a National Socialist university reform, broke up at the turn of 1933/34 (see above). This became public at the latest with the publication of the article by Krieck, in which he said about Heidegger's philosophy that it was "outspoken atheism and metaphysical nihilism, as it was otherwise mainly represented by our Jewish writers." The climber Krieck, who only received his doctorate due to his National Socialist convictions, had written "a series of derogatory articles about prominent humanities scholars" and responded here to a laudation that the medievalist and convinced Nazi Hans Naumann had held on Heidegger's works in the magazine Mutterssprache with the tenor that they were the philosophical completion of the Germanic myth.
Heidegger was also violently attacked from other quarters: the report requested by Walter Groß in February 1934 from Jaensch (see above), which he had also sent to Krieck, served at his insistence to induce Rosenberg to use it for this purpose, Heidegger as head of the Preuss Prussian Lecturer Academy. The Jaensch report was “a product of unbelievable pamphleting, the primitiveness of the argument, the degradation of Heidegger's personality and philosophy cannot be surpassed: an appointment Heidegger as head of the academy would be tantamount to a catastrophe.” Jaensch wrote in it and others. a. Heidegger was praised "by Jews, half-Jews and representatives of neo-Scholastic, strongly Catholic worldview". The plan for a teaching academy soon fell through and Baeumler, Krieck and Jaensch - the latter representatives of a biologistic type theory - remained opponents because they "did not want him to be considered the 'philosopher of National Socialism'."
Statements on Judaism
As during the First World War and the 1920s, Heidegger also wrote various texts during the Nazi era that later gave rise to debate as to whether he was an anti-Semite. The debate took on a new dimension in 2014 with the publication of the so-called Black Booklets and an unpublished quote from the lecture “History of Being”. A relevant note in this regard can also be found after the end of the Nazi regime.
"World Jewry"
A remark has been passed down from 1932, which appeared rather isolated until the publication of the Black Booklets , but was then confirmed by notes in it. In a conversation with Karl Jaspers, in which he spoke “about the malicious nonsense of the Elders of Zion ”, Heidegger replied: “There is a dangerous international connection between the Jews.” This remark is now in context with Heidegger's statements on World Jewry read in the black notebooks . Because, as Peter Trawny explains , "with this widespread tendency to attribute a homeless or cosmopolitan way of life to the Jews, the enemy emerges who is waging intangible war on the international level". This is what Heidegger once said:
"World Jewry, incited by the emigrants let out of Germany, is inconceivable everywhere and, despite all the development of power, nowhere needs to take part in acts of war, whereas we only have to sacrifice the best blood of the best of our own people."
"World Jewry" or "international Jewry" also appears in the "phantasm of an international Jewish conspiracy" (DF Krell) by manipulating the Bolshevik Soviet Union as well as Nazi Germany. In one of the reflections in the Black Booklet it says: “The imperialist-warlike and the human-pacifist way of thinking” - that is, both the way of thinking of the totalitarian states and that of the democracies - belong to metaphysics, and “therefore both the international Serving Judaism, which proclaim and accomplish one as a means for the other - this machinic 'history'-doer entangles all players equally in their nets. ”At the beginning of the Second World War, in November 1939, Heidegger spoke of another war in a letter : "I think we are only at the beginning of what this invisible war will bring us". Through comparisons with relevant texts, S. Kellerer describes this term as a "commonplace of anti-Semitism" adopted by National Socialism, since it is the type of war that has been ascribed to "world Jewry". The role of world Jewry, as Heidegger noted in 1940, was "not a racial, but a metaphysical question of the kind of humanity that can take on the uprooting of all beings from being as a 'world-historical' task." In also private records The years 1938–1940, only published in 1998 and called “History of Being”, Heidegger expresses himself on the nature of criminals, whom he calls “planetary main criminals”, whereby he initially defines the “planetary”.
"The 'planetary' means the relation of power to the whole of the earth, so that this relation is not the result of an expansion, but the beginning of a peculiar rule of the earth."
The following paragraph is controversial because in the first two editions of the volume the sentence with the "predestination of Jewry for planetary criminality" was deleted, which was only reinserted in the third edition, 2015 (see below):
“The major planetary criminals are, by their very nature, completely alike in their unconditional servitude to the unconditional empowerment of power. Historically determined differences that spread in the foreground only serve to disguise criminality in a harmless way and even to show that its accomplishment is 'morally' necessary in the 'interest' of humanity. It should be asked, however, where the peculiar predestination of Jewry for planetary crime is based. The main planetary criminals of the latest modern times, in which they are only possible and necessary, can be counted on the fingers of one hand. "
In its original interpretation, argues the editor of the first edition, Peter Trawny, he saw the “Jewry” in the deleted sentence as a victim of “planetary criminality”, which, on the other hand, is represented by Hitler and Stalin. In 2014, after the publication of u. a. also by him as anti-Semitic quotes from the black books , Trawny made the deleted sentence known and admitted a second reading, according to which the "Jewry" itself now comes into question as a criminal in the quote, which is confirmed by a statement in the Heidegger speaks of the horror of the “Bolshevik murder cellars” according to reports, whereby, according to Trawny, Heidegger said “that 'world Jewry' occupies the key positions of the Bolsheviks.” Th. Kisiel also argues that Hitler and Stalin as well as “a global one Jewish cabal (...) that works behind the scenes ”as the“ major planetary criminal ”. The objection was made that “it should be clear” “that Heidegger ascribes Judaism here to have been destined for planetary criminality, that is, to appear as the main criminal himself.” Heidegger saw Jews as such in a perfidious way, for which his sentence speak of "the power of world Jewry, which is incomprehensible everywhere".
Internal enemy of the people
In the lecture “From the essence of truth”, given in the winter semester 1933/34, Heidegger lectures on the fragment 53 of Heraclitus on the struggle, which he wants to be understood in terms of war, polemos , gives a definition of the enemy of a people and emphasizes its necessity:
“The enemy is the one and everyone who poses a major threat to the existence of the people and their individuals. The enemy need not be the outer one, and the outer one is not always even the more dangerous. And it can look like there is no enemy. Then the basic requirement is to find the enemy, to put it in the light or even to create it in the first place, so that this standing against the enemy takes place and existence does not become dull. The enemy can have established himself in the innermost roots of the existence of a people and can oppose and act contrary to its own nature. The struggle is all the sharper and harder and harder, because it only consists in the slightest part of beating one another; It is often much more difficult and protracted to spy on the enemy as such, to develop him, not to deceive him, to be ready to attack, to maintain and increase the constant readiness and to attack in the long term with the aim of complete destruction. "
This Heideggersian definition of the internal enemy of a people and the long-term goal of complete annihilation are predominantly assessed as racism or especially as anti-Semitism. Because without "being explicitly related to the Jews", "central figures of thought of anti-assimilatory anti-Semitism" are reproduced, which "should have been understood accordingly in autumn 1933". With the enemy "in the innermost root of the existence of a people" is meant , in the sense of the Lingua Tertii Imperii , the "parasite" and "to find it, to put it in the light" corresponds to "what the Gestapo as a new mission was entrusted: research into opponents. ”In affirming that the real enemy lies within the people, he followed Hitler, and the advocacy of creating this enemy was“ breathtaking cynicism ”. In view of the "anti-Semitic genealogy of the Judeo-Christian concealment of the Greek concept of truth according to Heidegger", it is ruled out that those quotations were a misfortune for him. "In the context of the year 1933/34 Heidegger had to be clear what he was doing by speaking like this: he was hounding." He shows himself here as an "arch-Nazi" who "without the slightest extreme compulsion in his own activity (... ) calls for the complete annihilation of an enemy that has become parasitic in the existence of the people. "
Jewish "bottomlessness", "empty rationality" and "money making"
In the same lecture, The “Essence of Truth”, Heidegger defined the existence of the people in terms of the terms blood and soil and knowledge and spirit with the formula that blood and soil are powerful and necessary, but not sufficient conditions for the existence of one People. (see above) And the phrase "blood and race become carriers of history" sounds like propaganda, according to T. Rockmore.
On the other hand, the “bottomlessness” is set in the black books , which is explicitly named as “Judaism” and which instead of “being” operates the empty calculation:
“As soon as the unhistorical has 'prevailed', the licentiousness of 'historicism' begins - the bottomless in the most varied and contradicting forms - without recognizing itself as the same malevolence - into the utmost hostility and desire for destruction. And perhaps 'wins' in this 'struggle', in which there is a struggle for aimlessness and which can therefore only be the caricature of the 'struggle', the greater bottomlessness, which is not bound to anything, makes everything subservient (Judaism). But the actual victory, the victory of history over the histo- rous, is only achieved where the bottomless excludes itself because it does not dare to be, but always only reckon with beings and set its calculations as the real. [...] One of the most hidden figures of the giant and perhaps the oldest is the tenacious dexterity of arithmetic and pushing and mixing things up, which founded the worldlessness of Judaism. "
The criticism of this sentence from 1937 sees in it predominantly the type of the "chess Jew", who "represents one of the most familiar figures in Judaism in every anti-Semitism". In the defense of the philosopher, on the other hand, the “tenacious dexterity of calculating, pushing and mixing things up” is rated as at most “cultural anti-Semitism”, as a “kind of concession to the spirit of the times .” Yet another note in the Black Notebooks connotes it Heidegger describes Judaism with the calculating factor that increases the power of the Jews, whereby he also counts Edmund Husserl, who converted to Christianity in 1886, to the latter:
"The temporary increase in power of Judaism is due to the fact that the metaphysics of the West, especially in its modern development, offered the starting point for the expansion of an otherwise empty rationality and arithmetic ability, which in such a way gained a place in the 'spirit', without ever being able to grasp the hidden decision-making areas on their own. The more original and initial the future decisions and questions become, the more inaccessible they remain to this 'race'. (So Husserl's writing on the phenomenological consideration is of lasting importance, set against the psychological explanation and historical offsetting of opinions - and yet it does not reach anywhere in the areas of essential decisions ...) "
And already on May 22nd. In 1922 Heidegger wrote privately (published only in 2013): These Jews will stop at nothing because of all the money they make ”. This statement, too, says S. Kellerer, “fits into the series of the numerous anti-Semitic statements by Heidegger that have long since ceased to exist, i. H. not only since the (...) discussion about the black books can be dismissed as occasional expressions of 'anti-Judaic resentment'. ”As a résumé of the quotations on“ Jews and pushers ”(1920, see above),“ arithmetic and pushing ”by Jews and to The editor of the Schwarzhefte sees their "empty rationality and arithmetic skills" as one of three types of anti-Semitism in Heidegger, which Heidegger interprets "philosophically alarmingly broad."
According to S. Vietta, on the other hand, Heidegger saw “the 'calculating spirit' at work” in Jews, but “completely overlooked the fact that Jews were forced into certain professions.” Therefore, his criticism was “criticism of civilization, not racism.” [979 ] This is confirmed to a certain extent by Heidegger's contradiction to Rosenberg, expressed in his “second major work”, Contributions to Philosophy , which was written between 1936 and 1938, but only published in 2003. Rosenberg's simple and for Heidegger's thinking unacceptable division into a technical spirit of the Nordic race and a speculative Jewish spirit is rejected in harsh words:
“It's pure nonsense to say that experimental research is Nordic-Germanic and that rational research is strange! We then have to make up our minds to count Newton and Leibniz among the 'Jews'. "
Doxography on the meaning of “blood and soil” in Heidegger
Lingua Tertii Imperii
As in the Rector's speech (see above), Heidegger also used “ideological signal words” in other texts, partly “from the military language of war, from the propagation of an authoritarian community doctrine and from the large stock of traditional national concepts of value”, but then also concepts of language of National Socialism, Lingua Tertii Imperii , whereby "these are not mere 'sprinkles' or even perfect foreign words in Heidegger's language". In addition to “World Jewry”, research also addresses other terms.
"Race principle", "Dismissal" "Race care"
In a note on the deliberations of the “Black Booklet”, Heidegger attributes the “racial principle” to “the Jews” and uses the term “dismissal” from Hitler's Mein Kampf .
“With their emphatically arithmetical talent, the Jews have been 'living' according to the racial principle for the longest, which is why they were the most violent in defending themselves against unrestricted use. The establishment of racial rearing does not come from life itself, but from the overpowering of life through machination. What they do with such planning is a complete disenfranchisement of the peoples by clamping them into the identically built and uniform arrangement of all that is. A self-alienation of the peoples goes hand in hand with the dismissal - the loss of history - i. H. the decision-making districts for being. "
Due to the dating of 1939 shortly before the Second World War, the Nuremberg Laws of 1935, the Reichspogromnacht of November 9, 1938, the destruction of the Freiburg synagogue located directly next to the university building the following morning and finally the deportation of Jewish residents are used as the background for this statement Freiburg's in the Dachau concentration camp and the Gurs internment camp . Mindful of these public violent measures against Jewish life in Germany, Peter Trawny asks: "Is it possible that Heidegger means violence with the 'unrestricted application' of the 'racial principle'?" And concludes: "The invention of racial thinking is contextualized in the history of being". In Heidegger's case, the quote proves a type of anti-Semitism that can be described as 'racial' or 'racist'. "Conspiracy-theoretical traits" with Jews as the carriers of abandonment were also recognized in the quote. In contradiction to this, however, it is pointed out that the note is formulated "in the context of the criticism of 'machinations'". Heidegger “does not criticize Jews in themselves or as a race, but in certain civilizing functional processes . In contrast to racism, Heidegger recognizes and brands racial thinking itself as a form of 'machinations'. "
In the “Supplements to: Koinon” - from the records “The History of Being”, written between 1938 and 1940, but only published in 1998 - it says: “Race care is a necessary measure towards which the end of the modern era is pressing. It corresponds to the already pre-drawn in the essence of 'culture' tensioning it in a 'cultural policy', which itself remains only a means of empowering power. ”On the other hand, the“ racial idea ”is limiting, according to Heidegger in the notes“ To Ernst Jünger ”from 1939 / 1940, "only possible on the basis of subjectivity", a "technical-subjectivity-related term"
"Non-Aryans", "Aryan descent", "half-Jewish"
The Nazi racial ideological terms “non-Aryan”, “non-Aryan descent” and “Aryan descent” also found their way into Heidegger's vocabulary. As rector, for example, he had the Freiburg student newspaper announce what the GWB stipulated:
"Jewish students of the above arrangement are students of non-Aryan descent within the meaning of Section 3 of the 1st Ordinance for the Implementation of the Law for the Restoration of the Professional Civil Service of April 11, 1933. The prohibition on granting discounts also applies to such students of non-Aryan descent, which come from marriages in which one parent and two grandparents are of Aryan descent and whose fathers fought on the front in the World War for the German Reich and its allies. Only those students of non-Aryan descent who have been combatants themselves or whose fathers died on the German side in the World War are exempt from the ban. The principal."
Similarly, in a letter to the deans of the Freiburg University, in which Heidegger called for signatures for the commitment of the German scientists to Adolf Hitler and, like before him, the NSLB functionary Arthur Göpfert, the organizer of the Leipzig event (see above), added : “There is no need for any special notice that non-Aryans should not appear on the signature sheet.” Due to this restriction, among other things, Gerhard Ritter and other Freiburg professors refused to sign. After his resignation as rector, Heidegger complained in a letter to Kurt Bauch on February 7th, 1935 that "nothing will be decided at the universities and by them for the next few decades", that they are heading towards "self-destruction" and that there will be a lack of those who campaign for National Socialism.
“I don't know your 'audience'; but I fear that you too read and struggle in front of those who are willing from the start not to work for National Socialism - scattered Jews, half-Jews, otherwise unsuccessful, Jesuits and blacks in layman form and a few beautiful spirits. - But maybe it is a mistake to think that there is also something that could represent a real audience. "
The term used by Heidegger here already early 1935 half-Jew , who, C. Schmitz-Berning explains, the "fanatical anti-Semite Eugen Dühring declined," came in the Nuremberg Laws of September and relevant addition of the first ordinance of 14 November Not before 1935 itself (there it is called "Jewish mixed race") and was only listed in the Duden from the 1941 edition. And S. Kellerer points out that "Heidegger's anti-Semitic and racist hints" should not have bothered his correspondent, Bauch, because of a similar mentality. With the remark to Bauch, Heidegger also "bluntly revealed" what he thinks of "'Jewish' intelligence", according to D. Thomä. In the same year, Heidegger also stated in a lecture that if Spinoza's philosophy was Jewish, the same would apply to philosophy from Leibniz to Hegel.
"Spirit of Vengeance"
After the Second World War, towards the end of the US education of the German population about the National Socialist crimes, Heidegger complained in 1948 of a “vengeance”, the goal of which was “to extinguish the Germans spiritually and historically.” It follows: “Don't worry in front. An old spirit of vengeance goes around the earth ”, but where“ the German alone (...) can originally rewrite and say being ”. According to the exegesis of Donatella di Cesare, Heidegger speaks of Judaism as the Old Testament religion of retribution. Ch. Fuchs, T. Fischer, MN Lorenz, E. Blum and S. Kellerer also follow the interpretation of the specifically “Jewish 'vengeance'” in the quote. In this context, S. Kellerer also points out that Heidegger warns in a letter of June 23, 1949 to Ernst Jünger “with a view to a 'Jewish emigrant': 'We must not throw the last of the vengeance, which has since become smarter, up for grabs : we must actually remain invulnerable. '"
Doxography on the question of anti-Semitism in Heidegger
On the relationship with Edmund Husserl
Heidegger's teacher and predecessor at the Freiburg Chair of Philosophy, Edmund Husserl, who converted from Judaism to Christianity in 1886, was given leave of absence on April 6, 1933 by Robert Wagner's “Jewish Decree” as a professor at Freiburg University from Rector Joseph Sauer, which he considered his greatest offense Life felt. After the “front fighter privilege” in the GWB issued the next day, Wagner's decree on this point was immediately outdated, and so the Baden Minister of Culture, Wacker, lifted the leave of absence on April 28, 1933 (see above).
The next day Elfride Heidegger wrote to Husserl's wife Malvine, also in Heidegger's name, and thanked the Husserls for the “kindness and friendliness” since 1918 and for the “willingness to make sacrifices” of their sons - the younger was killed in the First World War before Verdun, the older , the later law professor Gerhart Husserl , had also been dismissed from university for "racial" reasons, although he too fell under the "frontline fighter privilege". Heidegger's wife therefore saw it as a mere encroachment on subordinate positions and said that it was “in the spirit of this new (hard, from the German point of view reasonable) law if we unconditionally and in sincere reverence profess those who are in the hour of greatest need also through the deed to our German people. ”In a reply, Malvine Husserl said after a short thank you“ the relationship between the two families is over. ”From the summer of 1933, Husserl could have held lectures again, but under these circumstances he wanted to Not.
Stages of distancing
In 1927 Heidegger had dedicated his main work Being and Time “in admiration and friendship” to his former teacher Husserl , but a distancing had already taken place. He had already written to Jaspers four years earlier: “Husserl is completely out of the glue - if he was ever 'in' - which has become more and more questionable lately - he shuttles back and forth and says trivialities that it is want to have mercy. He lives from the mission of the 'founder of phenomenology'. Nobody knows what that is ... “Since Heidegger took over the chair from Husserl in Freiburg in 1928, the close friendship between the two of them visibly dissolved and was limited to rare encounters. Husserl in 1928:
“'Our intercourse after taking up his position lasted for about two months, then it was peacefully over. He eluded any possibility of scientific pronunciation in the simplest possible way, obviously an unnecessary, undesirable, and uncomfortable thing for him. - I see him once every few months. '"
In a letter to his student Dietrich Mahnke on May 4, 1933, Husserl described Heidegger's “(quite theatrical) entry into the National Socialist Party on May 1” as “the conclusion of a supposed philosophical friendship”. Heidegger had disappointed him most of all in his students. Husserl now explicitly called Heidegger an anti-Semite, whose attitude towards his Jewish students and faculty colleagues "has been increasingly expressed in recent years". In the letter, Husserl again dated the break in relations with Heidegger to 1928 and awarded the initiative to Heidegger:
“This was preceded by the termination of his intercourse with me (and soon after his appointment) and in recent years his increasingly pronounced anti-Semitism - also towards his group of enthusiastic Jewish students and in the faculty. Overcoming that was a difficult task. (...) But what the last months and weeks brought was attacking the deepest roots of my existence. "
Heidegger rejected the accusation that it was Heidegger who broke off contact and that in April 1933 he had also forbidden Husserl to enter the university library, as he was later accused by other sources. He explained the distance to Husserl with purely philosophical-factual disputes and called the allegation regarding the ban a "slander". There is actually no evidence for this claim, which is occasionally reproduced in research, and until his death in 1938 Husserl received the list of the library's new acquisitions and used it for notes. Heidegger avoided direct personal contact with Husserl since the leave of absence.
With the remark in the black books that Husserl's writing on the phenomenological consideration "nowhere reaches into the districts of essential decisions" becomes recognizable in the context of the "empty rationality" and "arithmetic ability" of Judaism (see below) claimed by Heidegger at the same time, so Peter Trawny, that Heidegger's attack on Husserl's phenomenology also had an anti-Semitic dimension. The fourth edition of Heidegger's Being and Time , published in 1935, but before the Nuremberg Race Laws, which also made Husserl a “university 'non-person”, still bore the dedication to Husserl, but in 1941 it was missing - whether on Heidegger's initiative or at the request of his publisher Niemeyer, is controversial - whereby Heidegger insisted on the footnote being printed on page 38, where he thanked his teacher. In the implementation of the race laws of September 1935, Husserl's name was missing from the summer semester 1936 onwards in the course catalog. The university also did not commemorate the death of Husserl in April 1938. “Heidegger followed this eradication of memory, at least he submitted to the condition”, says H. Ott, who continues: “It was a sign, it had a signal effect”.
Heidegger later declared his regret for not having visited Husserl when he was dying. The reason was his shame and helplessness towards the persecution of the Jews. On her 90th birthday on March 6, 1950, he apologized to Malvine Husserl for this “omission”, with a bouquet of flowers and the text of the letter: “On this day, I ask you to relate to the human error to which I fell when your husband passed away, to forgive from the wise goodness of your heart. "
Another time of National Socialism
Political Activities and Statements (1934–1936)
After his resignation from the office of rector and also after the turning point in the openly carried out state murders in the course of the Röhm putsch alleged by the Nazi leaders at the end of June and beginning of July 1934, Heidegger publicly took sides for Hitler and for National Socialism continued at various levels until at least 1936, be it in the Völkischer Beobachter , in the Committee for Legal Philosophy or in lectures and seminars at Freiburg University. His university- political ambitions in the Nazi state were expressed in speeches as a speaker at the German University of Politics , headed by Goebbels' Propaganda Ministry, and in his commitment to a National Socialist academy for lecturers.
The plan for a Nazi lecturers' academy
While he was still in the rector's office, in September 1933, Heidegger was to be appointed head of a planned National Socialist academy of lecturers "for reasons of state policy", which the State Secretary in the Prussian Ministry of Science and Education, Wilhelm Stuckart, announced in a letter as an appointment with the " a special political mandate would be connected ”. Heidegger therefore went to Berlin on September 8th, but was only received there by a ministerial councilor and not admitted to higher positions (“I was not called”), which apparently offended him. He asked himself "whether there was a higher will behind it all" - R. Mehring: "That is probably aimed at Hitler" - and returned without having achieved anything.
After the rectorate, however, Stuckart asked again in August 1934 that Heidegger and other professors communicate their concepts for such a National Socialist academy to be created. The aim of this school was to "'train the young university professors to become scientists and educators in the National Socialist spirit' and to 'develop the political will of the next generation of academics'". Heidegger complied with the request on August 28, 1934 with a six-page comment in which he “largely identified with the concept”. He called for a “rethinking of previous science from the questions and forces of National Socialism” and “ready-to-use knowledge of the future university as an educational community from a closed worldview.” And under point 4:
“The teaching school must become a permanent institution. Because it will not become superfluous even if the future teachers have been educated by the National Socialist high school, Hitler Youth, labor service and even by a National Socialist university. "
For the ideological qualification of the teaching staff to be trained there:
“The 'leaders and teachers (...) have to be' National Socialists' for their very own task. It is not enough that they are politically reliable men and at the same time represent their subject quite properly, but rather they have to be able, as National Socialists of the spirit, to prepare the revolution of science from within. '"
A change comes only “through newly educated university teachers.” If Heidegger was still the most promising candidate at the beginning of 1934, the prospect of being able to train philosophers from then on was the reason for Krieck, on February 14, 1934, the report by Jaensch to use (see above) and to form a front against him with Baeumler. Heidegger was eventually removed from the list of possible candidates for the director's office, and the entire plan of the teaching academy was not carried out.
Lecturer at the German University of Politics, which has been brought into line
After the German School of Politics in Berlin was brought into line by the Reich Propaganda Ministry in May 1933, “topics such as propaganda, military policy, racial studies and racial care” were taken up there, and “under the maxim of training 'leaders', courses were held for the SA and HJ, for the Nazi women and the advanced training of teachers in 'national political education'. ”While Jewish lecturers like Albert Salomon and opponents of the regime like the women's rights activist Gertrud Bäumer had to leave the university, a crowd of Nazi greats competed: in the winter semester of 1933 / 34, while he was still rectorate, Heidegger was one of the new lecturers at the university alongside Rudolf Hess , Joseph Goebbels , Hermann Göring , Walther Darré , Alfred Rosenberg and Baldur von Schirach . According to the president appointed by Goebbels, Paul Meier-Benneckenstein , the writings of the DHfP were intended to "further penetrate the German people with National Socialist ideas and educate them in the spirit of the national community ". The lecture program from 1935 also lists Heidegger's name.
Further advocates for Hitler and National Socialism
- At the end of May 1934, Heidegger gave a speech to his former classmates, in which he interpreted the “new German reality” in a way that proves that his loyalty to Adolf Hitler was unbroken: “The allegiance that creates a bond with the will of the Führer first community. "
- After the death of Reich President Paul von Hindenburg and seven weeks after the murders of the so-called "Röhm Putsch" by the National Socialists, Heidegger pleaded for the unity of the office of the Reich Chancellor and the German Reich in an article in the Völkischer Beobachter on the occasion of the referendum on the head of state of the German Reich Reich President. Through the corresponding law on the head of state of the German Reich of August 1934, Adolf Hitler was also formally “Führer and Chancellor”.
“We signed representatives of German science, whom we also speak on behalf of many who could not be reached by word or letter these days, have the confidence in Adolf Hitler as the leader of the state that he will lead the German people out of their misery and oppression . We trust in him that, under his leadership, science will also experience the support it needs in its entirety in order to fulfill the lofty task which it has to undertake in the rebuilding of the nation. In order to have an effect both internally and externally, the unity and unity of the German people and their will to freedom and honor must once again be expressed through the commitment to the leadership of Adolf Hitler. The undersigned representatives of German science follow the appeal of the Reich government, with which the German people will be called to a decision on August 19th. "
- At the University of Freiburg in mid-August 1934, Heidegger held so-called foreigner courses on the topic of “The German University” and in the section “The essence of the National Socialist revolution as a transformation of German reality” explained:
“The essence of the National Socialist revolution consists in the fact that Adolf Hitler raised that new spirit of community to the formative power of a new order of the people. The National Socialist revolution is therefore not the external takeover of an existing state power by a party that has grown sufficiently for this, but the internal re-education of the whole people with the aim of wanting their own unity and unity. "
Towards the end of the lecture it was said:
“The leader has the sure knowledge of the simple. But at the same time he has the irrepressible will to enforce it. (...) Education of the people by the state to become the people - that is the meaning of the National Socialist movement, that is the essence of the new state formation. "
On the quotation of the "inner truth and greatness of National Socialism" (1935)
The lecture in the summer semester of 1935, Introduction to Metaphysics - in which Heidegger complains at the beginning that the state of science and the university is "unchanged today despite some cleansing" - deals with the religious "belief of origin" as an "extra-philosophical bond" who is again rejected and does a geopolitical analysis, the sources and references of which trace everything back to the spirit:
“We are caught in a pincer. Standing in the middle, our people experience the sharpest pincer pressure, the most neighborly people and thus the most endangered people and in all this the metaphysical people. "
At the end of the lecture, Heidegger turns to the ethical problem of "being and ought" and speaks of values in this context:
“Since the term 'value' is beginning to look worn out (...), the values are now called 'wholes', but with this title only the letters have changed. However, what is more visible in these wholes is what they basically are, namely half measures. (...) What is being offered today as the philosophy of National Socialism, but has nothing to do with the inner truth and greatness of National Socialism, is fishing in these murky waters of 'values' and 'wholes'. "
When the sentence was published later, his student R. Marten testified that Heidegger made two decisive changes. Marten, who helped to revise the lecture as a student: “When the three of us advised him in 1953, when the lecture was going to print, to delete the phrase 'with the inner truth and greatness of National Socialism' [...] in anticipation of its public impact , instead he changes the second “National Socialism” to “Movement” and then inserts the brackets “, which was not yet included in the proofs and which is now printed in the complete edition:“ (namely with the encounter of planetary technology and of modern man) ”. But around 1935, according to Marten, Heidegger did not yet see the view of "a National Socialism perverted for the technical exploitation of beings".
Already with the phrase at the beginning regarding the purge at the universities, Heidegger shows himself “undeterred as an advocate of true fascism” and this second formulation speaks in every word “in favor of the philosophically recognized as genuine and good fascism and purely punishes the subsequent self-interpretation with lies . "
The historian Hugo Ott adds: "In this section (...), which deals with the philosophy of values, Heidegger settles accounts with the philosophers who claim and sell a philosophy of National Socialism", while the knowledge of Heidegger's claimed the inner greatness and truth of National Socialism "falls only to the thinker of being, to the knower who has revealed the inner truth and continues to reveal it".
Doxography on the quote of the "inner truth and greatness of National Socialism"
Hans Frank's Committee on Legal Philosophy
The so-called “Reichsführer” of the “ National Socialist Legal Guardian Association ” he founded in 1928 , Hans Frank, had, on June 26, 1933, intended for law-making, also out of disappointment that he had only been appointed Reich Minister without portfolio and not Reich Justice Minister Association with the name Academy for German Law founded in order to "realize the National Socialist program in future law." The Nazi program was interpreted by Frank in the journal of the "Academy" in the "sense of a biologically hidden natural law doctrine" in which the legal laws follow the natural laws determined by race. According to Hans Frank, the law can "only ever be a means (...) of maintaining, safeguarding and promoting the racial-ethnic community".
On May 5, 1934, the founding meeting of a sub-organization of the “Academy”, called the Committee for Legal Philosophy , took place in the Nietzsche Archive in Weimar. Heidegger, who had recently resigned from his position as rector, also took part. As founding members, u. a. Rosenberg and Rothacker at the table. At the opening, Frank said about the tasks of the committee: “We in our narrow circle [...] want to collect the popular general social doctrine of National Socialism in such a way that we use the terms race, state, leader, blood, authority, faith, soil , Wehr, Idealismus (...) convey German law as a basis. ”The new concept of the state is realized“ in the law and in the Führer principle ”. In the end, Frank asked that “the committee be constituted as a fighting committee for National Socialism.” In 1935, Julius Streicher , editor of the Nazi propaganda paper Der Stürmer , was accepted there. Karl Löwith took the fact that Heidegger and Streicher worked together as an occasion for critical inquiry when Heidegger visited Rome in 1936. Löwith:
“When I said that I understood a lot about his attitude, but not one thing, namely that he could sit down at the same table (in the Academy for German Law ) with an individual like J. Streicher , he was silent at first. Finally, the well-known justification (...) was reluctantly made, which amounted to the fact that everything would have 'gotten much worse' if at least some of the scientists had not advocated it. (...) 'If these gentlemen hadn't felt too fine to get involved, then everything would have turned out differently, but I was all alone.' ”You don't need to say a word about“ Streicher, the striker is nothing else than Pornography."
Due to the destruction of files, the work and subject areas of the Legal Philosophy Committee are largely unproven. But the fact that Heidegger's membership of the committee, discussed by V. Farías in 1989 on the basis of Löwith's report and contemporary newspaper reports, gave cause in the Heidegger controversy to ascribe a role to the committee of the "Academy" in the racist Nazi legislative process, that of studies in law and history is explicitly denied. So it is called z. B. at H.-D. Heller: “The academy's sparse involvement in the legislative process was repeatedly disappointing for Frank. Probably what offended him most was that the Nuremberg Laws came about without the involvement of the Academy. "
According to the current state of research, Löwith's 1940 report determined the terminus post quem for the end of Heidegger's participation in the committee with the summer of 1936 as the date of the conversation during the trip to Rome . The meaning of a list of the names of the still living, not convicted and not emigrated members, dated between July 17, 1941 and August 20, 1942, is unclear, controversial in research and has led to debate about Martin Heidegger and fake News led.
Doxography for document BArch R 61/30, sheet 171
The Hegel seminar
Heidegger's little-known interest in legal philosophy was also shown in a Hegel seminar for beginners that he offered in the winter semester of 1934/35 together with the lawyer Erik Wolf, the follower who was still deeply convinced of National Socialism at the time and who had become the reason for his resignation ( so). There are synthesizing transcripts of the seminar by the participants Wilhelm Hallwachs and Siegfried Bröse, but these are not verbatim protocols and can therefore only be used to a very limited extent for scientific exegesis. The reason for discussion in the context of the Heidegger debate was the contradiction it contained to a sentence by Carl Schmitt that Hegel died in 1933:
“But what is the current conception of the state? It has been said that Hegel died in 1933; on the contrary: he has only just begun to live. "
The controversy surrounding the seminar that began in 2005 addresses whether Heidegger wanted to Hegelianize National Socialism or rather reject it as metaphysics and a Platonic understanding of the state.
See: Heidegger's and Wolf's Beginners Seminar on Hegel's Philosophy of Law, 1934/35
Signs of Ambivalence (1935–1938)
In the period between 1935 and 1938, Heidegger's political commitment gradually withdrew, which was accompanied by signs of distancing himself from the real existing National Socialism and ultimately leading to a disenchantment of the philosopher and NSDAP member. However, while the distance from political events and the disappointment over his failure as rector and temporarily designated director of a Nazi university of lectures as well as the authoritative philosopher of National Socialism are recognized by most researchers, there is considerable dissent about the evaluation of the positions Criticism of National Socialist representatives and their positions: it is sometimes said that they support Heidegger's self-portrayal after 1945, that his initial Nazism was overcome with the disillusionment in the mid-1930s. On the other hand, Heidegger's critical comments are only assessed as part of a leveling strategy, the reason for which he was to reject the bourgeois part of National Socialism in favor of a more radical form.
To “ordinary” and “barbaric” National Socialism
At the beginning of the winter semester 1934/35, Heidegger had increasingly turned to the topic of “historical existence”, the approach to the history of being that extended into the discussion of the present, which was soon accompanied by “occasional resigned and distant tones”, as stated in the letter to the art historian Kurt Bauch from December 1935: “All of this is no longer worth it. All that remains is to pretend to be stupid and to laugh a lot inside - and for the rest and d. H. actually work ahead for the next 100 years. ”The later interpretation that this expression of displeasure belongs to a rejection of National Socialism as a whole that has now taken place has met with massive opposition. Various researchers, including G. Leaman, P. Matussek, R. Marten, T. Rockmore and J.-P. Faye, largely agreed that the criticism was aimed at the "real existing" and the "ordinary or vulgar NS", but differed from a "true" National Socialism that continued to exist for Heidegger ". George Leaman therefore concludes: Heidegger was able to separate “the 'inner truth and greatness'” that he saw in National Socialism “from the political practice of Nazism and then still cling to it, as other Nazi philosophers long ago followed the liberal ideology of the West German republic known. ”The criticism of the real National Socialism of his time, which Heidegger opposed another Nazism, is confirmed by two quotations on the“ barbaric ”. One of them can be found in another letter to K. Bauch:
“I feel like it's coming to an end somewhere; National Socialism would be nice as a barbaric principle - but it shouldn't be so bourgeois. "
Despite the unambiguousness of the statement, it was initially objected that it was "hardly to be assumed that Heidegger wanted to justify National Socialism as a 'barbaric' principle". However, since the publication of the Black Booklet in 2014, “the relationship between Heidegger's philosophy and National Socialism, which is glorified for its barbarism”, has been confirmed beyond doubt on the basis of the “parallel” there:
“National Socialism is a barbaric principle. That is its essence and its possible size. The danger is not himself - but that he is played down in a sermon of the truth, the good and the beautiful "
Daniel Morat's résumé is in line with the above researcher opinions: "Heidegger obviously still believed in the idea of National Socialism, which in his eyes threatened to be betrayed by the reality of the 'Third Reich'." , according to Martin Papenbrock , the mutual "idea of a historically and culturally founded German claim to leadership" and "undisguised national chauvinism" from 1937 to 1942 prove.
Löwith's report on Heidegger in Rome, 1936
.svg)
Karl Löwith's report on the meeting in Rome in spring 1936, written in 1940 by Karl Löwith, is also an illuminating contemporary testimony to Heidegger's relationship with National Socialist Germany. During their stay, Löwith and Heidegger, who had traveled with his wife and sons, went on a family excursion Frascati and Tusculum . On this day, too, noted Löwith, who had fled Nazi Germany due to racist legislation, Heidegger wore the swastika symbol on his suit lapel : “It had obviously not occurred to him that the swastika was not in place when he was Spent a day with me. ”According to Hermann Heidegger, at that time it was not a question of the Nazi party badge - Elfride Heidegger, on the other hand, wore it - but a Nazi national emblem, a“ little silver [Reich] eagle with a swastika ", Which Martin Heidegger also wore" 1933/34 as Rector ". The said pin can be seen in a well-known Heidegger photograph from 1934. The conversation turned to Heidegger's membership in the Committee for Legal Philosophy (see above), and finally Löwith explained to his former teacher that he was of the opinion "that partisanship for National Socialism is in the essence of his philosophy". Löwith continues:
“Heidegger agreed with me without reservation and told me that his concept of 'historicity' was the basis for his political commitment. He also left no doubt about his belief in Hitler; He only underestimated two things: the vitality of the Christian churches and the obstacles to the annexation of Austria. He was still convinced that National Socialism was the road mapped out for Germany; you just have to 'hold out' long enough. "
The connection between the National Socialist and the thinker Heidegger, which Löwith also addressed in a postcard to Karl Jaspers the next day, was confirmed by himself, "corroborated by a kind of philosophy of history", according to Hugo Ott.
Possible observation, withdrawal, and "disenchantment" (1936–1938)
There is no evidence of the observation by spies, which Heidegger later claimed, who reported to Baeumler and Krieck about his teaching activities after his resignation from the rectorate, beginning with the lecture on logic in the summer of 1934. In a memory of this lecture from 1977, however, the theology student H. Buhr, who was already involved in the experiment at the “Todtnauberg Science Camp” (see above), wrote that the lecture hall was “overcrowded” and that “all kinds of uniforms” had been seen: “Heidegger began (...): 'I read logic. (...).' (...) After a few hours, the lecture hall was normally occupied again, from people who philosophize, think, wanted to learn (something other than collecting results and evidence). ”Heidegger's reports about the confession made by his colleague Kurt Hancke in 1937 are completely unproven . who had worked for the student leader Scheel - meanwhile SD-Oberabschnittsleiter Südwest - that Hancke had received the order from him to investigate Heidegger with the secret service. Since Hancke in October d. J. Head of Department in the SD Main Office under SD Head of Domestic Intelligence Franz Six , such an activity cannot be ruled out, but for the assessment it was pointed out that Heidegger already knew about Hancke's death in World War II in 1941 when this case was first mentioned: “It was clear to him that he was no longer to be questioned as a contemporary witness.” And regardless of this, “the SD monitored almost every high-profile intellectual worker with more or less consequences”. Such an observation may also have been carried out because, as Hancke reported, the SD was convinced that Heidegger was collaborating with Jesuits.
The fact that Kurt Bauch was asked in 1938 by the Reichsdozentenbundführer Walter Schultze to “convey his opinion on Pg. Prof. Heidegger in technical and ideological terms” shows, according to Martin Papenbrock, “that one was not so sure about Heidegger in this regard ". However, Bauch confirmed the friend to be “the strongest potency of a really intellectual overcoming of the liberal and Catholic system of thought” and to be politically supported “by a radical will to clearly recognize the current situation and to recognize National Socialism, except in experience and action Thinking through it yourself. ”The inquiry about Heidegger, apparently requested by Nazi functionaries, was accompanied by his gradual withdrawal from the public, which Egon Vietta noted in an article in Das deutsche Wort as early as 1936 . “But why, one might ask, did Heidegger break off the series of his publications and withdraw himself from public discussion?” Between 1936 and 1938, Heidegger wrote, actually withdrawn, the “Contributions to Philosophy (From the Event)”, which was only published posthumously in 1989 were published and in which a "'Einkehr' in the renunciation of any action, but with constant expressions of displeasure" was seen.
“... just where you think you have goals again, where you are 'happy' again, where you move on to making the 'most' closed 'cultural assets (cinemas and seaside resort trips) equally accessible to all' people ' there, in this noisy 'experience drunkenness', is the greatest nihilism, the organized closing of eyes to the aimlessness of man, the 'ready' to avoid every goal-setting decision, the fear of every decision-making area and its opening. "
The majority of the contributions admitted the withdrawal into a criticism of the greed for adventure, the subjectivist worldview, and thus also of the "machinations" , but the extent to which this also included a criticism of National Socialism is controversial. However, B. Altmann stated in an article in his exile in Prague in 1938: “Disenchantment of a philosopher. Heidegger no longer likes to play paws ”. According to Altman, “parallels were drawn with others, with Richard Strauss , with Planck . They wanted to make themselves available to the Third Reich, perhaps even to be courted, and they always have to experience that one cannot even find the modus vivendi with their leaders if one claims to remain a scholar, artist and moral person . ”Looking back, Heidegger himself mentioned 1938 as one of the“ turning point ”in his life during a hike that he undertook on October 14, 1959 with Heribert Heinrichs. Since that year he has "recognized the total disaster and radically revised his relationship to National Socialism."
Heidegger turns to Holderlin and Nietzsche
To dissolve the intellectual-historical boundary between density and thought and between myth and logic in favor of a holistic approach determines Heidegger's attempt to explain a different beginning, the German beginning, to an origin in the history of being, after the Greek one, which is preferably in the exegesis of the works of Hölderlin and Nietzsche and the The accompanying idealization of a “mission from the Germans” found expression and was critically described as “national aestheticism”.
On Heidegger's interpretation of Hölderlin (1934–1943)
After the first failure in the field of realpolitical activity in the Nazi state and with the need for a new approach to the history of being, which, among other things, was the basis of this commitment, the turn to Hölderlin began in 1934, with which the “question of poetic language "Became central, which appeared as a" pioneer of another beginning ", as Holderlin himself is for Heidegger" the poet of the other beginning of our future history ". This turn into the poetic and the first work on the subject, the lecture from the winter semester 1934/35, are partly in the context of a turning away from Nazism and from the political in general after the resignation, but partly also in that of a politicization of the poetic and one in Heidegger's The perspective of insufficient radicalization of the National Socialist “revolution” is debated.
Heidegger's work on Hölderlin during the National Socialist era:
- Hölderlin's hymns "Germanien" and "Der Rhein" , lecture from 1934/35
- Holderlin and the essence of poetry , lecture given on April 2, 1936 in Rome
- If on the holidays , speech, given several times, 1939/1940
- Holderlin's hymn: 'Der Ister , 1942
- Mementos, commemorative pamphlet on the centenary of Hölderlin's death, 1943
- Homecoming / To the relatives , speech on the centenary of death, given in the auditorium of the University of Freiburg, June 6, 1943
- Multiple mentions of Hölderlin in the black books
- Multiple mentions in the posthumously published work Contributions to Philosophy
The "other beginning"
Already in the summer of 1931 the perspective had developed that saw in every beginning the “never again attainable greatness”, on the other hand, in progress the turn to the “newest” and opened up a way out of this contradiction by shifting the accent, “not only the philosophy-historical (im Meaning of the later 'history of being'), but also of the historical-philosophical thinking of Martin Heidegger. The evocation of the beginning, the Greek origin, enables a genuine new beginning in the sense of a cancellation of what has come before ”, through the“ building of a bridge to Greek thought ”.
“It is not arbitrary or even some learned custom, but the deepest necessity of our German existence when we listen back to this Greek beginning . It means: learning to understand that that great beginning of our existence is thrown ahead of us as what we have to catch up with - again not in order to complete a Hellenism, but in order to exhaust the basic possibilities of the primitive Germanic tribal system and to bring it to rule. "
These previously lectured in interpretation of the relationship between Hellenism and "urgermanischem tribalism" is, according to Daniel Meyer, also the "historical-philosophical principles" of the lecture Hölderlin's Hymns 'Germania' and 'The Rhine' is. Hölderlin's poetry, for Heidegger "the way in the possible of a new beginning, because it puts the living of man on earth below the measure of the divine, but first and foremost history as the history of a (and Heidegger means first and last: the German) people is founded. " Regardless of the geographical details, the Rheins become this self-contradicting origin, which “as a beginning is at the same time the determining end, i. H. actually the goal ”is.
In the perspective of the history of being, which has been changed in this way, Heidegger understands the poetic as “that power from which the historical existence of a people arises and from which philosophical thought and politics also experience their determination”. The three powers analogous to this, "poets, thinkers and creators of the state, are considered by Heidegger to be the (...) 'actually creative'", whereby language is "the 'reason for the possibility of history'". In this, Hölderlin's poetry is the "original language of the people", he is also the "'poet who first writes the Germans" "in terms of people's creativity. In the 1938 manuscript Reflection it is affirmed that Holderlin "is not taken here as one poet among others (...), but as the poet of the other beginning of our future history." In this "the people of Germania have 'the special mission' ( ...) to prepare the ground for the new gods. "Because the conception of the" 'first' and 'other beginning' ", described in depth in the black notebooks , is one of" the memory in Greece (...), that outside of Judaism and d. H. of Christianity remained ". The approach to the history of being that has been emerging since the beginning of the 1930s, here adopting Hölderlin's spelling “Seyn”, is now explicitly made into a folk-oriented one by the “Stifter des Deutschen Seyns” and based on “the occidental-Germanic historical existence”:
“The 'fatherland' is being itself, which from the ground up carries and assembles the history of a people as one that exists.”
Heidegger's Hölderlin as a "true leader"
In the lecture in Rome the “unique” of Holderlin's poetry is opposed to the Platonic conception of a general essence of poetry, with the intention of elevating Holderlin to mythical heights as the poet who “reveals the truth of being”. In view of the triad of "poet, thinker and creator of the state", it is predominantly assumed that Heidegger declared Holderlin to be the "true leader" in the 1934/35 lecture and replaced Hitler with the following quote:
“The true and only leader points in his being to the realm of the demigods. To be a leader is a fate and therefore finite being. "
Heidegger interprets himself "in association with Hölderlin as the mediating center", which draws a line that leads through Hölderlin to himself and already in the lecture of 1934/35 based and varied the famous word of Nietzsche:
"Demigods - not gods themselves, but beings in the direction of the gods, and in a direction that leads beyond humans - supermen who nevertheless remain below the size of the gods - sub-gods"
According to H. Ott, this also manifests "the 'little' from which Heidegger came to ascend to the 'secret of the great'", because only "those who understand who are 'first in the power of history' know that something greater is above him. "Heidegger:" This being able to have the greater above oneself is the secret of the great. "
"The story stands up"
Heidegger closes the lecture of 1934/35 with the proclamation of the order of the Germans to take on the role of mediating demigods between past and future:
“That hard-to-carry happiness is assigned to the people of this country: to be an in-between, a center from which and in history is founded. But this can only happen in such a way that this people itself founds and creates its existence, i.e. H. only originally calls Being again, creates poetically and thoughtfully. Thus the eagle's mission and knowledge culminates in the demand for that threefold naming that must be accomplished by this country and its people, and that means first by its creators. To be mentioned - to be reopened in the originally founding saga and knowledge - is the mother, the earth itself. But precisely in this naming as poetic, the 'divine past' (v. 100) sounds one with the future: history arises . "
During the Second World War, Heidegger turned to the hymn in which Hölderlin and the Danube (Latin: “Ister”) sang the river that rises at the source of the Danube in the Black Forest, and from this German-native origin to the east through ten countries all the way to Ukraine. The course of the current, which was already of considerable importance in the lecture on the hymn over the Rhine in the context of the other, the German beginning, is understood "in the Ister hymn, with political implications as a counter-striving of the river 'backwards' from its course to the east" , contending with himself, where the warlike element lies in the Heraclitic sense. The "Ister" lecture was given in 1942 when the German troops were operating the Leningrad blockade and six months after Hitler declared war on the USA, as T. Sheehan and G. Geismann recall - Heidegger also explicitly speaks of the political ones Events and from "National Socialism and its historical uniqueness" and interprets the American defense of the Anglo-Saxon world as a rejection of the beginning of the history of being:
“We know today that the Anglo-Saxon world of Americanism is determined to embrace Europe, and d. H. home, and d. H. to destroy the beginning of the occidental. The beginning is indestructible. America's entry into this planetary war is not the entry into history, but is already the last American act of American lack of history and self-devastation. Because this act is the rejection of the beginning and the decision for the beginning. The hidden spirit of the beginning in the West will not even have the look of contempt for this process of self-devastation of the beginning, but will wait for its great moment out of the serenity of the calm of the beginning. "
The public split with other thinkers of the NSDAP (see above) since the beginning of 1934, which also continues in Heidegger's stubborn interpretation of Holderlin, is also rejected in these texts in favor of a new beginning for the German people, which thus arises from that poetry purely biological approach, which some Nazi ideologues propagated to the “Germanic”, are in part also rated as criticism of National Socialism, which proves a turning away. But Heidegger's self-view and position in the “Third Reich”, combined with his volkish messianization of Hölderlin, which partly took place at the same time as the glorification of Hitler (see above), his distance from other National Socialists, which thus also determines the degree of closeness, are differentiated Summing up with Hugo Ott, starting with the lecture in Rome:
“Heidegger brought the Hölderlin lecture to publication in the December 1936 issue of the magazine Das Innere Reich - an esoteric organ in which invisible Germany, hidden in German spirituality, should be brought to bear, the Führer Adolf Hitler in a special, subtle way Wise submissive (...). Anyone who wrote in this magazine had by no means emigrated from within, was rather one of the figures ridiculed or ridiculed and ridiculed by the down-to-earth National Socialists, whose freedom from fools was just tolerated. (...) And yet, for Heidegger this was without any doubt, he was the only one who had the, as it were, mystical vision of the essence of National Socialism, 'the inner truth and greatness' of the movement, from which knowledge he could not deviate, never, for life! "
"Nietzsche" (1936–1940): About "Race" and "Breeding"
In his examination of Nietzsche, Heidegger placed the philosopher of the “will to power” in the history of being, as the completion of occidental metaphysics in European nihilism. According to Heidegger in 1939, the rationalitas of “total mobilization” only leads from the animal rationale into the brutalitas of bestialitas. At the end of the metaphysics is the sentence: "Homo is brutum bestiale." Nietzsche's " blonde beast ", according to Heidegger in 1940, is not an overcoming, but a consequence of "European nihilism". In 1940, in a Nietzsche lecture that was not given, he wrote: "The metaphysical affirmation of humans towards animals means the nihilistic affirmation of the superman". The condition of the dominion of the earth is therefore "a complete 'machinalization' of things and the breeding of man":
“The cultivation of man is not taming as holding down and paralyzing the 'sensuality', but the accumulation and purification of forces in the unambiguousness of the strictly controllable ' automatism ' of all action. Only where the unconditional subjectivity of the will to power becomes the truth of beings as a whole is the principle of establishing racial breeding, i.e. H. not mere racial formation that grows out of itself but the self-knowing racial idea possible and d. H. metaphysically necessary. Just as the will to power is not conceived biologically, rather ontologically, Nietzsche's idea of race has a metaphysical rather than a biological meaning. "
This passage was interpreted as a historical and philosophical legitimation of the race selection and the extermination of the Jews . In the objection, however, it was stated that “not everyone who attributes something back to its reason also legitimizes it.” Krzysztof Ziarek also judges that it is without a doubt about critical remarks on race and race primacy. In 1927, Heidegger had expressed in a Schelling seminar that “evil is metaphysically necessary”; H. necessarily belongs to the being of beings. In 1940 he wrote: "Nietzsche recognizes the metaphysical character of the machine [...]: 'it gives the pattern of party organization and warfare'." In a deleted passage in the lecture on "Nietzsche: European nihilism" in 1940 he discussed this as well The essence of metaphysics (defined as the "power of calculation and planning") using the example of the "' motorization ' of the Wehrmacht ":
“From the perspective of civil education and 'spirituality' one would like to z. B. the full, d. H. see here the fundamental “motorization” of the Wehrmacht as a manifestation of only unlimited “technicalism” and “ materialism ”. In truth, this is a metaphysical act, which in depth surely surpasses the abolition of ' philosophy '. "
According to Herman Philipse, Heidegger welcomed the totalitarian Nazi regime with these sentences because it carried out an active nihilism and consequently Nietzsche's “ revaluation of all values ”. According to Daniel Morat, the reason for the increasing importance of technology at Heidegger after 1933 is to be found in the fact that “by emphasizing the technical-modern side of the 'machinations' of National Socialism, he created his own ideological reference system of the 'earth' before the NS - Wanted to save contamination ”. In 1940, Heidegger openly said that thinking about domination and power "as a struggle" (according to S. Vietta, the association with Mein Kampf is striking) is nothing more than nihilism, which can only understand the category of truth as a function of power: “What is defeated in this struggle is, because it is defeated, wrong and untrue. What stays up in this fight is right and true because it wins. "
War and the end of the Nazi era
By turning to Hölderlin and Nietzsche and the “other beginning”, Heidegger had given expression to a glorification of the “people of poets and thinkers”, which remained the preferred concept during the Second World War, with which the “historical determination” of the German people and the events of the war as well as the incipient criticism of the National Socialist belief in the power of technology could be united in their inner contradiction. As an example, Heidegger argued at the time of the Battle of Stalingrad in 1942/43 that the Germans were only "invincible" as that people:
“It is therefore important to know that this historical people, if a 'victory' is important here at all, has already triumphed and is invincible if it is the people of poets and thinkers who remain in their essence as long as they do not who falls victim to the terrible, because always threatening deviation from his being and such a misunderstanding of his being. "
Heidegger lectured publicly throughout the Second World War as a professor, preferably dealing with poets and poets-philosophers, from his Nietzsche lectures at the beginning of the war to the “Introduction to Philosophy” with the subtitle “Thinking and Poetry”, which took place on August 8th November 1944 was canceled due to the war. The lectures of this period at a glance:
- Nietzsche's Doctrine of the Will to Power as Knowledge (Summer 1939)
- Nietzsche. European nihilism (second trimester 1940)
- Basic terms (summer 1941)
- Holderlin's hymn 'In memory' (1941/42)
- Hölderlin's hymn 'Der Ister' (Summer 1942)
- Parmenides (1942/43),
- The beginning of occidental thought. Heraklit (summer 1943)
- Logic. Heraclitus' Doctrine of the Logos (Summer 1944)
- Introduction to philosophy. Thinking and Poetry (winter semester 1944/45, discontinued in November 1944)
Statements in the context of the war
With reference to the “interpretation of being as imagined” by Descartes , which in the current episode is also “the metaphysical possibility of engine technology”, Heidegger interprets the capitulation of France in 1940 as a sign of spiritual decline: “In these days we are ourselves the witnesses of a mysterious law of history that one day a people will no longer be able to cope with metaphysics, which arose from their own history, at the moment when this metaphysics has turned into the unconditional. ”The French defeat in the technical war shows, "What Nietzsche already metaphysically recognized, that the modern 'machinal economy', the machine-based calculation of all action and planning in its unconditional form demands a new humanity that goes beyond the previous human". It is not enough to own “armored cars, airplanes and communications equipment”; rather, what is required is “humanity that is fundamentally in accordance with the unique fundamental nature of modern technology and its metaphysical truth” and this “'machine economy'” is only “the supreme” -humanly, and vice versa: This needs that for the establishment of the unconditional rule over the earth. "
Heidegger's interpretation and evaluation of the Nietzschean superman, which decides here on the question of approval of the Blitzkrieg of National Socialist Germany or of criticism of the events of the war, prevails particularly for 1940, i. H. for the time before the beginning of the military defeats of the "Third Reich", no agreement. In the exegesis of W. Müller-Lauter, the superman appeared to Heidegger in 1940 to still be the one who “operates the masterful approach to world conquest and domination” and “who as a subject gives beings the measure”, also as that, as F. Agell affirmed, who is "the necessary product of the movement of the will to its self-affirmation as will to will", and who thereby becomes the "master of the earth" and "almost finds Heidegger's approval".
The commentary on the defeat of France is also seen more generally as a juxtaposition in which the French are “described as incapable of continuing to carry Descartes' philosophy”, while “a superman is postulated” who takes up technology and metaphysics "And in the form of the" leaders of the totalitarian movements "carry out the" historically necessary rule ".
The exegesis, represented by S. Vietta, and which is based on the fundamental criticism of the machinic technique, that Heidegger “Nietzsche's call for the 'superman” stands against the approving and affirmative evaluation of this “superman” on the German or National Socialist-Fascist side '(...) just does not follow. "The mastery of the"' machinal economy '", as it was shown in the Second World War, by the superman is with this for Heidegger" the last embodiment of the nihilistic thinking of rule ", so that the there stated" Critique of National Socialism and its Ideologists "went over to a" Critique of Technology "as early as 1940. That in turn was, in the analysis of W. Müller-Lauter's statements by F. Agell, rather the case only in 1942," at a time when when it gradually became clear that Germany would not win the war. ”Only then did Heidegger the superman appeared as“ a passive machinist ”who worked for di e "devastation of the earth" is responsible.
"The planet is on fire"
After the German defeat in the Second Battle of El Alamein in November 1942 and after the debacle in Stalingrad in early 1943, Heidegger's criticism of Western philosophy as the origin of technology becomes evident. At the beginning of the lecture “The Beginning of Occidental Thought. Heraclitus ”, in the summer of 1943 it was said that technology was“ the consequence of 'philosophy' and nothing else ”, whereby Heraclitus was immediately excluded from the“ philosophy ”, beginning with Plato, and instead was called a“ thinker ”.
Here, too, a beginning before the beginning of metaphysics is evoked, one which only branched off after Heraclitus into the wrong path of machination and which, as another beginning, can still be saved by the Germans alone: this "greatest and the real test of the Germans" I still have to face: "whether they are strong enough beyond the willingness to die to save the beginnings against the small-mindedness of the modern world". Because: "The danger in which the 'sacred heart of the peoples' of the West stands is not that of ruin, but that we, confused, surrender ourselves to the will of modernity and drive it."
From this it is concluded by D. Morat that Heidegger “expected the Germans to be saved from the World War, even if they were the ones who instigated him”. Accordingly, he now separated "between the aberration of the technical-metaphysical National Socialism and the reflection on the real essence of the Germans, which he also increasingly placed in the context of Europe and the 'salvation of the West' (...), for which the Germans as' People of the occidental middle '(...) would have a special task and meaning ”.
“The planet is on fire. The essence of man is out of joint. Only from the Germans can, provided that they find and preserve 'the German', the world historical reflection. "
The "waiting people"
The evening conversation between a younger and an older man in a prisoner-of-war camp in Russia , written towards the end of the war in 1945 and only published in 1995, is also devoted to the question of the nature of the German people and their role in relation to other peoples. On the day of the unconditional surrender of the Germans , Heidegger added a note: "Schloss Hausen in the Danube Valley, May 8, 1945", where he stayed for a while: "On the day that the world celebrated its victory / and had not yet recognized it that for / centuries she has been the vanquished of her / own revolt. "
In the view of the former chairman of the Heidegger Society, G. Figal, this remark seems to "try to deny the victory of the Allies by placing it in the grandeur of a Western history of decline".
In the critical discussion of the “evening talk” on the military defeat of National Socialist Germany, it is pointed out that no soldier appears in it, “no dead person, not a single murder, no crime”, but “just military service”. The two dialogue partners are “mainly Germans” and do not only talk about the people of poets and thinkers, but they themselves are the poet (the younger) and the thinker (the elder), the people themselves. With the two figures, so to speak, the whole German people got into captivity. ”In the sense of the non-activist“ serenity ”that defines the people of poets and thinkers as such, the Germans, represented by the two waiting prisoners, are represented as“ that in one people waiting for only one sense ”, and it is the task of these Germans to teach“ the peoples ”the ability to wait. D. Morat: “In this document of the end of the war, Heidegger also expressed his belief in the 'still withheld nature of our defeated people' (...) and assumed, as in 1943, that only 'from the Germans [...], assumed that they can find and preserve 'the German', the world historical reflection can come '(...). "
“Entrenchment work” and the end of the war at Wildenstein Castle
Until the end of 1944, the Second World War had no documented effects on Heidegger's living conditions. Only after the NSDAP had called in October "all men aged 16 to 60 who were capable of weapons" to join the Volkssturm , the position order was also issued to the philosopher, who informed him on November 8th and on November 23rd to erect entrenchments Breisach am Rhein (Kaiserstuhl), east of the Alsace bridgehead , was drawn in during the battles for Alsace and Lorraine and on the day the western allies conquered Strasbourg - also four days before the bombing of Freiburg. Heidegger was released on December 2nd, "after his company had retreated across the Rhine."
The attempt by Heidegger's close friend, the Nazi racial hygienist Eugen Fischer , to intercede for him does not seem to have been the cause of the dismissal. On the day Heidegger marched on the Rhine, Fischer had telegraphed to the “ Reichsstudentenführer ” Gustav Adolf Scheel , who was meanwhile also Gauleiter of Salzburg: “Volkssturm and hourly commandment fully recognized, I stand up for faculty request from Alsace, deployed Volkssturmmann Heidegger, a unique nation and party irreplaceable thinker to obtain exemption from armed service. "Fischer sent a letter afterwards, and Scheel replied on December 12th, but his intervention was no longer necessary:" The Heidegger affair had meanwhile been satisfactorily resolved "(H. Ott).
“As a party member and thus a role model - not because of the dispensability of his person claimed by Heidegger - he was assigned to the Volkssturm as a fifty-five-year-old, sporty, healthy man. As in the First World War, in the Second World War he also succeeded in evading the front through intercession. Heidegger had (...) initially claused heroism, greatness and commitment to the fatherland in philosophical terms, and from 1933 proclaimed it in open National Socialist jargon (...). But his personal sacrifice for the often invoked common good bordered on cowardice. After the bombing of Freiburg in November 1944, he left the destroyed city in order to go to the idyll of his homeland in Messkirchen, far from the war. "
In his conversation with Der Spiegel in 1966, Heidegger said that he had already been drafted for fortification work in the summer of 1944, then again in November for the “Volkssturm”, which research has not yet confirmed.
After Heidegger's ten-day service in the war, he faced the problem of where the Faculty of Philosophy could continue to work, since the building could no longer be used after the bombing - around 80 percent of the city of Freiburg had been destroyed. At Heidegger's instigation, the faculty moved to Wildenstein Castle above the Danube Valley on March 16, 1945. Heidegger himself stayed in the forester's house at Burg Hausen with Prince von Sachsen-Meiningen and his wife Margot, who had been one of his students since 1942, then his lover and, like her husband, a member of the NSDAP since 1932. On the other hand, Heidegger's wife Elfride stayed in the house in Freiburg-Zähringen.
Heidegger was also concerned about the preservation of his manuscripts in those months before the unconditional surrender in the face of the advancing Western allies. Messkirch was bombed on February 22, 1945, whereupon Heidegger went to his birthplace, as his son Heinrich reports: “The two iron boxes were in our house; In the Volksbank, however, two safes were also rented for valuable manuscripts; After the air raid on February 22nd, Martin Heidegger himself took the manuscripts out of the destroyed building ”. The writings were brought to Bietingen.
Heidegger experienced the end of the war with ten professors and around thirty female students - the students were at the front - at Wildenstein Castle, privately in the house of the Prince and Princess of Saxony-Meiningen.
Doxography on Heidegger's exemption from the "Volkssturm"
Time after 1945
Dismissal, teaching ban and retirement
On April 21, 1945, while Heidegger was still at Wildenstein Castle, French troops of the 9th Colonial Infantry Division (DIC) and the 1st Panzer Division ended the National Socialist rule in Freiburg. Due to the shortage of housing in the almost completely destroyed city, the order was made to confiscate all the still intact houses of NSDAP members, including that of Heidegger, against which his wife Elfride objected on June 10th, confirmed by hers only on June 24th from the castle returning husband. By September, 2,540 apartments had been confiscated in the city, but Heidegger assessed this in his case as “discrimination against my person and my work” and raised “the sharpest objection”. To justify it said u. a .: "I have never held an office in the party". Already in this letter, according to H. Ott, "the basic elements of the subsequent apologetic line" and the language regulation of his self-portrayal were recognizable (see below). While large parts of the population were homeless, the mayor appointed by the French military government decided that the Heideggers could stay in their own house but had to take in two families.
The cleanup procedure
On April 25, just four days after the French troops marched in and around two weeks before the official end of the war, the university had already repealed the Führer constitution and elected a new Senate. At the end of July, a commission was also set up to represent the university vis-à-vis the French military government, which resulted in the initiation of the “puration” procedure for teaching staff from Nazi-polluted members. The commission was formed from professors who were accepted by the victorious power because of their participation in the Freiburg resistance or their opposition to National Socialism: Constantin von Dietze , who presided, Gerhard Ritter and Adolf Lampe belonged to the first group, Friedrich Oehlkers and Arthur Allgeier to second. The settlement procedure in the Heidegger case dragged on over stages from July 1945 to December 1946. The Faculty of Philosophy supported Heidegger's request for retirement from 1949 until his retirement in September 1951.
- July 23, 1945: first hearing before the five-member commission
- September 28, 1945: French military government declares Heidegger "available"
- September 1945: first report
- December 19, 1945: von Dietze report (revision of the first report)
- December 1945: second hearing before the Commission
- December 22, 1945: Expert opinion from Karl Jaspers
- January 19, 1946: Senate decision - ban on teaching
- December 28, 1946: Ratification by the military government - teaching ban, no function in the university
- January 9, 1949: Heidegger asks the new rector to have the military government lift his teaching ban
- May 1949: The Philosophical Faculty applies to the Senate to lift the teaching ban
- Spring 1949: New reports
- April 1, 1950: Application by the Philosophical Faculty for Heidegger's reintegration
- The Baden State Ministry guarantees Heidegger's retirement and retirement at the age of 62, effective on September 26, 1951, which includes the lifting of the teaching ban.
The "predominantly benevolent" commission largely followed Heidegger's self-portrayal in its first report and stated that in 1933 he expected "a spiritual renewal of German life on a national basis" and, moreover, the National Socialists as "a rescue of Western culture from the dangers of communism" considered. It was also noted, however, that Heidegger had allowed himself to be carried away up to the incitement of the students, as well as "zealous cooperation" in the "transformation of the university in the sense of the new 'Führer principle'" and in the "introduction of external forms of Hitlerism (...) in academic life ”and reset or abandoned“ anti-Nazi personalities ”. The report proposed retirement, which would leave him the possibility of limited teaching activity, but would remove him from active participation in self-administration, examinations and post-doctoral qualifications'. ”However, a member of the commission demanded further consequences.
This commission member was the resistance fighter Adolf Lampe, whom Heidegger had attested to as political unreliability in 1933 (see above). Together with Heidegger's other opponent from the rector's time, Walter Eucken, and with Vice-Rector Franz Böhm - all of them, including the chairman of Dietze, former members of the Freiburg district - a triad was formed that demanded more severe consequences, because Heidegger “with intolerant fanaticism (...) preached pernicious heresies ", namely those" that have never been taken back by him to this day ". Under the pressure of this triad, von Dietze, as chairman of the commission, submitted a revision of the report on December 19, which more clearly went into Heidegger's “behavior against Jews” and the fight against the Nazi claimed by him: “In any case, Mr. Heidegger had National Socialism at that time never fought as clearly and clearly as he once stood up for him in the Rector's speech. "
The Jaspers report
During renewed hearings in December, Heidegger asked Karl Jaspers, in particular, to answer the question of whether he was an anti-Semite, which he did in December in a letter to Oehlkers. However, against Heidegger's expectations, Jaspers passed a devastating verdict, partly determined by Heidegger's report in the Baumgarten case of 1933, in which he was described as belonging to the “liberal-democratic Heidelberg intellectual group around Max Weber” (see above), to which Jaspers was also to be counted quoted the copy together with the alleged defamatory allegation of a connection to the "Jew Fraenkel" and concluded: "Today we are used to atrocities, by which one can hardly understand today what horror seized me when reading these sentences." proved that Heidegger "at least in certain contexts became an anti-Semite." Alongside Alfred Baeumler and Carl Schmitt , Heidegger was one of the three professors "who tried to get to the top of the National Socialist movement spiritually". On the question of how the commission should proceed, Jaspers made a recommendation: “As long as there is no real rebirth in him, m. E. Such a teacher should not be placed in front of today's almost unresisted youth ”, which is why he pleaded for a suspension from the teaching post for a few years. On the basis of the revision of the first expert opinion and on that of the Jaspers letter, the Senate at a meeting on January 19, 1946 voted for the revocation of the teaching permit, ratified by the French military government in the decision of December 28, resulting in the loss the professorship and permanent loss of the license to teach and the prohibition of any participation in academic life.
Whether the Jaspers letter with the copy of the report in the Baumgarten case and the subsequent decision by the Senate to lose his teaching license caused Heidegger's nervous breakdown in the spring of 1946, the researchers believe that these were the reasons for which the majority affirmed However, it has not been confirmed by Viktor von Gebsattel, the doctor treating the patient at the time, nor is it completely undisputed, since the conflict of minds is also mentioned, which Heidegger had in that he was between his lover, Margot von Sachsen-Meiningen, and his wife Elfride had to decide.
The retirement in 1951
The Philosophical Faculty remained largely uninvolved during the adjustment process and only occasionally commented, always in Heidegger's favor, and this was, according to Joseph Sauer, "received with general laughter". But when Gerd Tellenbach was elected rector in 1949/50 , the Philosophical Faculty again took over the management of the university, which Heidegger used to send one of his justifications, My Relationship to the University , to Tellenbach and to suggest that the military government repeal the To obtain a teaching ban. The Philosophical Faculty complied with this in writing in May 1949, referring to Heidegger's international importance. In the following internal university discussion, however, opposing positions were again voiced, arguing that Heidegger was "more of a fashion philosopher or even a charlatan whose teaching is dangerous and rightly falls under the teaching ban." The arbitration chamber proceedings carried out by laypeople in the US American sector were also taken over by the French military government in 1947 and produced “increasingly milder decisions as the time went by until the end of the war”, which, in the judgment of K. Hochstuhl, proves the failure of denazification in the French occupation zone as well: “Denazification was closed by 1948 at the latest It has become an annoying compulsory exercise. ”In such a judicial chamber proceedings, Heidegger was only rated as a“ fellow traveler ”in 1949, which did not have any direct impact on the decision of the military government, but favored efforts to lift the teaching ban. After further international reports were obtained, and Karl Jaspers also moderated his previous judgment somewhat, an agreement was reached with Heidegger that the teaching ban should be lifted by retirement with retirement, which became legally effective on his 62nd birthday on September 26, 1951 - Heidegger perceived it as a third-rate rehabilitation throughout his life.
Heidegger's Nazi period in his self-portrayal
Beginning with the protest against the confiscation of his house in July 1945, Heidegger expressed himself in private and official letters and in essays about his behavior during the National Socialist era, most of which were not printed until after his death. The texts at a glance:
- Letter to the Provisional Mayor of Freiburg (July 16, 1945)
- The rectorate 1933/34. Facts and Thoughts (1945)
- Application for reinstatement in teaching , (November 4, 1945)
- Explanations and basic information , (letter to the chairman von Dietze, dated December 15, 1945)
- My Elimination (1946)
- Letter to Herbert Marcuse (January 20, 1948)
- Letters to Karl Jaspers (1946, March 1950)
- Letter to a Student (1960)
- Only a god can save us (interview with "Der Spiegel", 1966)
- Letter to Stefan Zemach (1968)
In these texts and in the hearings before the clean-up commission, Heidegger represented a perspective of the defense, sometimes varying, which over a period of around two decades and a. the following arguments were based:
- he supported National Socialism because he expected a “spiritual renewal” from it, also as a bulwark to prevent communism
- he was reluctant to take up the rector's office in 1933
- he only stayed in office to prevent worse
- After resigning from the rectorate and especially after the so-called “Röhm Putsch” in 1934, he entered the “spiritual resistance”, the “opposition”
- in his lectures he then clearly criticized National Socialism and thus had a corresponding effect on his students
Some of these arguments, which Heidegger used for a "biographical strategy" (D. Morat), belong to those that, as "collective behavior" and "thesis of so many", counted among the reaction patterns of self-relief after the Nazi era and in this sense are criticized, especially the paradigms "to prevent worse" and "to prevent communism".
In Heidegger's case in particular, however, the strategy of justification was denied or entirely rejected by colleagues and commentators with regard to its factual correctness, its credibility and its honest intention. On May 13, 1948, H. Marcuse called the declaration of a "spiritual renewal" by National Socialism a confusion of the "liquidation of Western thought with its renewal", which was an intellectual problem, namely a "problem of knowledge, of truth" - and finally broke off contact with Heidegger. Also in view of the defamation discussed several times by H. Ott, which Heidegger 1935 in the lecture “Introduction to Metaphysics” against one of the spiritual mentors of the “White Rose” , Theodor Haecker , and his book with the Kantian title “What is man? "poured out, the claim to have belonged to the resistance after 1934 and the claim that the Gestapo had sought a" stove "for the" Scholl Student Action "in its lectures was described as devoid of any basis and as veritable insolence and obscenity.
The arguments regarding Heidegger's unbroken commitment to Hitler and National Socialism after 1934 (see above) are also cited in research against the credibility of the self-portrayal in this regard, expanded by documents such as the "Questionnaire for Political Assessment" by the SS "Security Service" (SD), in which Heidegger was judged on May 11, 1938 as "politically reliable". In addition, numerous inaccuracies and contradictions are mentioned in Heidegger's defense documents.
According to the overwhelming opinion of researchers, the exclusion from the Philosophers' Congress in Prague, which he repeatedly asserted, is apparently only due to a non-appearance that Heidegger shared with Krieck, Baeumler, Rothacker and Rosenberg. On the other hand, Löwith, Popper and Husserl were in Prague, and Hans Heyse spoke in a letter to the Reich Ministry of Education on August 4, 1936, when it came to the 1937 congress in Paris, of the line in Prague that should be avoided this time.
In addition to critics of his writings of justification, Heidegger's friends, former students, followers and commentators after 1945 finally accused him of insincerity, characterized him as a "Black Forest rascal" and a notorious liar, which also shaped his philosophical conception of truth and his dealings with worldly events.
“I think he was lying. Human-political always, but also in the philosophical "
If someone came to Todtnauberg to reproach him, according to Hannah Arendt in a letter to Jaspers in 1949, Heidegger would “lie, the hell of a lot, and rely on the fact that he will not be called a liar in the face. He probably believed that in this way he could buy himself off the world cheaply, cheat out of all unpleasant things and just make philosophy. And then, of course, all this tricky, childish dishonesty was promptly thrown into his philosophizing. ”The method of quoting from his own writings from the Nazi era such as the Rector's speech and simply omitting dubious references, such as those to the“ earthly and bloody forces ", Commented Heidegger's former pupil Günther Anders:" Does he assume that no one is able to compare the quotations? Are we not worthy of a better lie? A cleverer fraud? "
Urged by Arendt to do so, Heidegger stated in a letter to Jaspers on March 7, 1950: "I haven't come to your house since 1933 because a Jewish woman lived there, but because I was simply ashamed ." on July 5, 1949, in a letter to Jaspers, he spoke of the "confrontation with German calamity and its world-historical-modern interdependence". Jaspers did not answer until 1952 and called Heidegger's attempts to confess guilt due to its "indeterminacy" a "semblance of greatness" and asked whether the 'power of evil', of which Heidegger had written, was not also 'the veiling and forgetting of the past' belong, whereupon there was no answer.
This further allegation concerns Heidegger's lack of apology for his role in National Socialism and his persistent public silence on it, which lasted until his death after the settlement process. Asked for an explanation by Karl Jaspers, Rudolf Bultmann and Herbert Marcuse, Heidegger replied to the latter in 1948 that it had been impossible for him, "because the Nazi followers expressed their change of mind in the most disgusting way, but I had nothing in common with them." Heidegger round Thirty years of silence in this regard has been critically commented on in numerous essays and articles.
"Without Heidegger's terrible silence we would not feel the commandment, which is directed at our sense of responsibility, the need to read Heidegger as he has not read himself."
Heidegger's commentary on the Holocaust
Since the demand of 1933/34 for a “complete annihilation” of the enemy “in the innermost root of the existence of a people”, Heidegger had shared an attitude of mind with his presentations on “World Jewry”, the “racial principle” and “racial unity” that followed the beginning of the The cause of the genocide of Jews in the summer of 1941 preceded (see above). Chronologically following on from his demand for “racial care” as a “necessary measure”, the philosopher speaks in 1942 of a “self-destruction” of the “Jewish”. Statements of this kind and evidence such as the report by Paul Jurevics about a conversation in 1944 means that Heidegger's knowledge of the genocide is largely assumed for the time of Nazi rule - parallel to the correction in the question of contemporary knowledge of the Holocaust in Germany. The extermination of the Jews, after 1945 expressly as industrial mass murder , was commented on by Heidegger only in passing, but repeatedly and clearly. The question of whether Heidegger endorsed the Holocaust or not is a matter of controversy today.
Quotes from the period before 1945
The day after the “Reichspogromnacht”, November 10, 1938, when the ruins of the burned down synagogue in Freiburg, located right next to the university, were blown up by the SS, Heidegger gave a lecture at 5 p.m., but he did not comment on his notes at the time later to this public anti-Semitic violence.
The content of an unspoken knowledge that Heidegger claims for himself in a letter to Kurt Bauch of August 10, 1941, but still to a greater extent ascribed to the addressee, the art historian and, since 1941, a member of the naval command of the naval command in Berlin, remains unclear : “And now the Russian war is here; but this means more than it is itself. I don't need to tell you anything, because you know more. But I know enough. ”In the previous month, and thus right at the beginning of the genocide, Heidegger's son Hermann, as a soldier on the Eastern Front,“ saw for the first time that Jews were murdered ”, but he did not tell his father about it. But R. Wolin assumes that Heidegger, due to his close friendship with Eugen Fischer, “could have already known about the Nazis' preparations for the genocide.” And after the exegesis of the Black Booklet , Peter Trawny leaves no doubt about Heidegger's knowledge of the Holocaust or about the NS -Time. One year after the start of the genocide, Heidegger noted in August 1942 the idea that "Judaism" since "Christ" has been the "principle of destruction", the annihilation of Judaism is "self-annihilation" and the fight against Jews is the fulfillment of a commandment in the history of being :
“The anti-christ, like every anti-, must originate from the same essential essence as that against which it is anti- - thus like '' the Christian ''. This comes from Judaism. This is in the period of the Christian West, i. H. of metaphysics, the principle of destruction. The destructive in the reversal of the perfection of metaphysics-d. H. Hegel through Marx. The spirit and culture become the superstructure of 'life'-d. H. the economy, d. H. the organization-d. H. of biological d. H. of the 'people'. When the essentially 'Jewish' in the metaphysical sense fights against the Jewish, the climax of self-annihilation in history is reached; Assuming that the 'Jewish' has completely seized control everywhere, so that the fight against 'the' Jewish 'and it first and foremost comes into submission to him. "
According to the testimony of the Latvian philosopher Paul Jurevics, Heidegger was informed of the genocide of the Jews in the Baltic countries in autumn 1944, but he commented sharply against it.
Commentary on the Holocaust after 1945
A treatise, an essay or a letter in which Heidegger addresses the topic of the extermination of European Jews is unknown. In some references to this, the Holocaust is given a rating that is equated with the flight and expulsion of Germans from Central and Eastern Europe after 1945 or that is integrated into the criticism of technology in the increasing development of industrialized processes. The following quote from the Black Booklet is used as evidence that in 1946 Heidegger's misunderstanding of “world will” with regard to the Germans was historically more important than the horror of the gas chambers, and that the Allied victory, which limited this world will, was more criminal.
"Would z. B. the misunderstanding of this fate - which does not belong to us ourselves, the holding down in the will of the world - would be conceived from fate, not an even more essential 'guilt' and a 'collective guilt', the size of which is not at all - in essence not even because of the atrocity of the 'Gas chambers' could be measured -; a guilt - more sinister than all publicly 'denouncing' 'crimes' - which certainly no one will ever be able to excuse in the future. 'One' suspects that the German people and country are already one single concentration camp - as 'the world' has never 'seen' it and that 'the world' does not want to see either - this unwillingness is even more willing than ours Willingness against the wilderness of National Socialism. ""
Attention was drawn to the fact that Heidegger also used the word “gas chambers” in addition to the terms “guilt” and “collective guilt”. According to Peter Trawny, the quotation also confirms the tenor of the reply to Marcuse from 1948, in which Heidegger complained that the Allies "could kill 'East Germans" in front of the world, "but that the Nazis kept it secret during the Holocaust.
“To the serious, justified accusations that you utter about a regime that killed millions of Jews, that made terror the normal state and everything that really means spirit and freedom and the like. Truth was connected, turned into its opposite ', I can only add that instead of' Jews' there must be 'East Germans' and then the same applies to one of the Allies, with the difference that everything that has happened since 1945 is publicized around the world is known, while the bloody terror of the Nazis was actually kept secret from the German people. "
Herbert Marcuse replied on May 13, 1948:
“How is it possible to put the torture, mutilation and extermination of millions of people on the same level as the compulsory transplant of ethnic groups in which none of these crimes have occurred (perhaps with a few exceptional cases). The world today is such that the difference between Nazi concentration camps and the deportations and internment camps of the post-war period is the whole difference between inhumanity and humanity. "
In his assessment of the history of reception, H. Givsan rejects O. Pöggeler's interpretation, according to which Marcuse merely uttered the “assumption” in his answer that Heidegger wanted to set off Auschwitz with the expulsion of the “East Germans”: “Heidegger says it himself. (...) If one 'opposing party' has done that, the other 'opposing party' has done that. "
In December 1949, the year after his correspondence with Marcuse, Heidegger gave a lecture in Bremen entitled “Das Ge-Stell”, dedicated to his criticism of technology, in which he casually spoke of gas chambers and extermination camps:
"Agriculture is now a motorized food industry, essentially the same as the manufacture of corpses in gas chambers and extermination camps, the same as the blockade and starvation of countries, the same as the manufacture of hydrogen bombs."
“Hundreds of thousands die en masse. They die? You perish. You will be killed. They die? They become part of the inventory of the manufacture of corpses. They die? They are quietly liquidated in extermination camps. And even without such - millions are now perishing in China through hunger. But to die means to be able to do this. We can only do it if our being likes the nature of death. But in the midst of countless deaths, the essence of death remains distorted. "
The judgments about Heidegger's comparison between the food industry and Auschwitz are almost unanimous on the line of “trivializing” the Holocaust ( Enzo Traverso ) and “dehumanizing the 'final solution'” ( Hans Jörg Sandkühler ). The “perversion of the concept of responsibility” and the “production of cloudiness” (F. Grosser) are stated. The idea fulfills the purpose of an “exculpative function of the criticism of technology in the post-war period” (D. Morat). It was also asked whether "The Shoah can be understood at least partially in terms of constellations within the history of thought that would have led to the 'motorized food industry'" (H. Zaborowski), but the "'incommensurable difference between mass extermination and any other technical phenomenon' ' "For most researchers the minimal consensus and Heidegger's violation, on the other hand, the actual point of criticism, which J. Habermas sums up as follows:" Under the leveling gaze of the philosopher of being, the extermination of the Jews also appears as an arbitrarily exchangeable event. "
In addition, especially the documented trains of thought on the history of being “subordinate” to the “self-destruction” of the “Jewish” as the “principle of destruction” and to the “holding down” of this “world will” by the allies, in which a “more essential” guilt than in death Seeing gas chambers prompted various researchers to undertake interpretative exegesis, according to which Heidegger “considered a 'final solution' to be necessary”. Occasionally, it is also said that, according to the latter quote, the Allies culpably prevented the Germans from achieving the completion of the “Final Solution”. On the other hand, there is a reading in which the Holocaust is an event marginalized by Heidegger within the historical stage of machination in general and National Socialism is a "necessary form of enhancement" of the latter, "since an apocalyptic change can only set in when it is fully developed," whereby the Germans for Heidegger “ the only people” “in which the positive change can take place”. Defensive remarks from the time before the publication of the Black Booklets must also be taken into account , in which, for example, the formulation of the "inventory items from the manufacture of corpses" was still interpreted as a counterpart to Adorno's critical statements on administrative mass murder or in which it was simply held to be that "in no case" could it be said that "Heidegger legitimized the extermination of the Jews."
In line with the call for a line to be drawn as early as 1948 and still using the means of relativising Nazi crimes by referring to communism, Heidegger expressed himself in a letter to the editor on a report in the Süddeutsche Zeitung on June 14, 1950:
“Where crimes have occurred they must be atoned for. But how long will one continue to publicly defame those who have been politically mistaken for a short or long period of time and this in a state whose constitution everyone can be a member and fighter of the communist party? In this way a strange delusion drives the attrition and inner dissolution of the last substantial forces of our people. "
The Heidegger case
Restoration and protest
The term "the Heidegger case" is considered an "international convention" (Th. Kisiel) for the discussion of the philosopher's relationship to National Socialism. Heidegger also used this term. But the connotations of this convention are by no means uniform. It can mean “Heidegger as an accomplice of the Nazis” or “Heidegger as a Nazi”, but also only refer to “the ongoing back and forth negotiations” about allegations of this kind.
In the course of the "great peace with the perpetrators" and the followers of the Nazi regime, which soon after the denazification process determined the restoration of an extensive social unity through the appropriate handling of the recent past and its representatives, Heidegger was returned to the reintegrated into university operations: in the winter semester of 1951/52 he gave a regular lecture and in June 1957 lectures as part of the festive program for the 500th anniversary of the Freiburg University. During this period, initially in the younger generation, there was also opposition and criticism, notably from Jürgen Habermas, Paul Hühnerfeld and Guido Schneeberger (all born between 1926 and 1929).
Habermas starts the debate
On the occasion of the publication of the lecture from 1935, Introduction to Metaphysics , including the quotation of the “inner truth and greatness of National Socialism”, which Heidegger now, in 1953, replaced in the latter part with “the movement” (see above), the as yet unknown doctoral student Jürgen Habermas caused an article to criticize the fact that that statement was published again without any distancing. This is part of the “continued rehabilitation” of National Socialism by “the masses, first and foremost those responsible from then and now”. Due to the lack of commentary on the words “it can be assumed that they reflect Heidegger's current view unchanged.” Habermas summed up that Heidegger “not only justified his own error, but instead of a moral clarification, also the 'error' of the National Socialist leadership based on his history. “In addition, his philosophy is still infected by the National Socialists, which is why a new infection of“ enthusiastic students ”through the martial terminology of the“ Third Reich ”is to be feared. In the essay, Heidegger's first public discussion of his role in National Socialist Germany was called for. Thereupon a dispute developed between Christian Lewalter and Karl Korn , in which the former used the ideological argument in defense of Heidegger that Habermas was an Adorno supporter and that Heidegger's statement was clearly trivialized - then referred to by Korn as “advocate tricks”. Heidegger replied in a short letter to the editor that he had omitted to delete the sentence for reasons of historical honesty ”.
First critical volumes on Heidegger's Nazi past
In 1959, the scholarly dispute in the feature pages of the newspapers was supplemented by the literary critic Paul Hühnerfeld , who also mentioned and commented critically on some of Heidegger's National Socialist remarks in a short biography: “The quintessence of Heidegger's philosophizing, the relationship between being and being, is shown in the Served the National Socialist ideology. ” Ludwig Marcuse praised the script as“ the best and most justice-seeking introduction to the life and thoughts of the most controversial thinker of our day ”and considered the criticism alone to be“ too elegant ”because“ Hühnerfeld only suggests what should be shouted out. ”The following year, Guido Schneeberger, a student of Karl Jaspers, published a first and very reduced bibliographical booklet, including the texts relevant to the debate and largely unknown to the public, two of which were also published there were printed (the call to the Vah l “German men and women” in the Freiburg student newspaper of November 10, 1933 and the professors' commitment to Adolf Hitler ). However, the magazine was self-published and could only be obtained free of charge from Schneeberger, so that the distribution remained extremely low. However, Schneeberger sent copies of it to various Heidegger researchers and in 1962 presented a more extensive documentation with a review of Heidegger . At the beginning of the 1960s, the subject of political engagement as rector was added to the debate within a general criticism of fascism, and with Theodor W. Adorno's analyzes, the “Heidegger case” came into sociological criticism and the dispute among political camps. "Heidegger's inclusion in Hitler's leadership state was not an act of opportunism," says Adorno, but rather was inferred from a philosophy that was "fascist right down to its innermost cells". Adorno's criticism of Heidegger, which had only been voiced sporadically, was given a comprehensive and fundamental form in 1964 in the work “Jargon of Authenticity. The German Ideology ”. In it he argued that Heidegger in particular - but also Jaspers - had sacrificed the language of the Enlightenment to a "homeland mystifying irrationalism" that served as a pioneer of National Socialism and continues to offer asylum for its social development.
“Spiegel” conversation and criticism
On the occasion of the dissertation of Alexander Schwan, Political Philosophy in Heidegger's thought , the former SD officer and then summed up mirror -Ressortleiter Georg Wolff development in the "case Heidegger" in broad terms in an article together - based on an essay by Dieter hum - and took on some inaccuracies "without fact checking " (L. Hachmeister), in particular the rumor that Heidegger had forbidden Husserl to enter the university "in writing and with his own signature". Thereupon Heidegger complained in a letter to the editor to the “Spiegel”, which the editor W. Busse took as an opportunity to transfigure the complaint “to a heroic deed” (G. Wolff) and to announce in the paper on March 14, 1966: “The The letter from Freiburg is a remarkable contribution to the contemporary history of philosophy, namely the first public statement that Heidegger made on actions in which he had seriously misjudged innovations from 1933 for several months. ”As L. Hachmeister explains, this was euphemistic and distorting Description of Heidegger's involvement in the National Socialist state and his racist ideology the beginning of the finally successful attempt to persuade the philosopher to do the interview that took place with editor-in-chief Rudolf Augstein and Georg Wolff on September 23, 1966 in Heidegger's private house in Rötebuckweg. The fact that Wolff, a former member of the SA and SD, interviewed a former member of the NSDAP and Augstein did not have sufficient philosophical knowledge enabled Heidegger to shape the conversation largely in the sense of his self-portrayal.
Through the agreement that the conversation should only be published posthumously and through the reputation of the "Spiegel" as a critically questioning magazine, Heidegger's self-portrayal was widely believed and disseminated after its publication in 1976 until the beginning of the 1980s.
In his critical biography, the historian Hugo Ott finally showed in 1988 that these versions, e.g. B. on the background of the takeover of the rectorate, often do not correspond to the actual processes. The book was also a reaction to the Rector's speech, which was first republished in 1983, and to a publication by Heidegger's decade-long follower, HW Petzet, who took part in the “Spiegel” conversation as his second and in 1983 meetings and conversations with Martin Heidegger 1929–1979 (subtitle ) with the programmatic title Towards a Star . Ott's book marks a turning point in which the historical facts of Heidegger's defense came to the test and - also following the publication by Victor Farias - the validity of self-portrayal as a whole was questioned.
Heidegger in the judgment of Arendt, Anders and Nolte
Hannah Arendt
Hannah Arendt's comments on Heidegger's National Socialist commitment are divided into critical and, in some cases, accusatory remarks before 1950 and a defensive statement in the period afterwards, with the criticism being expressed in private letters and only once publicly. Maria Robaszkiewicz writes: “The reasons why Arendt Heidegger only criticizes her friends and spares them in public must be found in her biography and in her fluctuating relationship with the philosopher. Undoubtedly, especially after they met again in 1950, this is ambivalent. ”In the essay What is Existential Philosophy ? , published in 1946 in English, 1947 in French and 1948 in German ? asked Arendt
“... whether Heidegger's philosophy has not been taken unduly seriously just because it deals with very serious things. In any case, Heidegger did everything in his political way of acting to warn us against taking him seriously. "
Arendt saw the Nazism of her former teacher and lover based on his irresponsibility and also in a romanticism, a "playfulness that stems partly from genius and partly from despair". And she criticized Heidegger's “mythologizing non-concepts” such as “people” and “earth”, which he had ascribed to the self in lectures in the 1930s. On July 9, 1946, she wrote to Jaspers regarding resolution 4012, which Heidegger had drafted on April 28, 1933 (see above) and which she called "letter": "because I know that this letter and this signature" almost killed Husserl I can't help but consider Heidegger a potential murderer. ”In 1949, she attested him in a letter of Jasper's lack of character, in the sense that“ he literally doesn't have one, certainly not a particularly bad one ”.
After seeing them again in a Freiburg hotel in 1950, their judgment about his Nazi period became much milder. In her second public statement on this, she compared Heidegger with Plato in 1969, on his eightieth birthday, because both “took refuge in tyrants and leaders.” This is a déformation of great professional thinkers: “Because the tendency towards the tyrannical is theoretically stable almost all great thinkers (Kant is the big exception). ”She praised the quality of his thinking and touched the topic of his involvement in the Nazi era only marginally with a relieving style. Their respect for him is based on the fact that he has learned from the mistake and henceforth limited himself to the domain of thinking.
"Now we all know that Heidegger once gave in to the temptation (...) to 'intervene' in the world of human affairs (...). He was still young enough to learn from the shock of the collision that drove him back to his traditional home 35 years ago after ten short, hectic months, and to incorporate what he had learned into his thoughts. "
She concluded with the train of thought that through Heidegger's thinking a storm was moving that came from the ancient "and what it leaves behind is something perfect that, like everything that is perfect, falls back to the age."
Doxography on Arendt's quote about the futurists
Günther Anders
Günther Anders , who heard Heidegger's lectures in Marburg in 1924 and got to know his future wife Hannah Arendt in the process, saw the commonality of Heidegger's philosophy with Hitler's convictions as those of the social climbers with a lack of morality - the latter similar to his friend Emmanuel Levinas . As early as 1946, Anders initially described the difference as that between the “technique of self-treatment” (Heidegger) and that of “mass treatment” (Hitler). But both “first meet in the anti-democratic affect , which in both cases is not the aristocratic affect known from history, but the upstart affect.” Although the self-treatment and the mass treatment concern the solipsistic and national “becoming real” Heidegger believed that he could “assume the two apparently contradicting positions at the same time”, the “self” and the “man” so despised by Heidegger, and this is due to the fact that both “represent variants of moral solipsism . From the anti-human 'unity' of existence (which excludes the others) the anti-human 'ever-our-ness' of National Socialist chauvinism could easily become. "
The conclusion of the philosopher Anders, who in the year after completing his doctorate with Husserl "could not differentiate" his own thoughts from those of Heidegger, according to Anders according to Heidegger, is given the form of the inference from existence that is appropriate to existential philosophy after the event of National Socialist rule on being:
“Every little martyr towers over him infinitely. Do not listen to him. Rather, listen to those anonymous anonymous people who had fallen silent, who had really dared to stand up to the meanness, to put their being at risk, to those for whom their struggle really became their fate, who did not do anything like H., but were destroyed. Listen to their silence. Next to him, Heidegger's partly hammered, partly orphically darkened sentences reveal themselves for what they are: as opportunistic. "
Ernst Nolte
In 1992 Ernst Nolte - who listened to Heidegger's lectures in 1944 and at the beginning of the 1950s and wanted to do his doctorate with him and whose theses on National Socialist crimes had triggered the historians' dispute as an "Asian act" in 1986 - extended his controversial relativism to Heidegger's involvement in the Nazi regime again used the argument of anti-Bolshevism as the basis of legitimation for the “Third Reich”. With the help of conceptual differentiations between “large” and “small attempted solutions”, between “national socialism”, “social nationalism” and “radical fascism”, Nolte came to the conclusion that Heidegger was at most in the direction of a “small attempted solution” in the form of "National socialism" is to be attributed. Regarding the denunciations by Heidegger, it should not be forgotten “that Georg Lukács is allowed to tell in his autobiography, without causing much offense, that he had seven deserters shot in an army while he was political commissar, and that by Ernst Bloch, without to arouse much offense, it can be reported that during the Moscow trials he accused the defendants of 'compassion for the kulaks', while Heidegger was made the most serious accusations because of mere testimonies in the still fluid initial phase of 1933/34. "
Doxography on Levinas' quote on morality
Heidegger's work and National Socialism
Looking back, and knowing the positions Heidegger took during the Nazi regime, the research raises the question of what relationship exists between these and his work, on which the main work Sein und Zeit from 1927 was analyzed. In the event of significant differences in the assessment of whether a compatibility or a corresponding coining and anticipation of such statements can already be recognized in the writings before 1933, the majority of concepts are used that can be presented as topics as follows:
- Individual existence as opposed to the collective of the people
- The "being to death" and the "design"
- From theory to action
Individual existence as opposed to the collective of the people
The explicit preference in being and time for the reflection on the self, the "unity", in conflict with the "decision-paralyzing lost in the" man "" seems at first to run counter to the idea of a völkisch or national collective, since it instead of nationalism in would have to lead a solipsism. In the debate, however, reference is regularly made to the one passage in the work that mentions the people as a philosophical conception. In § 74 it says first: "The determination in which Dasein comes back on itself opens up the respective factual possibilities of actual existence from the inheritance that it takes over as thrown " - from which it was concluded that this return to the beginning of existence turns out to be " Realize the fate of the community to which one belongs by birth ”and that consequently“ the question of existence leads to the question of the community, the people ”. This is proven by the quotation mentioned (for the term generation, Heidegger refers to Dilthey):
“If, however, the fateful existence exists as being-in-the-world essentially in being with others, its happening is a co-happening and is determined as a fate . We use this to denote what happens in the community, the people. (...) The fateful fate of existence in and with its 'generation' constitutes the full, actual happening of existence. "
"With this sequence of inheritance, fate, community and people" writes D. Morat, "Heidegger creates an actual mode of being with, which is easily recognizable as a conservative-folkish alternative to the democratic public of the man." But T. Sheehan gives cause for concern that in this passage as well as in Being and Time in general the whole point lies in the decision on individual authenticity and that only such a personal decision - which does not result from Heidegger's work, but from his biography - led to his choice for Hitler .
One of the most controversial is the question of whether the fate of the people as a happening already in existence and time primarily meant the German people, or whether this specification in the sense quoted required a personal decision by Heidegger between 1927 and 1933 and as such was an addition Theses of the respective evaluation of the relationship between Heidegger's philosophy of being and his National Socialist positions. Regarding the circular that Heidegger had sent as rector in 1933, in which it said that the individual counts nothing, but the fate of the people matters everything (see above), D. Thomä states: “The thesis on Heidegger's turn towards community can be traced back to his Confirming texts - and more precisely by means of a shift in the concept of 'people'. While it is still an instance in being and time to which the individual Dasein relates, to which it wants to gain access, a unity now emerges as the 'Dasein of the people' in which the individual is already integrated - and which as such can already be determined. ”The solution to the conflict between the individuation of unity and the national-völkisch existence was philosophically - thus not in biological-racist terms - understood as a“ turning to an as it were collectivized 'subject' existence ”in which the own existence was given up in favor of a common listening to the broadcast disclosed in the order. In relation to the latter, differing in terms of activity and native affiliation, G. Leaman comments on the Rector's speech of 1933: “As before, the individual must be determined to expose himself to his own finitude, to being-to-death, but in advance the 'earthly and blood-like forces' ensure the possibility of actual existence. "He continues:
“Heidegger no longer begins his analysis from the standpoint of the individual; it begins with the powers of being and therefore concludes the possibility of the actual self. This is the 'turn' from subject philosophy to thinking about being. The individual must first and foremost recognize his or her identity within a people who are bound by a common fate, a fate whose power is only realized in 'communication and in struggle'. "
The "being to death" and the "design"
It is concluded that the possibilities of the National Socialist revolution were more decisive than the political reality of the time for the philosopher of the “draft” of the possibility of being of the self. From this point of view, National Socialist drafts appear as a contingency in Heidegger's work before 1933, which he has continuously explored since his time and existence . With K. Löwith it says:
“' Being and time nowhere reveals that Heidegger could depend on something tenable, permanent, indestructible and lasting, except in the form of the unconditional steadfastness of the certainty of death and thus of nothingness. It was therefore impossible to foresee that the isolated existence before death, whose finiteness is stranded in eternity, could in the end still find a 'residence' and a 'home', a 'salvation' and even a 'sacred'. ""
But the philosophy of “being to death” and the possibility of designing the actual self takes up motifs of a heroism shaped by the glorification of the experiences at the front in World War I, which was described as a “brilliant summary of the politics of the revolutionary right”, and such passages In the judgment of D. Morat, Sein und Zeit “already anticipate Heidegger's involvement in the Nazi regime and prove the participation of his existential ontology in the decisionist thinking of the Conservative Revolution”.
From theory to action
For his political engagement in 1933, Heidegger also had to have a philosophical concept for the transition from theory to practice, and this is seen in the decisionism of “determination” which, according to Heidegger, as the “mode of opening up existence”, is the “in -being-of-the-world ”made possible in § 60 of Being and Time . However, the development of Being and Time up to the rectorate is predominantly viewed as one in which only the historical events and Heidegger's philosophical crisis and his personal situation made both National Socialism and the political actions of the philosopher himself appear as a solution. Heidegger could
“To further develop the categories of determination, self-choice, fate etc. set up in 'Being and Time' after the breaking off of 'Being and Time' (...) and thus increase his conservative-revolutionary willingness to act, which ultimately led to his commitment to National Socialism led. However, this further development did not take place in a linear manner, but rather went back to the crisis that resulted from the failure of the draft of 'Being and Time', 'out of which National Socialism could appear as a political solution to philosophical questions'. In this way, Heidegger combined his own philosophical crisis with the general political crisis. "
On reception in France and on apologetics
Jean-Paul Sartre
In France, the debate began during the occupation of 1943 in terms of political camp formation, when communists accused the existentialist Jean-Paul Sartre of an intellectual closeness to the National Socialist Heidegger. The communist newspaper Action published Sartre's reply on December 29, 1944:
““ Heidegger was a philosopher long before he was a Nazi. His approval of Hitlerism can be explained by fear, perhaps by careerism, certainly by conformity: that's not nice, I admit it. But that is enough to refute your fine argument: 'Heidegger', you say, 'is a member of the National Socialist Party, so his philosophy must be a Nazi one.' That is not true: Heidegger has no character, that is the truth; can you conclude from this that his philosophy is an apology for cowardice? Don't you know that sometimes people are not up to date with their works? And can you condemn the 'social contract' because Rousseau abandoned his children? And besides, what does Heidegger count? If we discover our own thinking on the basis of that of another philosopher, if we look to it for techniques and methods that can give us access to new problems, does that mean that we all share his theories? Marx adopted his dialectic from Hegel. Is that why you say, 'Das Kapital' is a Prussian work? ""
Heidegger's ambassador in Paris
Immediately after the Second World War, Heidegger received lively encouragement and support from the land of the occupying power France. Since his writings had become known there for their effect on the existentialists, the intellectuals among the officers stationed in Baden took the opportunity to visit him, including the journalist Alfred de Towarnicki, who soon became Heidegger's ambassador to Sartre in Paris, and a meeting wanted to organize between the two, which initially failed. But de Towarnicki wrote an essay for the first number of Sartre's magazine Le Temps Moderne in the winter of 1945/46 , in which he largely adopted Heidegger's "apologetic argumentation" (D. Morat) and, for the first time, on the coincidence of Heidegger's Nazism and its political unfamiliarity Naivety spoke - which should subsequently set a course. Karl Löwith immediately contradicted that Heidegger's Nazism was explained precisely because, in his fundamental philosophical thought, existence was only possible in the face of nothingness. Cassirer's former assistant Eric Weil answered this , followed by Maurice de Gandillac and Alphonse De Waelhens, the latter initiating the later often used defense strategy of the apologists, according to which Heidegger's critics were not qualified enough - now a feature of camp formation in the debate.
The Heideggerians around Beaufret
The hitherto unknown high school teacher Jean Beaufret also took advantage of the fact that French officers were stationed there to get in touch with Heidegger: on the day when his friend, German studies specialist Jean-Michel Palmier, went on a mission to Freiburg as a member of the Air Force he him by chance in the Parisian cafe d'Or Coq and wrote a note to Heidegger still there that this after Palmier she had brought to him, answered on 23 November 1945 by which the written dialogue began Heidegger the letter on humanism took . "This Beaufret was soon the PR man, interpreter, propagandist and steadfast friend of Heidegger in France," writes L. Hachmeister: "He occupied Heidegger, and Heidegger liked to be occupied." Beaufret, who settled after the murder of Victor Basch Joined a group of the Resistance in January 1944 , however, "has fallen into a dire twilight and thus become extremely questionable as Heidegger's addressee and interlocutor" since the Holocaust denier Robert Faurisson published letters from him in which Beaufret had encouraged him in 1978 , "To continue on the way", which Faurisson used to "appropriate Heidegger as a pioneer of the 'Auschwitz lie'", the latter a procedure that, in the judgment of H. Ott, was "naturally arbitrary and not justified".
In the French debate about Heidegger's Nazi past, the translation of his writings soon became one of the key arguments: the relevant texts from the Nazi era were initially not accessible in France. It was not until 1961 that Jean-Pierre Faye published a French version of the Rector's speech, including some of the quotations in which Heidegger glorified Hitler (see above), and later compared his language with the language of National Socialism . At the 1955 conference in Cerisy organized by Beaufret, in which Heidegger had participated, the texts had already been used by selected translators, including those of the young high school teacher François Fédier, who later became one of the "people primarily responsible for the translation of Heidegger into French" at the Gallimard publishing house. and claimed to know the German language in an even more appropriate way than native German-speaking critics of Heidegger such as Löwith, Marten and Thomä. He was convinced that a "'correct' translation of the rectorate's speech would remove any trace of Nazism that was put into it."
In the mid-1960s, there was a dispute between J.-P. Faye and F. Fédier, since the latter, with translations of central terms such as “people” and “völkisch”, gave an interpretation of the texts in which the connotations of the popular and the popular outweighed what Faye criticized - and those of the poet and translator Pierre Joris as “Sanitized”. In addition, Fédier demanded a ban on "misusing Heidegger's commitment to National Socialism to discredit his philosophy". He "stated that criticism of Heidegger was generally based on personal resentment."
AM Fischer counts Beaufret and Fédier in the “wreath of family friends ”, which forms the “ Heidegger Incorporated ” as an extended family business : this “monitors the goings-on in Heidegger research and intervenes immediately if they threaten the flawless image of the company founder seems. (...) That was the case during Heidegger's lifetime and continues after his death in a somewhat weakened form. ”The psychiatrist sees Heidegger as having a“ pathological addiction to self ”of a narcissistic“ great self ”, which is why he“ cared for carers like the Swiss admirer and doctor Medard Boss by the hand, dared to go abroad, in other words to France, Italy and Greece. “Because the self is always threatened with bursting like a balloon, and that applies not only to Heidegger, but also to that extended family:
“The same nightmare of the bursting of size puts both his family and the inner core of his followers, who are often almost Nibelung loyal, into constant fear, and that's why they share Heidegger's phantasies of persecution. Too much is at stake for them too, because if he were to be disenchanted, his world renown would be lost - and with it their own importance as his heralds. "
Victor Farías
In the mid-1960s, Heidegger had become a naturalized French thinker in reception - according to T. Rockmore. In this mood of Heidegger veneration, the first publication in France of Heidegger et le nazisme by the Chilean author Víctor Farías , in which Heidegger's unauthorized texts from the Nazi era were made accessible and commented on for the first time in 1987, had the effect of an attack on a national shrine: "A sky has collapsed in France - le ciel des philosophes", commented H. Ott. The Liberation headlined provocatively: "Heil Heidegger!"
Neither the Spanish nor the German version of the book had found a publisher, so it was initially published in French. From the point of view of the historian of philosophy Dominique Janicaud, this also gave many an opportunity to liquidate the intellectual hegemony of Heideggerianism in France. Victor Farías focused on the thesis of the indissoluble connection between Heidegger's philosophical thinking and National Socialism and thus triggered a wave of new research - and also "the French Heidegger Wars", whose "intensity increased in the following years" and which led to that his supporters finally assessed any criticism of Heidegger outside of France as opposition to him.
The book was written during the historians' dispute in which J. Habermas was involved and which he took up in his foreword to the German translation in 1989. Habermas also referred there to a quote from Manfred Frank, who saw a kind of laundering of thought that took place in the German reception through the French Heidegger admiration: “Many of our students receive the New French theories as a message of salvation. I think the phenomenon is dangerous: because here the younger Germans eagerly suck their own after the III, pretending to be open to the French International. Richly interrupted irrationalist tradition is reintroduced, which seems to have been purged of all national slag by having passed through the hands of the French. "
Emmanuel Faye
With the publication of Emmanuel Faye's interpretation in 2005 - Heidegger. The introduction of National Socialism into philosophy - the development of irreconcilable extremes in the French reception and exegesis of Heidegger's work and activity in opposing camps was sealed. The book is based on the thesis that Heidegger was a purely National Socialist philosopher, who thus integrated National Socialism as a discipline into philosophy. Therefore, his works should be removed from the specialist philosophical libraries and classified in the holdings of the history of Nazism and Hitlerism.
"These texts published in volumes 16, 36/37 and 38 of the so-called 'Gesamtausgabe' are, as far as their racism and National Socialist virulence are concerned, the writings that other official 'philosophers' of National Socialism such as Alfred Baeumler or Hans Heyse wrote, in nothing after. They even stand out due to the intensity of their Hitler following, which no other 'philosopher' of the regime achieved. Nevertheless these National Socialist texts by Heidegger can be found today on the shelves of the philosophical libraries. "
The reasoning for the judgment was partly based on the seminar transcripts of the early 1930s, in which a continuous affirmation of National Socialism can be stated. In addition, the interpretations of Ernst Nolte, Jean Beaufret, François Fédier and others were rejected as historical revisionism , with which they would have relativized the atrocities of the Nazis. The publication provoked fierce pros and cons, especially in France, Germany and the USA.
In 2015, the linguist François Rastier and the Franco-German philosopher Sidonie Kellerer appeared as Faye's defenders and supporters, who together with him in a newspaper article entitled Heidegger and the Extermination of Jews explained their interpretation of the notation of the black books and the remark that “ the German people and country are already a single concentration camp ”(see above), put on the same level as the end of the written confessions of the commander of the Auschwitz concentration camp , Rudolf Höß - who had testified during his interrogations in 1946, there more than 1.1 To have killed millions of people and been executed. The increasingly ideological-apologetic dogmatization of the debate about Heidegger's relationship to National Socialism - which becomes clear on both opposing sides - commented D. Thomä: Heidegger's critics “make themselves mentally dependent on the equations they find in Heidegger, the object of their negative desires . So they use the same questionable methods that Heidegger himself (...) uses and turn them against him. Everything is now again declared to be 'the same' - namely a National Socialist-anti-Semitic complex - and this picture, drawn not gray in gray, but brown in brown, is contrasted with the superlative of thinking. "
The "black books"
In 2013, Peter Trawny, co-editor of the complete edition of Heidegger's works, announced the publication of the hitherto unknown “ Black Hefts ”, thought diaries from 1931 to 1975. In the editions from 1938–1941 and 1941–1948 there are passages where Heidegger speaks about Judaism, "Judaism" and " World Jewry ". Trawny announced some excerpts from it in advance to French philosophers who published them, which sparked a debate about Heidegger's anti-Semitism from mid-2013, which renewed and exacerbated the controversy. Even before the publication of the first volume in March 2014, German media took part in the discussion from December 2013. In January 2014, another black issue appeared, Notes I , which was privately owned, was not known to the editor either, and which also contains controversial statements about Jews.
The majority of Heidegger's research regards the text passages mentioned as anti-Semitic, sometimes speaking of "historical anti-Semitism" or "metaphysical anti-Semitism", which is also criticized as an attempt to "move Heidegger's anti-Semitism away from anti-Semitism of the Nazis". In contrast, the quotes are related to “eliminatory anti-Semitism”, with Heidegger advocating the “ final solution ”. Opponents of this view deny that Heidegger was a "naive supporter of racism". Vetter sees Heidegger's “anti-Judaism” as religious and not as anti-Semitic: “According to Heidegger, we have to go beyond the God of metaphysics in order to prepare a place for 'the' God. And that is non-Jewish. The Jewish God does not need us so that we can prepare a place for him, he only needs our willingness. ”Finally, the question of his anti-Semitism is also left open.
In January 2015, the Freiburg philosophy professor Günter Figal announced his resignation from the chairmanship of the Martin Heidegger Society . In view of the anti-Semitic passages in the “Black Booklet”, he saw it as impossible to officially represent the philosopher and human being Heidegger as chairman. In March 2015 Helmuth Vetter took over the chairmanship. He regretted that almost everything in the discussions seemed to relate to accusations of anti-Semitism and suggested that it might be “not so bad” to interpret the controversial statements from the following note in the Black Booklet :
“Note for donkeys: the remark has nothing to do with 'anti-Semitism'. This is as foolish and as reprehensible as the bloody and above all bloodless actions of Christianity against 'the Gentiles'. The fact that Christianity brands anti-Semitism as 'unchristian' is part of the high level of sophistication in its power technique. "
The publication of the Black Booklet and the ensuing debate led the German public to demand that institutions and streets named after Heidegger be renamed. For example, on the recommendation of a commission of experts to review the Freiburg street names in 2018, the Freiburg municipal council voted in principle for a renaming of the “Martin-Heidegger-Weg”; According to the final report of the commission, “the processing of the political role and convictions of the philosopher” reached its climax with “the publication of the 'Black Hefts', Heidegger's private notes with anti-Semitic attacks”. In 2020 the “Martin-Heidegger-Weg” in Freiburg was finally renamed “Oberer Harbuckweg”.
Criticism of the edition of the complete edition
Since the new publication of the sentence “Inner Truth and Greatness of National Socialism” without comment in 1953, the practice of editing Heidegger's works has been criticized. With the beginning of the complete edition, the first volume of which was published in 1975, allegations in this regard were expanded, because “there is no independent scientific editorial board, but it is the family who determines the editors, as the first to Heidegger's last personal assistant, Friedrich-Wilhelm von Herrmann who then rose to the position of 'chief editor'. ”The consequence of the publications, the selection of texts, the accessibility of the archived manuscripts and the original versions are therefore in the control of the family and the publisher appointed by them. In connection with the conditions of publication and the influence of the family, it was recalled that a comparable active family role in the case of the estate of a philosopher was only known through Nietzsche's sister Elisabeth Förster-Nietzsche , whose work led to a distortion of her brother's works during the National Socialism.
At the end of 2014, the journalist Eggert Blum asked against the background of the publication of the “Black Hefts” why “Heidegger's hostility to Jews” had not become visible earlier in the volumes of the complete edition. He raised the charge that Heidegger's heirs had "zealously wiped out anti-Semitic traces" for many years, for example in volume 69 of the complete edition "Geschichte des Seyns" the sentence with the "predestination of Jewry for planetary crime" by the young editor Peter Trawny had eliminated in 1998 at the behest of Friedrich-Wilhelm von Herrmann. Julia A. Ireland pointed out that in Volume 39 an abbreviation 'N.soz' was erroneously read as 'Natural Science'. R. Wolin stated that “the custodians of Heidegger's estate as well as the editors have systematically erased pro-Nazi and anti-Semitic remarks from the published versions of Heidegger's texts, which belies the often-put forward claim that it was a 'last hand' edition ". As long as there is no critical edition of Heidegger's works, one has no certainty about what Heidegger wrote at the time. In November 2015, Wolin listed errors in the complete edition, Vittorio Klostermann responded to the allegations. In response to the demand that Heidegger's estate should finally be released for research, the answer was that the sources on which a volume is based would be made accessible with the publication, as Heidegger himself had ordered.
See also
literature
- swell
- Alfred Denker, Holger Zaborowski (ed.): Heidegger and National Socialism: I. Documents. Karl Alber, Freiburg / Munich 2009, ISBN 978-3-495-45704-7 .
- Bernd Martin: Heidegger and the “Third Reich”: A compendium. Scientific Book Society, Darmstadt 1989, ISBN 3-534-10929-5 .
- Guido Schneeberger: Gleanings on Heidegger. Documents on his life and thinking. With two picture panels. Bern 1962
For the correspondence see: Martin Heidegger # Correspondence
- Manuals
- Dieter Thomä (ed.): Heidegger manual. Life - work - effect. Metzler, Stuttgart 2003, ISBN 3-476-01804-0 .
- Helmuth Vetter : Heidegger floor plan. A handbook on life and work. Felix Meiner, Hamburg 2014, ISBN 978-3-7873-2276-3 .
- biography
- Ernst Nolte : Martin Heidegger: Politics and history in life and thinking. Propylaea, Berlin / Frankfurt am Main 1992, ISBN 3-549-07241-4 .
- Hugo Ott: Martin Heidegger. On the way to his biography. Campus, Frankfurt am Main 1992, ISBN 3-593-34633-8 .
- Rüdiger Safranski: A master from Germany: Heidegger and his time. (1994) 8th edition. S. Fischer, Frankfurt am Main 2001, ISBN 3-596-15157-0 ( Dieter Thomä review October 1, 1994).
- Black notebooks
- David Espinet, Günter Figal , Tobias Keiling, Nikola Mirkovic (eds.): Heidegger's 'Schwarze Hefte' in context. History, politics, ideology , Mohr Siebeck, Tübingen 2018, ISBN 978-3-16-154790-4 .
- Michèle Cohen-Halimi / Francis Cohen: The Trawny Case. To Heidegger's black books . Translated from the French and with an afterword by Oliver Precht. Turia + Kant, Neue Subjectile series , Vienna 2016, ISBN 978-3-85132-850-9 (Michèle Cohen-Halimi et Francis Cohen: Le Cas Trawny. À propos des cahiers noirs de heidegger . Sens & Tonka, Paris 2015, ISBN 978-2-84534-250-7 ).
- Marion Heinz and Sidonie Kellerer (eds.): "Black Hefts". A philosophical-political debate. With contributions by Rainer Marten , Günther Mensching , Hassan Givsan , Emmanuel Faye, Marion Heinz, Jaehoon Lee, Livia Profeti; Goran Gretić, Johannes Fritsche, Dieter Thomä , Susanne Lettow, Theodore Kisiel, Thomas Rohkrämer, Christian Geulen ; Reinhard Mehring , Daniela Helbig, Gaëtan Pégny; Anna Pia Ruoppo, Gregory Fried, Maurizio Fernaris, Richard Wolin, Anton M. Fischer. Suhrkamp (stw 2178), Berlin 2016, ISBN 978-3-518-29778-0 .
- Alfred J. Noll : The right foreman. Martin Heidegger based on the "Black Books". PapyRossa, Cologne 2016, ISBN 978-3-89438-600-9 .
- Peter Trawny: Heidegger and the myth of the Jewish world conspiracy. 3rd, revised and expanded edition, Klostermann, Frankfurt am Main 2015, ISBN 978-3-465-04238-9
- Political thinking
- Miguel de Beistegui: Heidegger and the Political. Routledge, 2002, ISBN 0-415-13063-8
- Florian Grosser: Thinking Revolution: Heidegger and the Political 1919 to 1969. Beck, Munich 2011, ISBN 978-3-406-62155-0
- Philippe Lacoue-Labarthe: The Fiction of the Political. Heidegger, art and politics. (Paris 1987) Stuttgart 1990
- Domenico Losurdo: The community, death, the west: Heidegger and the ideology of war. Translated from the Italian by Erdmuthe Brielmayer. Metzler, Stuttgart 1995, ISBN 3-476-01299-9
- Otto Pöggeler: Philosophy and Politics at Heidegger. 2nd Edition. Alber, Freiburg / Munich 1974, ISBN 3-495-47261-4
- Alexander Schwan : Political Philosophy in Heidegger's Thought. 1989, ISBN 3-531-12036-0
- Hans Sluga: Heidegger's Crisis: Philosophy and Politics in Nazi Germany. Harvard University Press, 1993, ISBN 0-674-38711-2 .
- Paul Sörensen, Nikolai Münch (ed.): Political theory and the thinking of Heidegger . transcript, Bielefeld 2013, ISBN 978-3-8376-2389-5
- Richard Wolin: Politics of Being. Martin Heidegger's political thinking. Passages, 1991, ISBN 3-900767-85-8
- National Socialism
- Eggert Blum: Prof. Dr. Martin Heidegger: The call of being against the noise of the many. In: Wolfgang Proske (Hrsg.): Perpetrators helpers free riders. Nazi-polluted from Baden-Württemberg , Volume 9: Nazi-polluted from the south of today's Baden-Württemberg . Kugelberg Verlag, Gerstetten 2018, pp. 165–175, ISBN 978-3-945893-10-4 .
- Alfred Denker, Holger Zaborowski (ed.): Heidegger and National Socialism: II. Interpretations. Karl Alber, Freiburg / Munich 2009, ISBN 978-3-495-45705-4 .
- Holger Zaborowski: “A question of error and guilt?” Martin Heidegger and National Socialism. S. Fischer, Frankfurt am Main 2009, ISBN 978-3-596-18017-2 (Dieter Thomä, FAZ, July 7, 2010: review ).
- Emmanuel Faye: Heidegger. The Introduction of National Socialism into Philosophy. (2005) Matthes & Seitz, Berlin 2009, ISBN 978-3-88221-025-5 .
- Reviews: Thomas Meyer (Die Zeit)
- Sidonie Kellerer.
- Emmanuel Faye: Answer to Thomas Meyer (Die Zeit)
- Alfred Schmidt (Germany radio)
- Bernhard Radloff: Heidegger and the Question of National Socialism. Disclosure and Gestalt. University of Toronto Press, 2007, ISBN 978-0-8020-9315-8 .
- Charles R. Bambach: Heidegger's Roots. Nietzsche, National Socialism, and the Greeks. Cornell University Press, 2005, ISBN 0-8014-7266-0 .
- Johannes Fritsche: Historical Destiny and National Socialism in Heidegger's Being and Time. University of California Press, Berkeley 1999 ( text online ).
- Tom Rockmore : On Heidegger's Nazism and Philosophy. 2nd edition, University of California Press / Harvester Wheatsheaf, Berkeley 1997 ( text online ).
- Ernst Topitsch : The saved ruler prevented. Heidegger and National Socialism. In: Alfred Bohnen, Alan Musgrave (Ed.): Ways of reason. Festschrift for the seventieth birthday of Hans Albert. Mohr, Tübingen 1991, ISBN 3-16-145712-9 , pp. 245-260.
- Philipp Rippel: Martin Heidegger and National Socialism. In: Politische Vierteljahresschrift 32, Westdeutscher Verlag, 1991, pp. 123–129.
- Victor Farias: Heidegger and National Socialism. (1987) S. Fischer, Frankfurt am Main 1989, ISBN 3-10-020402-6 ( review by Alex Steiner ).
- Silvio Vietta: Heidegger's Critique of National Socialism and Technology. Max Niemeyer, Tübingen 1989, ISBN 3-484-70150-1 .
- Symposium on Heidegger and Nazism. In: Critical Inquiry. Issue 15, No. 2, The University of Chicago Press 1989.
- anti-Semitism
- Walter Homolka , Arnulf Heidegger (ed.): Heidegger and anti-Semitism. Positions in conflict. With letters from Martin and Fritz Heidegger. Herder, Freiburg 2016, ISBN 978-3-451-37529-3 .
- Helmuth Vetter: Wilhelm Dilthey, Martin Heidegger and Heidegger's anti-Semitism. Reflections and materials. In: DIVINATIO • studia culturologica series 38 (2013–2014) 7–64. ISSN 1310-9456 .
- language
- Theodor W. Adorno: Jargon of the authenticity : To the German ideology. Suhrkamp, Frankfurt am Main 1964, ISBN 3-518-10091-2 .
- M. Siegfried: Turning away from the subject: To think about language in Heidegger and Buber , 2010 books.google.de
- Kaveh Nassirin : Heidegger's linguistic images of bottomlessness and uprooting and their antonyms 1922–1938 / 39: On stylistics, interpretation and translation , 2018, FORVM u. academia.edu pdf
- Heidegger debate
- Hassan Givsan: A startling story: Why philosophers allow themselves to be corrupted by the "Heidegger case". Königshausen & Neumann, Würzburg 1998, ISBN 3-8260-1389-1 .
- Lutz Hachmeister : Heidegger's Testament: The Philosopher, the SPIEGEL and the SS. Propylaea, Berlin 2014, ISBN 978-3-549-07447-3 .
- Richard Wolin: The Heidegger Controversy: A Critical Reader. MIT Press, 1993, ISBN 0-262-23166-2 ( Review by Thomas Sheehan: A Normal Nazi ( memento of October 15, 2012 in the Internet Archive ); PDF).
- Jürg Altwegg (Ed.): The Heidegger Controversy. Athenaeum, Frankfurt am Main 1988, ISBN 3-610-04714-3 .
- Kaveh Nassirin: Martin Heidegger and the legal philosophy of the Nazi era: detailed analysis of an unknown document (BArch R 61/30, sheet 171) , academia.edu, 2018 , complete version of the FAZ article Worked against the genocides? In: FAZ.net . Retrieved July 17, 2018 . .
- Heidegger in dialogue
- Emil Kettering, Günther Neske (ed.): Answer. Martin Heidegger in conversation. Klett-Cotta, 1988, ISBN 3-608-91097-2 .
- Heinrich Wiegand Petzet: Approaching a star. Encounters and conversations with Martin Heidegger 1929–1976. Societäts-Verlag, Frankfurt am Main 1983, ISBN 3-7973-0414-5 .
- Philosophy and university
- George Leaman: The university philosophers of the "Ostmark". In: FORVM 481-484, April 1994, pp. 25-31.
- George Leaman: Heidegger in context. Complete overview of the Nazi involvement of university philosophers. Argument, Hamburg / Berlin 1993, ISBN 3-88619-205-9 .
- Reinhard Brandt : University between self-determination and external determination. Kant's “Dispute between the Faculties”. With an appendix to Heidegger's "Rector's speech". Academy, Berlin 2003, ISBN 3-05-003859-4 .
- Ethics, practical philosophy, ontology
- Bernhard HF Taureck (Ed.): Political Innocence? In terms of Martin Heidegger. Wilhelm Fink, Munich 2007, ISBN 978-3-7705-4537-7 .
- Herman Philipse: Heidegger's Philosophy of Being: A Critical Interpretation. Princeton University Press, Princeton 1998, ISBN 1-4008-2295-5 (§ 14: Heidegger and Hitler. Pp. 246-274).
- Hassan Givsan: Heidegger - The thinking of inhumanity. An ontological examination of Heidegger's thinking. Königshausen & Neumann, Würzburg 1998, ISBN 3-8260-1388-3 .
- Hassan Givsan: To Heidegger. An addendum to "Heidegger - The Thinking of Inhumanity". Königshausen & Neumann, Würzburg 2011, ISBN 978-3-8260-4541-7 .
- Pierre Bourdieu: The political ontology of Martin Heidegger. Suhrkamp, Frankfurt am Main 1988, ISBN 3-518-11514-6 .
- Annemarie Gethmann-Siefert, Otto Pöggeler (Ed.): Heidegger and the practical philosophy. Suhrkamp, Frankfurt am Main 1988
- resistance
- Bernard Willms : Heidegger and anti-fascism. Karolinger, Vienna 2015, ISBN 978-3-85418-165-1
- André Glucksmann : Philosophy of Resistance: Socrates or Heidegger. Passagen, Vienna 2012, ISBN 978-3-7092-0015-5
- Rest
- Jacques Derrida: Of the Spirit. Heidegger and the question. Suhrkamp, Frankfurt am Main 1992, ISBN 3-518-28595-5
- Andreas Großmann: Overplaying the political? Inquiries to Heidegger and Postmodernism. In: Heiner Bielefeldt, Winfried Brugger, Klaus Dicke (Hrsg.): Dignity and right of people. Festschrift for Johannes Schwardtländer on his 70th birthday. Königshausen & Neumann, Würzburg 1992, ISBN 3-88479-683-6
- Karl Jaspers: Notes on Martin Heidegger . Edited by Hans Saner, Piper, Munich 1978, p. 2013, ISBN 978-3-492-30342-2
- Theodore Kisiel: Heidegger's Philosophical Geopolitics in the Third Reich. In: Gregory Fried, Richard Polt (Eds.): A Companion to Heidegger's 'Introduction to Metaphysics'. Yale University Press, 2000, ISBN 0-300-08328-9 , pp. 226-249
- Reinhard Mehring: Heidegger's “great politics”. The semantic revolution of the complete edition . Mohr Siebeck, Tübingen 2016, ISBN 978-3-16-154374-6
- Gerhard Oberschlick (Ed.): Günther Anders : About Heidegger. Beck, Munich 2001, ISBN 3-406-48259-7
- Hermann Schäfer (Ed.): Approaches to Martin Heidegger. Festschrift for Hugo Ott on his 65th birthday . Campus, Frankfurt 1996, ISBN 3-593-35604-X
- Gottfried Schramm, Bernd Martin (Ed.): Martin Heidegger. A philosopher and politics . 2nd ext. Ed., Rombach, Freiburg 2001, ISBN 3-7930-9232-1
Web links
- Heidegger's “Black Booklet”. Discussing: Micha Brumlik - philosopher, Senior Advisor of the Center for Jewish Studies, Berlin / Brandenburg, Rainer Marten - philosopher, University of Freiburg, Peter Trawny - philosopher, editor of Martin Heidegger's “Black Hefts”, Bergische Universität Wuppertal, SWR2 forum, broadcast dated February 24, 2014 .
- The most consistent philosopher of the 20th century - fascist. Results Verlag 1988, ISBN 3-922935-28-1 .
- Stephan Günzel: Lines: Nietzsche - Jünger - Heidegger. (PDF; 108 kB).
- Frank Madro: The master of being. Heidegger and the jargon of dishonesty. (PDF; 44 kB).
- Rainer Marten: Heidegger's spirit. (PDF).
- Bernd Martin: The University of Freiburg im Breisgau in 1933. A review of Heidegger's rectorate. (PDF).
- Bernd Martin: Heidegger and the reform of the German university in 1933. (PDF; 1.1 MB).
- Rudolf Ringguth: leader of the leaders. Martin Heidegger's political error of 1933 was more serious than he wanted the world to believe. The mirror . 34/1986, August 18, 1986.
- Frank Schalow: Heidegger, the Polity, and National Socialism. (Review article) , University of New Orleans, Jan. 10, 1998.
- Gerhard Scheit : Being without Jews: About Martin Heidegger.
- Alex Steiner: The Martin Heidegger Case - Philosopher and Nazi. Part 1 , 2 , 3.
- Walter van Rossum : Philosophy. Heavily condensed. Martin Heidegger and his “black books”. Deutschlandradio Kultur, time travel. May 7, 2014, 7:30 pm - 8:00 pm (with audio file).
Individual evidence
- ↑ Richard Wolin: Heidegger and Jünger : The dangerous moment. In: August H. Leugers-Scherzberg, Lucia Scherzberg (eds.): Gender aspects in dealing with the past , Saarbrücken, 2014, pp. 55–82, here: p. 66; Rüdiger Safranski: A master from Germany: Heidegger and his time . (1994) 8th edition Fischer, Frankfurt 2001, p. 75.
- ^ Anton M. Fischer: Martin Heidegger - The godless priest: Psychogram of a thinker. Rüffer & Rub, Zurich 2008, p. 88.
- ↑ Holger Zaborowski: “A question of error and guilt?”. Martin Heidegger and National Socialism . Fischer, Frankfurt 2010, pp. 143f. u. 284f.
- ↑ Jörg Appelhans: Martin Heidegger's unwritten poetology . Niemeyer, Tübingen 2002, p. 37.
- ↑ Holger Zaborowski: “A question of error and guilt?”. Martin Heidegger and National Socialism, Fischer, Frankfurt 2010, 134-159
- ^ Letter of June 15, 1918, in: Joachim W Storck (Ed.): Martin Heidegger / Elisabeth Blochmann. Correspondence. 1918–1969, Deutsche Schillerges. 2nd edition 1990, quoted from: Reinhard Mehring: Heidegger's tradition of delivery. A Dionysian self-staging, Königshausen & Neumann, Würzburg 1992, 31. Cf. Joachim W Storck (ed.): Martin Heidegger / Elisabeth Blochmann. Correspondence. 1918–1969, Deutsche Schillergesellschaft, 1989, p. 7.
- ^ Herman Philipse: Heidegger's Philosophy of Being: A Critical Interpretation. , Princeton University Press, 1998, 437.
- ↑ GA 56/57 (on the determination of philosophy, war emergency semester 1919), 3-6: preliminary consideration. Science and university reform: "The much talked about university reform is completely misguided and a total misunderstanding of all genuine revolutionization of the spirit, if it now expands into appeals, protest assemblies, programs, orders and associations: anti-mental means in the service of ephemeral ends" (p. 4); GA 56/57 (On the determination of philosophy, Appendix I, SS 1919), 205-214: Postscript by Oskar Becker: On the essence of the university and academic studies; GA 63 (Ontology, Lecture SS 1923), 33: “The situation of the sciences and the university has become questionable. What happens? Nothing. Brochures are written about the crisis in science, about the profession of science. One tells the other, you say as you can hear, the sciences are over. Today there is already a literature on the question of how it should be. Otherwise nothing happens. "; GA 28 (Der Deutschen Idealismus, SS 1929) 347-361: Introduction to academic studies; GA 16 (speeches and other testimonies, August 14/15, 1934), 285-307: Die Deutsche Universität; GA 16 (speeches and other testimonials, Appendix 3, lecture June 30, 1933), 761-763: The University in the German Reich
- ↑ The “bankruptcy” of science can only be eliminated by “bringing the buried idea itself back to light and science again becomes a way of life, not a craft and business.”, Martin Heidegger: Grundprobleme der Phenomenologie, WS 1919/20, GA 58, 20
- ↑ Holger Zaborowski: “A question of error and guilt?”. Martin Heidegger and National Socialism . Fischer, Frankfurt 2010, 149 - 150
- ↑ Martin Heidegger: Early Freiburg Lectures GA 56/57 (The Idea of Philosophy and the Weltanschauung Problem, War Emergency Semester 1919), 5
- ↑ Martin Heidegger: Early Freiburg Lectures GA 56/57 (The Idea of Philosophy and the Weltanschauung Problem, War Emergency Semester 1919), 5
- ^ Karl Jaspers: The idea of the university , Berlin 1923, revised editions under the same title from 1946 and 1961
- ↑ Karl Jaspers: Notes on Heidegger , ed. by Hans Saner, Pieper, Munich 1978, No. 59: “What annoys me: that we have not become allies in public, which in 1921 seemed a possibility - […] Since this did not happen - […] but the way of Failure can have different motives on both sides - is the relationship burdened with this lack of opportunity. "
- ↑ Reinhard Mehring: Heidegger's "great politics". Mohr Siebeck, Tübingen 2016, 71
- ^ Günther Anders: Austriaca, Presses universitaires de Rouen et du Havre , 1992, No. 35, p. 29.
- ^ Richard Wolin: Heidegger's "Black Hefts": National Socialism, World Jewry and History of Being. Institute for Contemporary History, de Gruyter, Munich 2015.
- ^ Otto Pöggeler: Philosophy and Politics in Heidegger. 2nd Edition. Alber, Freiburg / Munich 1972, p. 109.
- ↑ Daniel Morat: From action to serenity. Wallstein, Göttingen 2007, p. 105 f.
- ↑ Daniel Morat: From action to serenity . Wallstein, Göttingen 2007, pp. 106-107
- ↑ Gottfried Schramm, Bernd Martin: A conversation with Max Müller (†). In this. (Ed.): Martin Heidegger. A philosopher and politics . 2nd ext. Edition Rombach, Freiburg 2001 [1. Ed. 1984], 75-116, first published in the Freiburg University Gazette, June 1986, completely, but without authorization (Schramm / Martin p. 115/116) reprinted in: Günther Neske, Emil Kettering (ed.): Answer. Martin Heidegger in conversation. Pfüllingen 1988, pp. 90-220. The quote is from Schramm / Martin with the first part on p. 80, with the second part on p. 81 - in between there is another question. The third part is on p. 85 with several thematically different questions in between. The first part of the quote is presented by Manfred Weinberg: Hitler's hands. Heidegger and euthanasia. In: Ulrich Bröckling and others (ed.): Disciplines of life. Narr Francke Attempto, 2004, p. 305 fn 29 , but only with reference to the year 1928 and with the reference that Müller had expressed the opposite about the year 1933.
- ↑ Martin Heidegger: Introduction to Philosophy (WS 1928/29) GA 27, p. 7.
- ↑ Martin Heidegger: The basic concepts of metaphysics. World - Finiteness - Loneliness (WS 1929/30) GA 29/30, 110; on this Otto Pöggeler: Philosophy and National Socialism - using Heidegger's example. Opladen 1990, p. 23.
- ↑ Holger Zaborowski: “A question of error and guilt?” Martin Heidegger and National Socialism. Fischer, Frankfurt 2010, p. 761.
- ↑ Michael Grossheim: Political Existentialism. Subjectivity between alienation and engagement. Mohr Siebeck, Tübingen 2002, p. 384 .
- ↑ Martin Heidegger: The basic concepts of metaphysics. World - Finiteness - Loneliness (WS 1929/30) GA 29/30, 240.
- ^ Rudolf Ringguth, Der Spiegel (August 18, 1986): Führer der Führer.
- ↑ Martin Heidegger: The basic concepts of metaphysics. World - Finiteness - Loneliness (WS 1929/30) GA 29/30, 245.
- ↑ Ernst Vollrath: What is the political? A theory of the political and its perception. Würzburg 2003, p. 175.
- ↑ Martin Heidegger: The basic concepts of metaphysics. World - Finiteness - Loneliness (WS 1929/30) GA 29/30, 255 f.
- ↑ Gertrud Heidegger (Ed.): Martin Heidegger: “My dear soul!” Martin Heidegger's letters to his wife Elfride 1915–1970. DVA, Munich 2005, p. 165.
- ↑ Walter Homolka, Arnulf Heidegger (ed.): Heidegger and anti-Semitism. Positions in conflict. With letters from Martin and Fritz Heidegger. Herder, Freiburg 2016, p. 21f. u. 23: "At first I was a bit surprised about the gift of the Hitler Book." (Fritz Heidegger)
- ↑ Walter Homolka, Arnulf Heidegger (ed.): Heidegger and anti-Semitism. Positions in conflict. With letters from Martin and Fritz Heidegger. Herder, Freiburg 2016, p. 26f.
- ↑ H. Mörchen read the text from his diary on January 30, 1989 on WDR 3, cf. on this Rüdiger Safranski: A master from Germany. Fischer, Frankfurt 2001, pp. 257f., Note 12
- ↑ This picture is used by Karl Löwith: Heidegger - Denker in pooriger Zeit, Stuttgart 1983 (Complete Writings Volume 8), 18
- ↑ Florian Grosser: Thinking Revolution. Heidegger and the political. Beck, Munich 2011, 267
- ↑ Silvio Vietta: Heidegger's Critique of National Socialism and Technology . Niemeyer, Tübingen, 1989, p. 17
- ↑ Manfred Weinberg: Hitler's hands. Martin Heidegger and euthanasia , in Ulrich Bröckling, […] Martin Weinberg (Ed.): Disciplines of Life: Between Anthropology, Literature and Politics , Narr, Tübingen 2004, 297-324 p. 305, note 31
- ↑ Eduard Langwald: Say the other. Studies on Martin Heidegger and his work. LIT, Münster 2004, 76 (Communism)
- ↑ Emmanuel Faye: Heidegger. The Introduction of National Socialism into Philosophy , Introduction, I, On Heidegger's Political Orientation Before 1933: “In short: Heidegger's public connection to National Socialism in 1933 is not a temporary event owed to the circumstances. It is the completion of an 'imprint' and an inner development that goes far back and expresses itself in his texts. "
- ↑ Among others: Miguel de Beistegui: Heidegger and the Political . Routledge, London 2002; Pierre Bourdieu: The political ontology of Martin Heidegger . Suhrkamp, Frankfurt 1988; Florian Grosser: Think revolution. Heidegger and the political . Beck, Munich 2011; Philippe Lacoue-Labarthe: The Fiction of the Political. Heidegger, art and politics . (Paris 1987) Stuttgart 1990; Ernst Nolte: Martin Heidegger: Politics and history in life and thinking . Propylaea, Berlin / Frankfurt 1992; Otto Pöggeler: Philosophy and Politics at Heidegger . 2nd edition Alber, Freiburg / Munich 1974; Alexander Schwan: Political Philosophy in Heidegger's Thought . [1965] 2nd edition expanded by a supplement in 1988. Westdeutscher Verlag, Opladen 1989; Hans Sluga: Heidegger's Crisis: Philosophy and Politics in Nazi Germany. Harvard University Press, Cambridge / Mass. 1993; Gérard Bensussan: “Both, Herr General”: Heidegger, the Nazi, Heidegger, the philosopher and vice versa. In: Bernhard HF Taureck (Ed.): Political Innocence? In terms of Martin Heidegger . Wilhelm Fink, Munich 2007, 83-96; Richard Wolin: Politics of Being. Martin Heidegger's political thinking . Passagen, Vienna 1991
- ↑ Gertrud Heidegger (Ed.): Martin Heidegger: “My dear soul!” Martin Heidegger's letters to his wife Elfride 1915–1970. DVA, Munich 2005, p. 176.
- ↑ Gertrud Heidegger (Ed.): Martin Heidegger: “My dear soul!” Martin Heidegger's letters to his wife Elfride 1915–1970. DVA, Munich 2005, p. 178 f.
- ↑ Holger Zaborowski: “A question of error and guilt?” Martin Heidegger and National Socialism. Fischer, Frankfurt 2010, p. 229.
- ↑ Gertrud Heidegger (Ed.): Martin Heidegger: 'My dear soul!' Martin Heidegger's letters to his wife Elfride 1915–1970. DVA, Munich 2005, p. 180.
- ↑ Lutz Hachmeister: Heidegger's Testament: Der Philosopher, der SPIEGEL and the SS. Propylaen, Berlin 2014, p. 238. GA 16, 835.
- ↑ Iris Radisch, Hermann Heidegger (Die Zeit, March 6, 2014): “He was a dear father”.
- ↑ Holger Zaborowski: “A question of error and guilt?” Martin Heidegger and National Socialism. Fischer, Frankfurt 2010, p. 229.
- ↑ Gertrud Heidegger (Ed.): Martin Heidegger: “My dear soul!” Martin Heidegger's letters to his wife Elfride 1915–1970. DVA, Munich 2005, p. 184.
- ↑ Holger Zaborowski: “A question of error and guilt?” Martin Heidegger and National Socialism. Frankfurt am Main 2010, p. 761.
- ^ Rudolf Bultmann / Martin Heidegger: Correspondence 1925–1975. Edited by A. Großmann and C. Landmesser. Klostermann / Mohr Siebeck, Tübingen 2009, p. 191.
- ^ Archives of the National Library, Jerusalem, Nachlass Ernst Simon Arch. File 332, cited above. n. Thomas Meyer, Between Philosophy and Law: Jewish Philosophy and Theology from 1933 to 1938 , Leiden, 2009, p. 285 m. Note 31 .
- ↑ Bernd Martin: Martin Heidegger and the Third Reich . Scientific Book Society, Darmstadt 1989, p. 20; Norbert Kapferer: The Nazification of Philosophy at the University of Breslau, 1933–1945 . Lit, Münster 2001, p. 54
- ↑ Joachim W. Storck (ed.): Martin Heidegger, Elisabeth Blochmann: Briefwechsel 1918–1969. 2nd edition Deutsche Schillergesellschaft, Marbach 1990, p. 60.
- ↑ Holger Zaborowski: “A question of error and guilt?” Martin Heidegger and National Socialism. Fischer, Frankfurt 2010, pp. 216-217.
- ↑ Joachim W. Storck (ed.): Martin Heidegger, Elisabeth Blochmann: Briefwechsel 1918–1969. 2nd edition Deutsche Schillergesellschaft, Marbach 1990, p. 62
- ↑ Heidegger / Bauch, p. 32
- ^ Christian Tilitzki, The German University Philosophy in the Weimar Republic and in the Third Reich , p. 346, m. Note 601 , Husserl in a letter (Husserl to Landgrebe, May 28, 1932, Husserl Briefwechsel 1994, Volume IV, p. 288 f.):
- ↑ Gertrud Heidegger (Ed.): Martin Heidegger: "My dear soul!" Munich 2005, p. 51.
- ↑ Gertrud Heidegger (Ed.): Martin Heidegger: 'My dear soul!' Munich 2005, p. 112.
- ↑ Gertrud Heidegger (Ed.): Martin Heidegger: "My dear soul!" Munich 2005, p. 116.
- ↑ Holger Zaborowski: Was Heidegger an anti-Semite? In: Heidegger and National Socialism. II. Interpretations. Freiburg / Munich 2009, p. 301.
- ↑ See Peter Trawny: Heidegger and the myth of the Jewish world conspiracy. 3rd, revised and expanded edition. Klostermann, Frankfurt 2015, p. 35.
- ↑ Gertrud Heidegger (Ed.): Martin Heidegger: "My dear soul!" Munich 2005, p. 188
- ↑ Gertrud Heidegger (Ed.): Martin Heidegger: "My dear soul!" Munich 2005, p. 105
- ↑ Ulrich Sieg ( Die Zeit , December 22, 1989): The Judaization of the German Spirit. An unknown letter from Heidegger.
- ↑ Tom Rockmore: On Heidegger's Nazism and philosophy. University of California Press, Berkeley / Los Angeles 1992, p. 111.
- ^ Mathias Brodkorb: The causal nexus. An introduction to Ernst Nolte's thinking. In: Mathias Brodkorb (Ed.): Singular Auschwitz? Ernst Nolte, Jürgen Habermas and 25 years of “Historikerstreit”, p. 17 u. 28.
- ↑ Ernst Nolte: Martin Heidegger: Politics and history in life and thinking. Propylaea, Berlin / Frankfurt am Main 1992, p. 145.
- ↑ Otto Pöggeler: From Nietzsche to Hitler? Heidegger's political options. In: Hermann Schäfer (Ed.): Approaches to Martin Heidegger. Festschrift for Hugo Ott on his 65th birthday. Frankfurt am Main and New York 1996, 81-101, p. 96.
- ↑ Rüdiger Safranski, p. 301
- ↑ Tatjana Noemi Tömmel, Wille und Passion: Der Liebesbegriff bei Heidegger and Arendt , 2013, p. 22 : “The contact to Heidegger, which was maintained despite Arendt's marriage to Günter Stern alias Günter Anders, comes to a preliminary conclusion with the political events in the winter of 1932/33 The End. The final line under the first phase is a letter from Heidegger's reply to the rumors about his 'enraged anti-Semitism' which alarmed Arendt. "
- ↑ Bernd Grün: The rector as a guide? The University of Freiburg i. Br. From 1933 to 1945. Karl Alber, Freiburg / Munich 2010, p. 249.
- ↑ Ursula Ludz (ed.): Hannah Arendt, Martin Heidegger: Briefe 1925–1975. Frankfurt am Main 2013, p. 68 f.
- ↑ Gerhard Scheit, Revised and abridged version of the Heidegger chapter from The Masters of the Crisis. About the connection between annihilation and the prosperity of the people . Freiburg, 2001; first published in: Zwischenwelt. Journal for the Culture of Exile and Resistance 18. Jg./2001, H. 1 u. 2), p. 1 : "Heidegger had known himself to Hannah Arendt as an" anti-Semite "."
- ^ Maria Robaszkiewicz, Exercises in Political Thinking: Hannah Arendt's Writings ... p. 92
- ↑ Annette Vowinckel, Concept of History and Historical Thinking in Hannah Arendt . P. 20
- ↑ Zaborowski, p. 409
- ^ Hans Peter Obermayer: German ancient scholars in American exile: A reconstruction. Berlin 2014, p. 668, fn. 1443.
- ^ Safranski, p. 289
- ↑ Franz Walter, From Milieu to Party State: Lifeworlds, Leading Figures and Politics in Historical Change , 2010 p. 26 f.
- ^ Norbert Kapferer, The Nazification of Philosophy at the University of Breslau , 1933-1945, pp. 28ff.
- ↑ Norbert Kapferer, The Nazification of Philosophy at the University of Breslau , 1933–1945, p. 30.
- ↑ Martin Heidegger: Being and Time , Niemeyer, Tübingen (1927) 2006, p. 50, note 1.
- ↑ Holger Zaborowski: Was Heidegger an anti-Semite? In: Heidegger Handbook 5: Heidegger and National Socialism. II. Interpretations . Alber, Freiburg / Munich 2009, p. 260.
- ^ Philipp von Wussow: Davos Disputation. In: Dan Diner (Ed.): Encyclopedia of Jewish History and Culture (EJGK). Volume 2: Co-Ha. Metzler, Stuttgart / Weimar 2012, ISBN 978-3-476-02502-9 , pp. 69–74, here p. 73.
- ^ Toni Cassirer: My life with Ernst Cassirer, Meiner, Hamburg 2003, 187f.
- ^ Toni Cassirer: My life with Ernst Cassirer, Meiner, Hamburg 2003, 188.
- ^ Karlfried founder: Heidegger and Cassirer in Davos 1929, In: About Ernst Cassirer's philosophy of symbolic forms. Edited by Hans-Jürg Braun, u. a., Frankfurt / M., 290-302, 293.
- ↑ Holger Zaborowski: “A question of error and guilt?” Martin Heidegger and National Socialism. Fischer, Frankfurt 2010, p. 629.
- ↑ Dominic Kaegi: The Legend of Davos. In: Hannah Arendt. Hidden tradition - untimely topicality? , 75-86, here p. 76, note 8, letter to Toni Cassirer in: Toni Cassirer: Mein Leben mit Ernst Cassirer , Hildesheim, 1981, 167
- ↑ J. Meier, The personal synchronization of the Baden universities 1933–1935 Conformity and resistance in Heidelberg, Karlsruhe and Freiburg in comparison , Heidelberg, 2015, p. 20
- ↑ Bernd Martin, The University of Freiburg im Breisgau in 1933 A review of Heidegger's Rectorate , "Journal for the History of the Upper Rhine 136 (1988), pp. [445] - 477"; P. 454: With reference to a letter (May 26, 1933) from Wolfgang Aly to the rejection of the radio broadcast of Heidegger's inaugural speech - "Furthermore, the letter proves that Heidegger was not only the preferred candidate of a small number of folk-oriented colleagues for the post of rector, but also the party was considered the ideal man for this post. "
- ^ J. Malitz, Classical Philology. In: E. Wirbelauer (ed.): The Freiburg Faculty of Philosophy 1920–1960 , Jürgen Malitz, Classical Philology , p. 308 fm note 20 .
- ↑ Hellmut Flashar: Biographical moments in difficult times. In: Spectra. Narr Francke Attempto, 2004, pp. 307-328, p. 310
- ^ Museum am Burghof , Lörrach, National Socialism in Baden, 1. Robert Wagner becomes Reich Governor of Baden
- ^ Eduard Seidler: The Medical Faculty of the Albert-Ludwigs-University Freiburg im Breisgau: Basics and developments , Springer, Berlin-Heidelberg 1993, p. 305 ; J. Meier, Die Personal Gleichschaltung der Baden Universities 1933–1935 Conformity and Resistance in Heidelberg, Karlsruhe and Freiburg in Comparison , Heidelberg, 2015, p. 20 : “Wagner's decree came about arbitrarily and without legal basis and represented a massive disregard for the Civil servants' rights ", m. Note 55.
- ↑ Eduard Seidler: The Medical Faculty of the Albert Ludwig University of Freiburg im Breisgau: Fundamentals and Developments , Springer, Berlin-Heidelberg 1993, p. 305
- ↑ Freiburg newspaper v. April 10, 1933
- ↑ Haumann, Heiko / Schadek, Hans (ed.): History of the city of Freiburg im Breisgau. Volume 3. From the rule of Baden to the present. Stuttgart, Theiss 1992, p. 303 f .; NS Documentation Center of the City of Cologne, Cologne University exemplary
- ↑ Eduard Seidler: The Medical Faculty of the Albert Ludwig University of Freiburg im Breisgau: Fundamentals and Developments , Springer, Berlin-Heidelberg 1993, p. 308 : “Since it became known at the Rectors' Conference that the University of Cologne was the first to resign The Rector and Senate had already cleared the way for the universities to be brought into line, Sauer and v. Möllendorff is hardly able to prevent this in Freiburg. "
- ^ Annette Schulz-Baldes: The year 1933. The medical faculty and the "Gleichschaltung" at the University of Freiburg. In: Bernd Grün / Hans-Georg Hofer / Karl-Heinz Leven (eds.): Medicine and National Socialism: the Freiburg Medical Faculty and the Clinic in the Weimar Republic and in the "Third Reich", Lang, Frankfurt 2002, p. 139– 160, 152.
- ↑ B. Martin: The University of Freiburg im Breisgau in 1933. A review of Heidegger's Rectorate , “Journal for the History of the Upper Rhine”, 136 (1988), p. [445] - 477, here: p. 453: “One direct involvement of party positions in the change of the rector's office from Möllendorff to Heidegger was obvious in view of the press campaign against the democratically inclined medical professor, but this has not yet been proven. "; Bernd Martin: The University of Freiburg im Breisgau in 1933. A review of Heidegger's rectorate. In: “Zeitschrift für die Geschichte des Oberrheins”, 136 (1988), pp. [445] - 477, here: p. 453. “When Heidegger joined the right-wing parties in March 1933 after the NSDAP's election victory said goodbye to a visit to Heidelberg with the remark of Karl Jaspers, 'you have to get involved', he seems to have had more precise ideas about his future political action than he wanted to admit in the exonerating letter. "
- ↑ Jürgen Malitz: Classical Philology. In: Eckhard Wirbelauer (Ed.): The Freiburg Philosophical Faculty 1920–1960, Alber, Freiburg / Munich 2006, 303-364, here p. 309, note 20. about W. Aly: “At the beginning of April he played himself as' Gray Eminence 'behind the scenes on ”; A letter dated May 26, 1933 - the day before the inaugural address - suggests that its author, W. Aly, was working in the background: Bernd Martin: The University of Freiburg im Breisgau in 1933. A review of Heidegger's rectorate. In: “Zeitschrift für die Geschichte des Oberrheins”, 136 (1988), pp. [445] - 477, here: p. 454: “This implicitly allows the conclusion that, before Möllendorff's resignation from the rector's office, discussions between party offices and Heidegger, possibly through intermediaries like Professor Aly, must have taken place. "
- ↑ Hellmut Flashar: Biographical moments in difficult times. In: Spectra. Narr Francke Attempto, 2004, pp. 307–328, p. 313 : “That Schadewaldt on Easter Sunday [16. April] visited Sauer again with the same concern, can only be explained on the assumption that he was under heavy pressure (probably also from Heidegger himself). Sauer did not trust Heidegger with the office ”, m. Note 14: Sauer's diary entry on April 16, 1933
- ^ Eduard Seidler: The Medical Faculty of the Albert Ludwig University of Freiburg im Breisgau: Fundamentals and developments , Springer, Berlin-Heidelberg 1993, p. 302 f.
- ^ Eduard Seidler: The Medical Faculty of the Albert Ludwig University of Freiburg im Breisgau: Fundamentals and Developments , Springer, Berlin-Heidelberg 1993, p. 309
- ^ Otto Pöggeler: New ways with Heidegger . Alber, Freiburg, Munich 1992, p. 223; Hellmut Flashar: Biographical moments in difficult times. In: Spectra. Narr Francke Attempto, 2004, pp. 307-328, p. 313
- ↑ H. Ott, p. 171: Heidegger had "to do with anti-Semitic measures and riots before he took office".
- ↑ Martin Heidegger: Speeches and other testimonials from a life's path (1910–1976), GA 16, p. 84
- ^ Anton M. Fischer, Martin Heidegger - The godless priest: Psychogram of a thinker . Rüffer & Rub, 2008, p. 287: "Heidegger is not defending the more lenient imperial law, but forwards Wacker's letter to his deans and encloses a request (...)".
- ↑ Martin Heidegger: Speeches and other testimonies of a life path (1910-1976), GA 16, p. 91 f.
- ↑ Dominic Kaegi in Wolfgang U. Eckart, Volker Sellin, Eike Wolgast (eds.), The University of Heidelberg in National Socialism , 2006, p. 326 : “In Freiburg, Husserl's leave of absence had to be canceled because it contradicted the Law on Civil Servants”.
- ^ Emmanuel Faye: Heidegger: The Introduction of Nazism Into Philosophy. Yale University Press, 2009, p. 56; Alfred Denker, Holger Zaborowski (ed.): Heidegger and National Socialism: I. Documents. Karl Alber, Freiburg / Munich 2009, p. 13.
- ^ Albrecht Götz von Olenhusen: The “non-Aryan” students at German universities. In: Vierteljahrshefte für Zeitgeschichte 14 (1966), H. 2, 175–206, p. 181
- ^ Alfred Denker, Holger Zaborowski (Ed.): Heidegger and National Socialism: I. Documents. Karl Alber, Freiburg / Munich 2009, p. 13 f.
- ^ Albrecht Götz von Olenhusen: The “non-Aryan” students at German universities. In: Vierteljahrshefte für Zeitgeschichte 14 (1966), no . 2, 175–206, p. 184, fn. 47
- ↑ Martin Heidegger: Speeches and other testimonials from a life path (1910–1976), GA 16, p. 382
- ↑ Martin Heidegger: Speeches and other testimonials of a life path (1910–1976), GA 16, p. 142; Wolfgang Kreutzberger: Students and Politics 1918–1933: The case of Freiburg im Breisgau. Göttingen 1972, V&R, p. 173 .
- ↑ Martin Heidegger: Speeches and other testimonials from a life path (1910-1976), GA 16, p. 82f.
- ↑ According to entry in the party register; see. Victor Farías: Heidegger and National Socialism. S. Fischer, Frankfurt a. M., p. 137.
- ↑ Martin Heidegger: Speeches and other testimonies of a life path (1910–1976), GA 16, 93.
- ↑ Hellmut Flashar: Biographical moments in difficult times. In: Spectra. Narr Francke Attempto, 2004, pp. 307–328, here: p. 314 and fn. 15
- ↑ Walter Biemel, Hans Saner (ed.): Martin Heidegger, Karl Jaspers: Briefwechsel 1920–1963. Frankfurt am Main 1992, p. 257.
- ^ Gerhard Ritter: Self-testimony 3. The University of Freiburg in the Hitler Empire. Personal impressions and experiences. In: Eckhard Wirbelauer (ed.): The Freiburg Philosophical Faculty 1920–1960. Members - Structures - Networks , Freiburg and Munich, 2006, p. 788 .
- ↑ GA 36/37, 3.
- ↑ cf. T. Sheehan, L'affaire Faye: Faut-il brûler Heidegger? A Reply to Fritsche, Pégny, and Rastier , Philosophy Today, 2016, Vol. 60, Issue 2, pp. 481–535, here: p. 485, note 6
- ↑ Martin Heidegger: Speeches and other testimonies of a life path (1910-1976) , GA 16, p. 759 f. ; Bernd Martin, The University of Freiburg im Breisgau in 1933. A review of Heidegger's rectorate. In: Zeitschrift für die Geschichte des Oberrheins 136 (1988), pp. 445–477, here: 460 f.
- ↑ Guido Schneeberger, gleanings on Heidegger. Documents on his life and thinking , Bern, 1962, Doc. No. 44.
- ^ R. Safranski, p. 376.
- ↑ Bernd Martin, The University of Freiburg im Breisgau in 1933 , p. 454 f.
- ^ Rainer Rotermundt: Confrontations. Hegel, Heidegger, Levinas. An essay. Würzburg: Königshausen & Neumann 2006, p. 81
- ^ R. Safranski, p. 285
- ^ Hugo Ott: Martin Heidegger. On the way to his biography . Frankfurt / M. 1988, p. 149: "(Communication No. 5288): The raising of the hand (...) has become (...) the national greeting of the German people".
- ↑ Bernd Martin, The University of Freiburg im Breisgau in 1933 , p. 454 f.
- ↑ Bernd Martin The University of Freiburg im Breisgau in 1933. In: Journal for the history of the Upper Rhine 136, 1988, 454.
- ↑ Holger Zaborowski, A Question of Erre and Guilt? Martin Heidegger and National Socialism , Frankfurt am Main 2010, p. 257.
- ↑ The speech is published in GA 16, pp. 107–117.
- ↑ cf. Bächli / Graeser, Basic Concepts of Ancient Philosophy , Stuttgart, 2000, a. "Art": "τεχνη actually meant any form of human or divine (cf. Plato, Sophistes 265e) craftsmanship and practical intelligence, in contrast to the independent activity of nature."
- ↑ Michael Grüttner, History of the University of Unter den Linden , Berlin 2012, p. 252 : "Jews were excluded from the outset" m. Note 176.
- ↑ Holger Zinn, Die Studentische Selbstverwaltung in Deutschland bis 1945 , Wiesbaden, 2005, p. 25 : in order to belong to the student body, an affidavit was necessary "that parents and grandparents were of German descent".
- ↑ D. Morat, p. 122
- ↑ Harald Maier-Metz, reason for discharge: Pacifism: Albrecht Götze, the Gumbel case and the University of Marburg 1930–1946 , p. 106 f.
- ^ Karl Dietrich Bracher, The National Socialist Seizure of Power: Studies on the Establishment of the Totalitarian System of Rule in Germany 1933/34 , Wiesbaden, 1960, p. 568 m. Note 239 f. : "For integration into the national community for military and labor service and physical exercise."
- ↑ Senate Commission for the Processing of Jena University History in the 20th Century (Ed.), Traditions, Fractions, Changes: the University of Jena 1850–1995 , Cologne, Weimar, Vienna, 2009, p. 444
- ↑ Ulrich Barth, Gott als Projekt der Vernunft , Tübingen, 2005, p. 48, note 55 : "very time-bound distinction (...) based on the analogy of the Platonic three-tier state"
- ↑ Reinhard Brandt, University between Self-Determination and External Determination: Kant's "Controversy of the Faculties" , Berlin 2003, p. 181 : "Paradoxically, with a Platonic reminiscence, the idea of the Academy, which goes back to Plato, is destroyed."
- ↑ H. Vetter, p. 421 : “Ambiguity”.
- ^ Henning Ottmann: History of political thought . Volume 4.2, Metzler, Stuttgart / Weimar 2012, p. 7
- ↑ See Grün in HJ5, p. 96.
- ^ Paul Shorey: “For all great things are precarious”, Perseus, Plat., Polit ., 497 d
- ↑ Bernd Martin, Introduction: “Everything large is also at risk” - the Heidegger (s) case. In: Martin Heidegger and the Third Reich. A compendium , ders. (Ed.), Darmstadt 1989, p. 3: "Because everything big is also endangered".
- ↑ Manfred Geier, Wittgenstein and Heidegger: Die last Philosophen , p. 261 : Heidegger had used “the metaphor of the 'storm' for some time to characterize both the energy of his philosophizing and the events of contemporary history. (...) Did Heidegger want to inspire the young SA men who were taking part in an academic celebration for the first time with his storm? Plato as spokesman for the 'Sturmabteilung'? "
- ↑ Bernd Martin, Introduction: “Everything large is also at risk” - the Heidegger (s) case. In: Martin Heidegger and the Third Reich. A compendium , the same (ed.), Darmstadt 1989, p. 3.
- ↑ See Hans Barth, Neue Zürcher Zeitung , December 6, 1933, No. 1417, "On Heidegger's Rector's speech on the 'self-assertion of the German university'"; Dolf Sternberger, “The truth. On Martin Heidegger's second lecture in the Hochstift ”, Frankfurter Zeitung , 81st year, no. 608, November 27, 1936; "At the origin? On Martin Heidegger's Frankfurter Vorlesung ”, Frankfurter Zeitung, 81st vol., No. 672, December 8, 1936; GA 16, p. 663.
- ^ Francesco Cattaneo, Forme del conflitto. La filosofia di Heidegger degli anni Trenta tra politica e arte , Bologna, 2007, p. 74: “Il dibattito intorno a Heidegger si scatenò già con la sua assunzione del rettorato, che in Germania fu accolta con accenti entusiastici, ma che all'estero fu in non pochi casi recepita con sbigottimento e accompagnata da severe critiche. "
- ↑ Bernd Martin, p. 53, m. Note 36: Guido Schneeberger, documents 46-48.
- ↑ G. Schneeberger, 1962, Doc. 79
- ↑ H. Ott, p. 146.
- ^ Rudolf Bultmann / Martin Heidegger: Correspondence 1925–1975 . Edited by A. Großmann and C. Landmesser. Klostermann / Mohr Siebeck, Tübingen 2009, p. 194 f.
- ^ F. Eymann in: Karl Ballmer, But Mr. Heidegger! Martin Heidegger's speech from the Freiburg Rectorate. With a foreword by Prof. theol. F. Eymann, Bern, Basel 1933; A. Denker, H. Zaborowski (Ed.) Heidegger and National Socialism, documents. Heidegger-Jahrbuch 4 , Freiburg, Munich, 2009, pp. 155–177
- ↑ Karl Ballmer, But Mr. Heidegger! Martin Heidegger's speech from the Freiburg Rectorate. With a foreword by Prof. theol. F. Eymann, Bern, Basel 1933 in: A. Denker, H. Zaborowski (Eds.) Heidegger and National Socialism, documents. Heidegger-Jahrbuch 4 , Freiburg, Munich, 2009, pp. 155–177
- ↑ cit. NH Ott, p. 192 f.
- ^ Hans Dieter Zimmermann: Philosophy and Fastnacht. Martin and Fritz Heidegger. Munich 2005, p. 86
- ^ Letter to Karl Vossler dated September 9, 1933, cf. R. Safranski, p. 292.
- ↑ La Critica. Rivista di Letteratura, Storia e Filosofia, 32, 1934, p. 69 f.
- ↑ A. Denker, H. Zaborowski (Ed.) Heidegger and National Socialism, documents. Heidegger-Jahrbuch 4 , Freiburg, Munich, 2009, p. 196 f.
- ↑ GA 16, p. 658; Hugo Ott: Martin Heidegger. Frankfurt am Main 1992, p. 182.
- ↑ Margrid Bircken, Helmut Peitsch (ed.): Wolfgang Benz: Burning books. Memories of May 10, 1933 , Brandenburg State Center for Political Education, Potsdam, 2003, The Cultural Scandal: Myth, Tradition and Effect of Book Burning. Claims to cultural hegemony and its enforcement pdf., P. 30 ( Memento of the original from September 26, 2017 in the Internet Archive ) Info: The archive link has been inserted automatically and has not yet been checked. Please check the original and archive link according to the instructions and then remove this notice.
- ↑ cf. also the contemporary witness Gerhard Ritter: Self-testimony 3: The University of Freiburg in the Hitler Empire. Personal impressions and experiences , p. 802 says, regarding the book burning in Freiburg on May 10th: "I don't know anything about it."
- ↑ based on the testimony of the Italian philosopher and contemporary witness Ernesto Grassi, cf. H. Ott: Martin Heidegger. On the way to his biography , p. 182: “The fire was blazing in front of the university library”; H. Ott, ibid .: “I spoke to contemporary witnesses who confirm this account. In contrast, Heidegger's (...) statement that he had banned book burning. "
- ↑ Käthe Vordtriede: "There are times when you wither". My life in Germany before and after 1933. Lengwil 1999, p. 80; see. also Heiko Wegmann: Books were burned by the Nazis in Freiburg too. In: Badische Zeitung. August 13, 2013: online
- ↑ Martin Heidegger: Speeches and other testimonies of a life path (1910–1976), GA 16, 131
- ^ Ulrich Sieg: German Science and Neo-Kantianism. In: Hartmut Lehmann, Otto Gerhard Oexle (Eds.): National Socialism in the Cultural Studies 2. Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, Göttingen 2004, ISBN 3-525-35862-8 , p. 211
- ↑ Otto Gerhard Oexle: Crisis of Historicism - Crisis of Reality. Science, art and literature 1880–1932. Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, Göttingen 2007, ISBN 978-3-525-35810-8 , 104
- ↑ Martin Heidegger: Speeches and other testimonies of a life path (1910-1976), GA 16, p. 132
- ↑ H. Zaborowski, p. 358 : "Suddenly the mind is no longer in the foreground, but blood and soil".
- ↑ Kaveh Nassirin, Heidegger's linguistic images of bottomlessness and uprooting and their antonyms 1922–1938 / 39: On stylistics, interpretation and translation , 2018, FORVM u. academia.edu pdf, p. 24 , on the text history of the concepts of “soil” in Heidegger see also Dieter Thomä, Die Zeit des Selbst und die Zeit nach : On the criticism of the text history of Martin Heidegger 1910–1976 , pp. 581–598; Thomas Sheehan, L'affaire Faye: Faut-il brûler Heidegger? A Reply to Fritsche, Pégny, and Rastier , Philosophy Today, Vol. 60, 2, 2016, passim.
- ↑ Dieter Thomä: Heidegger and National Socialism. In the darkroom of the story of being . In: Dieter Thomä (ed.): Heidegger manual. Life-work-effect . Metzler, Stuttgart and Weimar 2003, p. 527; Anton M. Fischer: Martin Heidegger - The godless priest: psychogram of a thinker . Rüffer & Rub, 2008, p. 301; Emmanuel Faye. Heidegger. The introduction of National Socialism into philosophy, Berlin 2009, p. 65 ; Stefan Blankertz: Thomas von Aquin: The nourishment of the soul. Berlin 2013, p. 196 ; Max Brinnich, Georg Heller: Kant and the phenomenology in Austria. In: Violetta Waibel (Ed.): Detours: Approaches to Immanuel Kant in Vienna, in Austria and in Eastern Europe. Vienna 2015, p. 495 ; Manfred Geier: Wittgenstein and Heidegger: The last philosophers . Reinbek 2017, p. 262
- ↑ Martin Heidegger: Speeches and other testimonials from a life path (1910–1976), GA 16, 417 : “I received an inquiry from Göttingen about Baumgarten's scientific abilities, in which his National Socialist reliability was also asked. Thereupon I submitted a scientific report, because of its political "reliability", pointing out its origin, because I harbored considerable doubts about Baumgarten's display of National Socialism. According to other reports I received from colleagues, he seemed to me to belong to those who wanted to assert themselves with the help of the party ”; Hans-Joachim Dahms: Rise and End of the Philosophy of Life. The philosophical seminar in Göttingen between 1917 and 1950. In: Heinrich Becker, Hans-Joachim Dahms, Cornelia Wegeler (ed.): The University of Göttingen under National Socialism , 2. Erw. Ed. Sauer, Munich 1998, pp. 288-317, here: p. 300 ; Helmuth Vetter: Heidegger floor plan. A handbook on life and work. Meiner, Hamburg 2014, p. 413.
- ^ David Luban: A conversation about Heidegger with Eduard Baumgarten. In: Berel Lang: Heideggers Silence , Cornell University Press, New York 1996, 101–112, here: p. 107
- ^ Hugo Ott: Martin Heidegger. On the way to his biography. Campus, Frankfurt 1992, p. 183 m. Note 146; Martin Heidegger: Speeches and other testimonials from a life path (1910–1976) GA 16, p. 417: "Your letter of January 7th with partial copy of Jasper's letter ..."
- ↑ Martin Heidegger: Speeches and other testimonials from a path of life (1910–1976) GA 16, p. 417f.
- ↑ Holger Zaborowski: “A question of error and guilt?” Martin Heidegger and National Socialism . Fischer, Frankfurt am Main 2009, p. 385, note 127: "The fact that this procedure would have been extremely unusual speaks against this, but also that the report is written in the first person."
- ↑ Hans Saner (Ed.): Karl Jaspers, Notes on Heidegger , Piper, Munich 1978, foreword, ders., P. 14f., Erroneously referred to as a copy by Baumgarten, cf. on this Hans-Joachim Dahms: The rise and end of the philosophy of life. The philosophical seminar in Göttingen between 1917 and 1950. In: Heinrich Becker, Hans-Joachim Dahms, Cornelia Wegeler (ed.): The University of Göttingen under National Socialism , 2. Erw. Ed. Sauer, Munich 1998, pp. 288–317, here: p. 312, note 86 and the two versions by Hugo Ott: Martin Heidegger. On the way to his biography. Campus, Frankfurt 1992, p. 183; Martin Heidegger: Speeches and other testimonies of a life path (1910–1976) GA 16, 774, document UAF B 34/31, cf. also Helmuth Vetter: Heidegger floor plan. A handbook on life and work. Meiner, Hamburg 2014, p. 413 m. Note 42.
- ↑ Hans-Joachim Dahms: Rise and end of the philosophy of life. The philosophical seminar in Göttingen between 1917 and 1950. In: Heinrich Becker, Hans-Joachim Dahms, Cornelia Wegeler (ed.): The University of Göttingen under National Socialism , 2. Erw. Ed. Sauer, Munich 1998, pp. 288–317, here: p. 312, note 87 .
- ^ David Luban: A conversation about Heidegger with Eduard Baumgarten. In: Berel Lang: Heideggers Silence , Cornell University Press, New York 1996, 101–112, here: p. 108
- ^ Hugo Ott: Martin Heidegger. On the way to his biography . Campus, Frankfurt 1992, p. 183: “Around 1934/35, Jaspers, mediated by Marianne Weber, the widow of Max Weber, became aware of the copy of an expert report on Eduard Baumgarten, which Heidegger received on December 16, 1933 for the attention of the Nazi Lecturer Association in Göttingen had exhibited. "; Daniel Morat, From action to serenity: conservative thinking in Martin Heidegger, Ernst Jünger and Friedrich Georg Jünger, 1920–1960 , Wallstein, Göttingen 2007, p. 371, note 41
- ^ Hugo Ott: Martin Heidegger. On the way to his biography . Campus, Frankfurt 1992, p. 184
- ^ R. Safranski, p. 319.
- ↑ Jürgen Busche, "The position of Martin Heidegger", Frankfurter Allgemeine Zeitung. April 30, 1983; this was contradicted by Wilhelm Schoeppe, Heidegger and Baumgarten , FAZ, May 28, 1983; François Fédier: Heidegger - anatomie d'un scandale. Laffont, 1988, p. 104.
- ↑ Hans-Joachim Dahms: Rise and end of the philosophy of life. The philosophical seminar in Göttingen between 1917 and 1950. In: Heinrich Becker, Hans-Joachim Dahms, Cornelia Wegeler (ed.): The University of Göttingen under National Socialism , 2. Erw. Ed. Sauer, Munich 1998, pp. 288–317, here: p. 300 : "Although the authenticity of the report has recently even been disputed in the daily press, there is hardly any doubt about it." Note 87: “As far as Heidegger's Baumgarten report is concerned, this deficiency is not so sensitive that one can have reasonable doubts about its authenticity.” After Baumgarten had obtained the text of the report, “there was an exchange of correspondence between the faculty and the lecturers. ”(quoted there); Hugo Ott: Martin Heidegger. On the way to his biography . Campus, Frankfurt 1992, p. 184: “Since Jaspers had already presented the Baumgarten complex in detail in his 1945 report, Heidegger was familiar with the Jaspers report, and the case was discussed in the clean-up commission, there is no doubt about its authenticity. Had a falsification or even just falsification occurred, Heidegger would have corrected this. "; Hermann Heidegger, in: Martin Heidegger: Speeches and other testimonials from a life path (1910–1976) GA 16, note 186, is limited to the reference to “uncertain wording of the expert opinion”.
- ^ Hugo Ott: Martin Heidegger. On the way to his biography . Campus, Frankfurt am Main 1992, p. 210; see. also Klaus Hentschel , Physics and National Socialism: An Anthology of Primary Sources , Springer-Verlag, 1996, pp. 100-109: Philipp Lenard, the pioneer of German Physics , Karlsruhe, (Karlsruhe Academic Speeches, No. 17): Alfons Bühl, Philipp Lenard and German Nature Research , 1935; also: Gerhard Rammer, The Nazification and Denazification of Physics at the University of Göttingen , Göttingen, 2004, p. 62, note 188 : "The 'German Physicists' were represented by Alfons Bühl ..."
- ^ Richard L. Rubenstein, Center for Holocaust and Genocide Studies , The Philosopher and the Jews: The Case of Martin Heidegger , Modern Judaism, Spring 1989, p. 8 ( Memento of the original from September 29, 2017 in the Internet Archive ) Info: Der 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. : "Secret denunciations of academic colleagues to Nazi authorities."
- ^ Hugo Ott: Martin Heidegger. On the way to his biography . Campus, Frankfurt am Main 1992, p. 209: Memorandum, Political Archive of the Foreign Office, dated July 28, 1933: “Privatdozent Dr. Bühl informs me that he has been commissioned by the rector of the University of Freiburg to collect material on Professor Staudinger, currently a professor at the University of Freiburg, because there are various rumors about conscientious objection, etc. "
- ^ Hugo Ott: Martin Heidegger. On the way to his biography . Campus, Frankfurt am Main 1992, p. 207; Martin Heidegger: Speeches and other testimonies of a life path (1910–1976) GA 16, p. 248 “All reports of the German Consulate General in Zurich, especially the memo from the Legion Secretary von Simon dated 15.II.1917, speak of the passing on of German chemical manufacturing processes by Staudinger to (hostile) abroad. "
- ^ Hugo Ott: Martin Heidegger. On the way to his biography . Campus, Frankfurt am Main 1992, p. 205: "The accusation of betraying manufacturing secrets was not upheld even by the National Socialists."
- ↑ Siegfried Niese: The great moment of the natural sciences: The later Nobel Prize Laureates Spemann - Hevesy - Krebs - Staudinger and their political-social environment , manuscript p. 15 , in: 550 years Albert-Ludwigsuniversität Freiburg - Festschrift , volume 3: Bernd Martin, (ed .), From the Baden State University to the University of the 21st Century , Alber, Freiburg 2007, pp. 259–279: “As the Baden university advisor Professor Fehrle on September 29, 33 in connection with Heidegger's appointment as Führer-Rector the university Heidegger suspected Staudinger, whom he wanted to put on the list of those to be dismissed, of having betrayed important military secrets to foreign countries. These communications related to events during the First World War and the immediate post-war years. The next day Fehrle (...) had filed a complaint against Staudinger with the Freiburg police department, although Heidegger could not make any relevant information, but could only refer to a rumor. "
- ^ Freiburg State Archives, A5 Art Academy, University of Music, Freiburg University No. 180, quoted in. n. Hugo Ott: Martin Heidegger as rector of the University of Freiburg i. Br. 1933/34. II. The time of the rectorate of Martin Heidegger (April 23, 1933 to April 23, 1934). In: Annual issue of the Breisgau-Geschichtsverein Schau-ins-Land ( 1984 ), p. 124, note 57
- ^ Hugo Ott: Martin Heidegger. On the way to his biography . Campus, Frankfurt am Main 1992, p. 202.
- ^ Hugo Ott: Martin Heidegger. On the way to his biography . Campus, Frankfurt am Main 1992, p. 201
- ↑ Paul Matussek, Martin Heidegger In: Analytische Psychosentherapie , Springer-Verlag, Berlin, Heidelberg, New York, 1997, pp. 49–78, p. 66 : “targeted political denunciation”; Dieter Wyss, Kain: a phenomenology and psychopathology of evil , Würzburg 1997, p. 430 ; Victor Farias, Heidegger and Nazism , Philadelphia, 1987, p. 119 ; Dermot Moran, Introduction to Phenomenology , New York, 2000 p. 212 ; Richard L. Rubenstein, Center for Holocaust and Genocide Studies , The Philosopher and the Jews: The Case of Martin Heidegger , Modern Judaism, Spring 1989, p. 8 ( Memento of the original from September 29, 2017 in the Internet Archive ) Info: The archive link was used automatically and not yet checked. Please check the original and archive link according to the instructions and then remove this notice. ; Rüdiger Safranski: A master from Germany: Heidegger and his time . (1994) 8th edition. Fischer, Frankfurt 2001, p. 321
- ↑ H. Zaborowski, p. 385: "Heidegger, who plays here as a legal expert and judge".
- ↑ Martin Heidegger: Speeches and other testimonies of a life path (1910–1976) GA 16 p. 248 f.
- ^ Hugo Ott: Annual issue of the Breisgau-Geschichtsverein Schau-ins-Land ( 1984 ), p. 126
- ↑ Martin Heidegger: Speeches and other testimonials of a life path (1910-1976) GA 16, p. 260.
- ^ Hugo Ott: Martin Heidegger. On the way to his biography . Campus, Frankfurt am Main 1992, p. 208
- ^ Paul Matussek, Martin Heidegger In: Analytische Psychosentherapie , Springer-Verlag, Berlin, Heidelberg, New York, 1997, pp. 49-78, p. 66 .
- ↑ Dieter Wyss, Kain: a phenomenology and psychopathology of evil , Würzburg 1997, p. 430
- ↑ Martin Heidegger: Speeches and other testimonies of a path through life (1910–1976) GA 16, p. 798 f, note 133 : "Heidegger's sharp judgment of Staudinger evidently arose from anger at the opportunism of his colleague who was becoming obsolete."
- ↑ Silvio Vietta: Heidegger's Critique of National Socialism and Technology . Tübingen 1989, p. 22.
- ↑ Martin Heidegger: Speeches and other testimonials from a life path (1910–1976) GA 16, 140 ff; see. also Siegfried Niese: The great moment of the natural sciences: The later Nobel Prize Laureates Spemann - Hevesy - Krebs - Staudinger and their political-social environment , manuscript p. 15 , published in: 550 Years Albert Ludwig University Freiburg - Festschrift , Volume 3: Bernd Martin, (Ed.): From the Baden State University to the University of the 21st Century , Alber, Freiburg 2007, pp. 259–279: “Heidegger was very committed to the cultural advisor of the Baden state government, Fehrle, in favor of Hevesy remaining at the university because he wanted to preserve its exceptional skills and high reputation abroad for the university and the Third Reich. "
- ↑ Martin Heidegger: Speeches and other testimonies of a life's path (1910–1976) GA 16, 144 ff.
- ↑ Cf. B.Martin in Die Freiburger Philosophische Studium 1920–1960, p. 45: “Finally, in response to Schadewaldt's individual application, in Fraenkel's case, she [the Philosophical Faculty] managed to write an accompanying letter to the ministry, to which Heidegger, as in other cases, immediately followed. "
- ^ Hugo Ott: Martin Heidegger. On the way to his biography . Campus, Frankfurt 1992, p. 199
- ^ The documentation prepared by Bernd Martin The dismissal of the Jewish teachers at the Freiburg University and the efforts to reintegrate them after 1945. In: Fates: Jewish scholars at the University of Freiburg during the Nazi era. Freiburg: Rombach, 1995. (Freiburger Universitätsblätter; 129 = 34th year 1995), pp. 7–46 ( online ) was evaluated by Julia Meier: Die Personal Gleichschaltung der Baden Universities 1933–1935. Conformity and resistance in Heidelberg, Karlsruhe and Freiburg in comparison , historical seminar Ruprecht-Karls-Universität Heidelberg, 2015, p. 20 ( online ); see also: Siegfried Niese: The great moment of the natural sciences: The later Nobel Prize Laureates Spemann - Hevesy - Krebs - Staudinger and their political-social environment , manuscript p. 15 , in: 550 years Albert-Ludwigsuniversität Freiburg - Festschrift , volume 3: Bernd Martin, (Ed.), From the Baden State University to the University of the 21st Century , Alber, Freiburg 2007, pp. 259–279: “Those who were dismissed included: The theoretical physicist Johann Königsberger, the mathematician Alfred Loewy, the lecturer of internal medicine Hans Adolf Krebs, the lecturer in pathology Rudolf Schönheimer, the lecturer in physical chemistry and employee of Hevesy Ernst Alexander, as well as the library assistant Max Pfannenstiel. "
- ↑ Holger Zaborowski: “A question of error and guilt?” Martin Heidegger and National Socialism . Fischer, Frankfurt 2010, p. 392 f.
- ^ Hugo Ott: Martin Heidegger as rector of the University of Freiburg i. Br. 1933/34. II. The time of the rectorate of Martin Heidegger (April 23, 1933 to April 23, 1934). In: Annual issue of the Breisgau-Geschichtsverein Schau-ins-Land ( 1984 ), 107-130, here 123.
- ↑ Bernd Grün: The rector as a guide? The University of Freiburg i. Br. From 1933 to 1945. Karl Alber, Freiburg / Munich 2010, p. 211.
- ^ Anton M. Fischer: Martin Heidegger - The godless priest: Psychogram of a thinker. Rüffer & Rub, Zurich 2008, p. 287.
- ^ Leonie Breunung, Manfred Walther: The emigration of German-speaking jurists from 1933. A bio-bibliographical handbook. Volume 1: Western European countries, Turkey, Palestine / Israel, Latin American countries, South African Union. Berlin 2012, p. 464.
- ↑ Friedrich Heer: The risk of the creative reason, Stuttgart. u. a. 1977. New edition. Vienna u. a. 2003, p. 311.
- ↑ Marlis Meckel, To give back their names to the victims: Stolpersteine in Freiburg, Freiburg 2006, pp. 46, 144 u. 209; David R. Blumenthal: Living with God and Humanity, edited by Hava Tirsoh-Samuelson and Aaron Hughes, Leiden / Bosten 2014, p. 113.
- ↑ Martin Heidegger: Speeches and other testimonials from a life path (1910–1976) , GA 16, p. 792
- ↑ Joachim W. Storck (Ed.): Martin Heidegger, Elisabeth Blochmann. Correspondence 1918–1969 , 2nd edition Deutsche Schillergesellschaft, Marbach 1990, p. 70
- ^ Helmuth Vetter: Heidegger floor plan. A handbook on life and work . Meiner, Hamburg 2014, p. 408.
- ^ Hugo Ott: Martin Heidegger. On the way to his biography . Campus, Frankfurt am Main 1992, p. 213; Holger Zaborowski: “A question of error and guilt?” Martin Heidegger and National Socialism . Fischer, Frankfurt 2010, p. 391f.
- ^ Letter from Elisabeth Blochmann to Heidegger of September 29, 1933 in: Joachim W. Storck (Ed.): Martin Heidegger - Elisabeth Blochmann. Correspondence 1918–1969, 2nd edition Deutsche Schillergesellschaft, Marbach 1990 p. 75; Klafki / Müller 1992, pp. 61-67. Quoted from Bernd Grün: The rector as leader? The University of Freiburg i. Br. From 1933 to 1945. Alber, Freiburg / Munich 2010, p. 259.
- ↑ See Johannes Baptist Lotz in conversation. In: Günther Neske (Ed.): Remembering Martin Heidegger , Neske, Pfullingen 1977 p. 158 ; Gustav René Hocke: In the shadow of the Leviathan: Memories of life 1908–1984, Deutscher Kunstverlag, Munich 2005, p. 84; Martin Heidegger in an interview with Spiegel: GA16, 662 ; Hermann Heidegger, Die Zeit, August 20, 2015 ; Holger Zaborowski, HJ5 p. 261: “At the same time, Heidegger also seems to have advocated Thannhauser in 1933.” For the Thannhauser case see Eduard Seidler: The Medical Faculty of the Albert Ludwig University of Freiburg im Breisgau: Fundamentals and Developments, Springer, Berlin-Heidelberg 1993, p. 313 f.
- ^ Hans Dieter Zimmermann: Philosophy and Fastnacht. Martin and Fritz Heidegger. Munich 2005, p. 84; Peter Trawny: Heidegger and the Myth of a Jewish World Conspiracy, Chicago 2015, p. 65 ; Silvio Vietta: "Something is racing around the globe ..." Martin Heidegger: Ambivalent Existence and Criticism of Globalization, Munich 2015, p. 94.
- ↑ Holger Zaborowski: “A question of error and guilt?” Martin Heidegger and National Socialism . Fischer, Frankfurt 2010, p. 347
- ↑ As a reminder of Hermann Heidegger: Martin Heidegger: Reden and other testimonials of a way of life (1910–1976) , GA 16, 788 as well as the reaction of the ministry: Martin Heidegger: Reden und other testimonials of a way of life (1910–1976) , GA16, 91. See Emmanuel Faye: Heidegger. The Introduction of National Socialism into Philosophy. (2005) Matthes & Seitz, Berlin 2009, p. 69.
- ^ About Thannhauser: Eduard Seidler: The Medical Faculty of the Albert Ludwig University of Freiburg im Breisgau: Fundamentals and Developments, Springer, Berlin-Heidelberg 1993, p. 314 ; on Cohn: Uwe Wolfradt, Elfriede Billmann-Mahecha, Armin Stock, German-speaking psychologists 1933–1945 , Wiesbaden, 2015, p. 435 : "retired by Rector Martin Heidegger"; Johann Aichinger, The Path of Dialectics from the Pre-Socratics to Jonas Cohn (traced on the basis of selected examples) (Master's thesis), University of Vienna, 2008, p. 52 : "The retirement was provisional on April 20, 1933, and finally on April 24th August pronounced. The letter of dismissal was signed by Martin Heidegger (1889-1976) as the university rector. The faculty turned away from Cohn ”; History of the Institute for Psychology in Freiburg p. 8 .
- ↑ Bernd Martin: Heidegger and the reform of the German university 1933 In: Gottfried Schramm, Bernd Martin (Hrsg.): Martin Heidegger: a philosopher and politics , 2nd exp. Aufl. Rombach, Freiburg 1986, pp. 149–194, here: p. 167
- ↑ Bernd Martin: Heidegger and the reform of the German university 1933 In: Gottfried Schramm, Bernd Martin (Hrsg.): Martin Heidegger: a philosopher and politics , 2nd exp. Aufl. Rombach, Freiburg 1986, pp. 149–194, here: p. 168
- ↑ Bernd Martin: Heidegger and the reform of the German university 1933 In: Gottfried Schramm, Bernd Martin (Hrsg.): Martin Heidegger: a philosopher and politics , 2nd exp. Aufl. Rombach, Freiburg 1986, pp. 149–194, here: p. 181; Hugo Ott: Martin Heidegger. On the way to his biography . Campus, Frankfurt 1992, p. 191; Bernd Grün: University Management and Philosophical Faculty. In: Eckhard Wirbelauer (Ed.): The Freiburg Philosophical Faculty 1920–1960 , Alber, Freiburg / Munich 2006, pp. 715–730, here, p. 718: “In Baden, the National Socialist 'seizure of power' found its first constitutional precipitate the 'Constitution of the Baden Universities' of August 21, 1933, which came into force in the winter semester of 1933/34, which was explicitly intended to be provisional in anticipation of a uniform regulation throughout the empire. "
- ↑ Bernd Martin: Heidegger and the reform of the German university 1933 In: Gottfried Schramm, Bernd Martin (Hrsg.): Martin Heidegger: a philosopher and politics , 2nd exp. Aufl. Rombach, Freiburg 1986, pp. 149–194, here: p. 181; Hugo Ott: Martin Heidegger. On the way to his biography . Campus, Frankfurt 1992, p. 191: “The state of Baden, true to its reputation as a 'model country' once again, had pushed ahead and wanted to be decisive. The rector himself appointed the deans as leaders of the faculties, in future they will shape the university according to the clear leader principle ”; Bernd Grün: University Management and Philosophical Faculty. In: Eckhard Wirbelauer (ed.): The Freiburg Philosophical Faculty 1920–1960 , Alber, Freiburg / Munich 2006, pp. 715–730, here p. 718: “The Baden government clearly questioned the traditional structure of the university and introduced what is probably the most formative element of the National Socialist administrative structure: the Führer principle. "
- ↑ Hellmut Flashar: Biographical moments in difficult times. In: Spectra. Narr Francke Attempto, 2004, pp. 307–328, here: pp. 316 f.
- ↑ Bernd Martin: Heidegger and the reform of the German university 1933 In: Gottfried Schramm, Bernd Martin (Hrsg.): Martin Heidegger: a philosopher and politics , 2nd exp. Aufl. Rombach, Freiburg 1986, pp. 149–194, here: p. 187; Daniel Morat: From action to serenity . Wallstein, Göttingen 2007, p. 126: “Newly issued Baden University Constitution, in the creation of which he was not insignificantly involved”; Bernd Grün: The rector as a leader? The University of Freiburg i. Br. From 1933 to 1945 . Alber, Freiburg / Munich. 193-196
- ^ Hugo Ott: Martin Heidegger. On the way to his biography . Campus, Frankfurt 1992, p. 191 f.
- ↑ GA 16, p. 157
- ↑ Bernd Grün: University Management and Philosophical Faculty. In: Eckhard Wirbelauer (Ed.): The Freiburg Philosophical Faculty 1920–1960 , Alber, Freiburg / Munich 2006, pp. 715–730, here p. 719: “The deans were also obliged to inform the rector about all faculty matters. This was to make it clear that the rector was the leader of the entire university and that the faculties had no right to any life of their own. The constitution saw the university only as a hierarchically structured teaching and learning community of students and lecturers. "
- ↑ Bernd Martin: Martin Heidegger and the Third Reich. Darmstadt: Wissenschaftliche Buchgesellschaft 1989, pp. 31–35.
- ↑ Bernd Martin: Heidegger and the reform of the German university 1933 In: Gottfried Schramm, Bernd Martin (Hrsg.): Martin Heidegger: a philosopher and politics , 2nd exp. Aufl. Rombach, Freiburg 1986, pp. 149–194, here: 187.
- ↑ Bernd Martin: Heidegger and the reform of the German university 1933 In: Gottfried Schramm, Bernd Martin (Hrsg.): Martin Heidegger: a philosopher and politics , 2nd exp. Aufl. Rombach, Freiburg 1986, pp. 149–194, here: p. 191
- ^ Hugo Ott: Martin Heidegger. On the way to his biography. Campus, Frankfurt 1992, p. 192
- ↑ See Jürgen Malitz: Classical Philology. In: Eckhard Wirbelauer (Ed.): The Freiburg Philosophical Faculty 1920–1960, Alber, Freiburg / Munich 2006, 303-364, here p. 313, note 35 : “From the general report of the Philosophical Faculty Leipzig of December 2, 1933 (Univ.-Archiv Leipzig, Schadewaldt personnel file): The speech about the new German student that Schadewaldt gave at the request of the student body in Freiburg towards the end of the SS is included in the print of the Freiburg student newspaper of July 27, 33, because it seems to us a particularly important testimony to how deeply the speaker is permeated by the spirit of the National Socialist, how vividly the speaker is able to transmit the rhythm of the current movement ”; ibid. p. 315, statement of the faculty after 1945: “The year 1933 brought a sharp turnaround, in which the philosopher Heidegger became rector and received strong support from his followers in the faculty, especially from the dean he appointed Schadewaldt. When he left for Leipzig in 1934 and after the departure of the Jewish philologist (sic!) Fränkel, Schadewaldt ensured that both chairs were filled by radical National Socialists (Oppermann and Bogner), making extensive use of the Führer principle ”; see. Freiburg University Library, digitized historical inventory, course catalog summer semester 1934, personnel directory, February 1, 1934
- ^ Ernst Klee: The dictionary of persons on the Third Reich. Who was what before and after 1945 . Fischer, Frankfurt 2005, p. 685, quotes Wolf: “The non-Aryan people's guests who do not have legal status include people of foreign origin and foreigners.”; further evidence from Christoph M. Scheuren-Brandes: The path from National Socialist legal teachings to Radbruch's formula. Investigations into the history of the idea of "wrong law". Schöning, Paderborn 2006, pp. 76,77; see also Bernd Grün: The rector as a leader? The University of Freiburg i. Br. From 1933 to 1945 . Alber, Freiburg / Munich 2010, 196-197
- ↑ Bernd Grün: University Management and Philosophical Faculty. In: Eckhard Wirbelauer (Ed.): The Freiburg Philosophical Faculty 1920–1960, Alber, Freiburg / Munich 2006, pp. 715–730, here p. 722
- ↑ Senate meeting of 29.XI.1933, to 9., GA 16, p. 214; Hugo Ott: Martin Heidegger. On the way to his biography . Campus, Frankfurt 1992, p. 151 f .; see. Paul Matussek: Analytical psychosis therapy. 2 applications , Springer, Berlin a. a. 2001, pp. 66–67 , who speaks of Heidegger having “completely lost contact with his private self”.
- ^ Hugo Ott: Martin Heidegger. On the way to his biography. Campus, Frankfurt 1992, p. 229, with the source not being specified: Freiburg University Archives; this letter was not included in GA 16 or in Heidegger Yearbook 4, in which the documents on Heidegger's involvement in National Socialism were collected.
- ↑ Bernd Martin reports on the development at various universities: Heidegger and the reform of the German university 1933 in: Gottfried Schramm, Bernd Martin (ed.): Martin Heidegger: ein Philosopher und die Politik, 2. Erw. Aufl. Rombach, Freiburg 1986, pp. 149-194
- ^ Rüdiger Safranski: A master from Germany: Heidegger and his time . (1994) 8th edition. Fischer, Frankfurt 2001, p. 312: “Sometimes he was found funny and the story was told, like some students under the direction of the aforementioned philosophy lecturer and former corvette captain Stieler in the clay pit of a brick factory with dummy rifles drilled out of wood, and how Heidegger then drove up in the car and jumped out. The tall Stieler - he measured 2.02 meters - had built himself up in front of the short Heidegger and reported militarily correct, and Heidegger, who had only performed military service with the post censorship and a weather battalion, also saluted the report militarily correctly like a commander accepted. Heidegger's fight scenes were of this kind. "
- ↑ Bernd Grün: The rector as a guide? The University of Freiburg i. Br. From 1933 to 1945 . Alber, Freiburg / Munich 2010, p. 171.
- ↑ Daniel Morat: From action to serenity . Wallstein, Göttingen 2007 p. 134 ;, GA 36/37, p. 212; Bernd Grün: The rector as a leader? The University of Freiburg i. Br. From 1933 to 1945 . Alber, Freiburg / Munich 2010, p. 171. Bernd Martin: Martin Heidegger and the Third Reich . Wissenschaftliche Buchgesellschaft, Darmstadt 1989, p. 35 comments on Heidegger's efforts for continued intellectual renewal: “The appeal to the German students, his speech at the election rally of science in Leipzig (November 11th), his speech in Tübingen and last but not least his vehement one Supporting an address of loyalty from German science for Adolf Hitler - the appeal to the world's educated - are testimony to an irrational delusion, a desperate clinging to ideals that have long since been overtaken by actual developments. "
- ↑ Martin Heidegger: On the essence of truth. In: Being and Truth , GA 36/37, p. 119, quoted from: Daniel Morat: From deeds to serenity . Wallstein, Göttingen 2007 p. 135
- ↑ Martin Heidegger: Speeches and other testimonials from a life path (1910–1976), GA 16, p. 124; Claus Arnold: Catholicism as a cultural power. The Freiburg theologian Joseph Sauer (1872–1949) and the legacy of Franz Xaver Kraus, Schöningh, Paderborn 1999, p. 371.
- ↑ Holger Gehle: Motives of a literature "after Auschwitz". In: Sven Kramer (ed.): The political in literary discourse. Studies on contemporary German literature. Westdeutscher Verlag, Opladen 1996, p. 109
- ↑ GA 16, 239; Holger Gehle: Motifs of a literature "after Auschwitz". In: Sven Kramer (ed.): The political in literary discourse. Studies on contemporary German literature. Westdeutscher Verlag, Opladen 1996, p. 109 ; see. also Martin Heidegger: Speeches and other testimonies of a life path (1910–1976), GA 16, p. 303: “Work is not a punishment and hardship, but the priority of free people. That is why the animal is denied the privilege of working. "
- ↑ Siegfried Müller, Culture in Germany: From the Empire to Reunification , Stuttgart, 2017, Part 2, “School and Education”, 1933–1945: “The University” .
- ↑ Bernd Grün: The rector as a guide? The University of Freiburg i. Br. From 1933 to 1945 . Alber, Freiburg / Munich 2010, pp. 226–228, with references to Guido Schneeberger: Review of Heidegger. Documents on his life and thinking . With two picture panels. Bern 1962, in particular pp. 76-80; see also Bernd Martin: Heidegger and the reform of the German university 1933. In: Gottfried Schramm, Bernd Martin (Hrsg.): Martin Heidegger: a philosopher and politics . 2nd ext. Aufl. Rombach, Freiburg 1986, pp. 149-194, here: 169-173; Furthermore: Article “Dienst” in: Cornelia Schmitz-Berning (Ed.): Vokabular des Nationalozialismus . De Gruyter, Berlin 2007, 152; for the position of the students see: Grüttner, Michael: Students in the Third Reich . Schöningh, Paderborn 1995, 63
- ^ Gerhard Ritter: Self-testimony 3. The Universitåt Freiburg in the Hitler Reich. Personal impressions and experiences. In: Eckhard Wirbelauer (ed.): The Freiburg Philosophical Faculty 1920–1960. Members - structures - networks. , Alber, Freiburg / Munich 2006, 780.
- ^ Anton M. Fischer: Martin Heidegger - The godless priest: Psychogram of a thinker . Rüffer & Rub, 2008, p. 282.
- ^ Anton M. Fischer: Martin Heidegger - The godless priest: Psychogram of a thinker. Rüffer & Rub, 2008, p. 282; Martin Heidegger: Speeches and other testimonies of a life path (1910–1976), GA 16, p. 125.
- ↑ Holger Zaborowski: “A question of error and guilt?” Martin Heidegger and National Socialism. Fischer, Frankfurt 2010, p. 308.
- ↑ Bernd Martin: The University of Freiburg im Breisgau in 1933. A review of Heidegger's rectorate. In: Zeitschrift für die Geschichte des Oberrheins 136 (1988), pp. 445-477, here p. 458, m. Note 86.
- ^ Martin Heidegger: Speeches and other testimonies of a life path (1910-1976), GA 16, p. 766
- ^ Henning Ottmann: History of political thought. Volume 4.2, Metzler, Stuttgart / Weimar 2012, p. 7 PDF ( Memento of the original from March 5, 2016 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.
- ↑ Martin Heidegger: Speeches and other testimonies of a life path (1910-1976), GA 16, p. 234
- ↑ Thomas Ditt: "Shock Troop Faculty Breslau" , Mohr (Siebeck), Tübingen 2011, p. 212 ; Karl Roch, Of logos, intellectual struggle and Germanic wisdom. A foray through the philosophical journals in German fascism In: Contradiction No. 13 Philosophy in German Fascism (1987), pp. 57-65, here p. 62 , m. Quote from Georg Dahm: On the current situation of the German university. In: Zeitschrift für deutsche Kulturphilosophie 2 (1936), 211 ff .: “According to Dahm, the“ science camp ”was developed at the German universities as a new form of scientific activity, which“ combines a soldier's way of life with free scientific debate and a friendly togetherness of lecturers and student "should represent an approach to college renewal"; Florian Grosser: Think revolution. Heidegger and the Political 1919 to 1969 . Beck, Munich 2011, p. 69 ( page no longer available , search in web archives ) Info: The link was automatically marked as defective. Please check the link according to the instructions and then remove this notice. : “After all, the planning and implementation of a 'science camp' in the Black Forest in autumn 1933 is another project that shows Heidegger's efforts to bring about radical changes in academic reality. Selected lecturers and students, candidates for future management positions in National Socialist Germany, should, according to the project, try out the 'science camp' as a means of political education ”; Martin Heidegger: To the lecturers and assistants participating in the Todtnauberg holiday camp (Black Forest) , Martin Heidegger: Speeches and other testimonials from a life's path (1910–1976), GA 16, No. 90, p. 170, point 2: “Bringing closer to life the goals of a National Socialist revolution in higher education ”; see. also Martin Heidegger: Arbeitsdienst und Universität , GA 16 No. 59, p. 125 f.
- ^ Hugo Ott: Martin Heidegger. On the way to his biography . Campus, Frankfurt 1992, p. 218; Otto Pöggeler: Philosophy and National Socialism - using Heidegger's example . Westdeutscher Verlag, Opladen 1990, p. 30
- ^ Hugo Ott: Martin Heidegger. On the way to his biography . Campus, Frankfurt 1992, p. 218 m. Note 155
- ^ Hugo Ott: Martin Heidegger. On the way to his biography . Campus, Frankfurt 1992, p. 218; for Johannes Stein s. Lutz Hachmeister: Heidegger's will. The philosopher, SPIEGEL and the SS . Ullstein, Berlin 2014, p. 267
- ↑ Florian Think Big Revolution. Heidegger and the Political 1919 to 1969 . Beck, Munich 2011, p. 69 ( page no longer available , search in web archives ) Info: The link was automatically marked as defective. Please check the link according to the instructions and then remove this notice.
- ↑ Jürgen Malitz: Classical Philology. In: Eckhard Wirbelauer (ed.): The Freiburg Philosophical Faculty 1920–1960 . Alber, Freiburg / Munich 2006, p. 322 f., Note 66
- ↑ Lutz Hachmeister: Heidegger's Testament. The philosopher, the mirror and the SS . Ullstein, Berlin 2014, p. 269.
- ↑ Ernst Klee: Auschwitz, Nazi medicine and its victims . S. Fischer, Frankfurt am Main 1997, p. 256.
- ^ Hugo Ott: Martin Heidegger. On the way to his biography . Campus, Frankfurt 1992, p. 216; see. also Herman Philipse: Heidegger's Philosophy of Being: A Critical Interpretation . Princeton University Press, Princeton / NJ 1998, pp. 184 f., M. Note 425
- ↑ Ulrich Arnswald, review of the book by E. Faye : “Some of Heidegger's past is indisputable these days: (...) He carried out propaganda for the NSDAP, for example. B. in the form of speeches and calls for elections for Hitler as well as by means of the science camps organized by him for the 'political education' of the students, which also included racial studies ”; Emmanuel Faye, foreword to the Italian edition of The Introduction of National Socialism into Philosophy - Heidegger, l'introduzione del nazismo nella filosofia, Rome, 2012, Prefazione all'edizione italiana, p. XVIII: “And it's in Todtnauberg, where, in October 1933, the rector Heidegger organized his first camp for indoctrination (with a march from Freiburg in SA or SS uniforms) and where he held courses in race theory and prepared himself to select the most suitable. ”(Ed è a Todtnauberg che , nell'ottobre del 1933, il rettore Heidegger organizza il suo primo campo di indottrinamento (con marcia da Friburgo in uniforme della SA o delle SS), dove fa tenere corsi di dottrina razziale e procede egli stesso alla selezione dei più idonei.)
- ^ Hugo Ott: Martin Heidegger. On the way to his biography . Campus, Frankfurt 1992, p. 217: “These passages are not included in the files of the political purification process from 1945”.
- ↑ Martin Heidegger: The Rectorate 1933/34. Facts and thoughts . GA 16 No. 180, 387; see also ibid. 381 f.
- ^ Hugo Ott: Martin Heidegger. On the way to his biography . Campus, Frankfurt 1992, p. 219.
- ↑ Florian Think Big Revolution. Heidegger and the Political 1919 to 1969 . Beck, Munich 2011, p. 69 ( page no longer available , search in web archives ) Info: The link was automatically marked as defective. Please check the link according to the instructions and then remove this notice. : "Despite the factual failure of the 'Todtnauberger Lager', which can be traced back to political trench warfare and political differences between camp participants, for example relating to the importance of racial ideas for National Socialism, this episode also documents Heidegger's will to reorganize the university."
- ↑ Tom Rockmore: On Heidegger's Nazism and Philosophy . University of California Press, Berkeley / Los Angeles 1992, p. 68 : “recalls the worst excess of political efforts at mind control”, “scientific concentration camp”.
- ↑ Lutz Hachmeister: Heidegger's Testament: Der Philosopher, der SPIEGEL and the SS. Ullstein, Berlin 2014, p. 191.
- ^ Rüdiger Safranski: A master from Germany. Heidegger and his time . (1994) 8th edition. Fischer, Frankfurt 2001, p. 307
- ↑ Margarete Götz : The elementary school in the time of National Socialism. Klinkhardt, Bad Heilbrunn / Obb, 1997, p. 63 ; Martin Heidegger: Letter of April 13, 1934 with reference to Wacker's decree (wrong year number), GA 16 No. 147, 269.
- ↑ Volker Hasenauer: Race Studies. In: Eckhard Wirbelauer (ed.): The Freiburg Philosophical Faculty 1920–1960. Alber, Freiburg / Munich 2006, 485-508, here p. 503; Nißle's letter of December 20, 1933, archived: UAF B1 / 1224.
- ↑ Volker Hasenauer: Race Studies. In: Eckhard Wirbelauer (ed.): The Freiburg Philosophical Faculty 1920–1960. Alber, Freiburg / Munich 2006, 485-508, here p. 503; Reply from the Ministry of Culture (UAF B1 / 1124)
- ↑ Martin Heidegger: Letter of April 13, 1934 with reference to Wacker's decree (wrong year number), GA 16 No. 147, 269.
- ↑ Albert-Ludwigs-Universität, course catalog for the summer half of 1934 , p. 42 ( page no longer available , search in web archives ) Info: The link was automatically marked as defective. Please check the link according to the instructions and then remove this notice. : “Hereditary biology, racial hygiene (including the most important chapters of racial studies) and their significance for population policy; large Wed 8-9; Nißle ".
- ↑ Volker Hasenauer: Race Studies. In: Eckhard Wirbelauer (ed.): The Freiburg Philosophical Faculty 1920–1960. Alber, Freiburg / Munich 2006, 485-508, here 507f
- ↑ Eduard Seidler: The Medical Faculty of the Albert Ludwig University of Freiburg im Breisgau. Basics and developments . Springer, Berlin-Heidelberg 1993, p. 331.
- ↑ Angelika Uhlmann, Wolfgang Kohlrausch (1888–1980) and the history of German sports medicine , inaugural dissertation for obtaining a doctorate from the Philosophical Faculty of the Albert Ludwig University of Freiburg i. Br., Freiburg / Stuttgart 2004, p. 126 .
- ↑ Eduard Seidler: The Medical Faculty of the Albert Ludwig University of Freiburg im Breisgau. Basics and developments . Springer, Berlin-Heidelberg 1993 p. 331 ; Albert-Ludwigs-University, course catalog for the winter semester 1934, medical faculty : “'Race studies and race care': Pakheiser; 'Hereditary Biology and Racial Hygiene': Nißle ”.
- ^ Richard Wolin, French Heidegger Wars. In the S. (Ed.), The Heidegger Controversy - A Critical Reader . (1993) MIT Press, Cambridge et al. a. 1998, p. 283 : "due to Fischer's influence that the racial measures promoted by Heidegger during his tenure as rectore that have been chronicled by Farias"; V. Farias: Heidegger and Nazism , ed. with a foreword by Joseph Margolis and Tom Rockmore, Temple University Press, Philadelphia 1989, p. 70; Stuart K. Hayashi: Hunting Down Social Darwinism: Will This Canard Go Extinct? Lexington Books, Lanham 2015, p. 139 : “collaborated extensively with Eugen Fischer in his eugenics studies”; JA Barash, Heidegger et la question de la race , Les Temps Modernes , 2008/4 (No. 650), pp. 290–305, here: p. 299 f. : "Il me semble qu'à placer Heidegger sur le même plan idéologique que Fischer, Günther, voire Bäumler ou Rosenberg, on efface certaines nuances cruciales"; on concepts of "public health" and breed breeding at Heidegger s. also Wolf-Dietrich Bukow: Life in the multicultural society: The emergence of small entrepreneurs and the difficulties in dealing with ethnic minorities . Westdeutscher Verlag, Opladen 1993, p. 56 ; Alexander Schwann: Criticism of the times and politics in Heidegger's late philosophy. In: Annemarie Gethmann-Siefert, Otto Pöggeler (eds.): Heidegger and the practical philosophy . Suhrkamp, Frankfurt / M. 1988, p. 100; Emmanuel Faye: Heidegger. The Introduction of National Socialism into Philosophy . Matthes & Seitz, Berlin 2009, Chapter 3, 98-101; Italian edition pp. 103-106; also Holger Zaborowski: “A question of error and guilt?” Martin Heidegger and National Socialism . Fischer, Frankfurt / M. 2010, 358-365
- ↑ Heiner Fangerau: The standard work on human heredity and racial hygiene by Erwin Baur, Eugen Fischer and Fritz Lenz in the mirror of contemporary review literature 1921-1941 , inaugural dissertation Medical Faculty, Ruhr University Bochum, Bremen / Bochum 2000, p. 23 , m . Quote v. Michael Biddiss: Disease and dictatorship: the case of Hitler's Reich . Journal of the Royal Society of Medicine 30 (1997), pp. 342–346, p. 345: “When it came a little later to the 'euthanasia programs' and the murder of Jews and Gypsies, those in power were able to appeal treat even works that are called “scientific” like the Baur-Fischer-Lenz 'not as murder, but as' cure ', as a therapeutic measure to maintain the health of the national body' ”; Henry Friedlander: The Origins of Nazi Genocide: From Euthanasia to the Final Solution . The University of North Carolina Press, Chapel Hill 1995 p. 123
- ↑ Alex Steiner, The Martin Heidegger case. Philosopher and Nazi, I: Die Inventory , Messkirch, 2000, Steiner : "The Freiburg lecture catalogs show that he is by no means limited to the classic topics of anthropology, but takes into account the new issues of racial studies in research and teaching"; Helmut Heiber: The General Plan East. In: Vierteljahrshefte für Zeitgeschichte. Documentation 6, 1958, issue 3, p. 294; Albert Ludwig University, course catalog for the winter semester 1918 , medical faculty, anatomy
- ↑ Volker Hasenauer: Race Studies. In: Eckhard Wirbelauer (ed.): The Freiburg Philosophical Faculty 1920–1960 . Alber, Freiburg / Munich 2006, 485-508, here p. 492.
- ↑ Free University of Berlin, Otto Suhr Institute, inscription on the memorial plaque at the Kaiser Wilhelm Institute for Anthropology.
- ↑ Heiner Fangerau, the standard work on human heredity and racial hygiene by Erwin Baur, Eugen Fischer and Fritz Lenz in the mirror of contemporary review literature 1921–1941 . Inaugural dissertation Medical Faculty, Ruhr University Bochum, Bremen / Bochum 2000 p. 28
- ^ Richard Wolin, French Heidegger Wars. In the S. (Ed.), The Heidegger Controversy - A Critical Reader . (1993) MIT Press, Cambridge et al. a. 1998, p. 283
- ^ Hans-Walter Schmuhl, Crossing borders: the Kaiser Wilhelm Institute for Anthropology . Wallstein, Göttingen 2005, p. 163, note 19 ; Arno Münster, Heidegger, la Science allemande et le national-socialime , Kimé, Paris 2002, p. 29.
- ↑ Martin Heidegger: From the table speech at the celebration of the 50th anniversary of the Institute for Pathological Anatomy at the University of Freiburg (beginning of August 1933), Martin Heidegger: Speeches and other testimonies of a path of life (1910-1976), GA 16, no. 75, P. 151 f.
- ↑ Reinhold Aschenberg : Ent-Subjectivierung des Menschen: Camp and Shoah in philosophical reflection . Königshausen & Neumann, Würzburg 2003 p. 152, note 116
- ↑ Ludger Lütkehaus : Der Staat am Sterbebett , Zeit-online (May 23, 2001): “Here he gives a possibly even more astonishing example of how he used the much-vaunted showpiece of his early philosophy - that of death as the 'most intrinsic being of existence' - want to fill euthanatologically. (...) Nothing less than a ban on healing the life that is unworthy of the state. (…) In view of the importance of this prohibition of healing for life that is unworthy of the state, it must be repeated again: This is not a mere historical and ethnic characteristic of the Greek concepts of illness and health, but rather identification and superiority. (...) In a very small space here (...) self-legislation in the existential questions of health and illness is combined with an 'interpretation' of human nature that could hardly be thought of as more 'fixed': the regression on 'blood', on 'soil' and subordination to the Führer principle. "
- ^ Stuart K. Hayashi: Hunting Down Social Darwinism. Will This Canard Go Extinct? Lexington Books, Lanham 2015, p. 139 : "substantial contributor to Nazi eugenicist thought (...) Martin Heidegger who gave lectures in praise of Hitler and eugenics during the summer of 1933 at the Institute for Pathological Anatomy".
- ↑ Ludger Lütkehaus, Zeit-online (May 23, 2001): The state on the deathbed : “… whom it orientates itself without naming its source. It is a famous and infamous passage in the third book of Plato's Politeia. There it says: "He who is unable to live in his assigned circle, he (Asklepios) did not believe he had to look after either, because he was of no use to himself or to the state." (...). The euthanatological intention in both versions is clear, except that Heidegger - and this is serious - turns the not-having in Plato into a not-allowed. The wrong translation of Plato at the end of the Rector's speech finds its equivalent here. "
- ↑ Manfred Weinberg, Hitler's Hands. Martin Heidegger and euthanasia. In: Ulrich Bröckling, Benjamin Bühler, Marcus Hahn, Matthias Schöning, Manfred Weinberg (eds.): Disciplines of life. Between anthropology, literature and politics . Narr, Tübingen 2004, 297–323, here: p. 317; for a discussion of the speech cf. ibid. p. 310 ff.
- ↑ Holger Zaborowski: “A question of error and guilt?” Martin Heidegger and National Socialism . Fischer, Frankfurt / M. 2010, p. 356f.
- ↑ cf. Holger Zaborowski: “A question of error and guilt?” Martin Heidegger and National Socialism . Fischer, Frankfurt / M. 2010, pp. 364–365, or Bernd Grün: The rector as a leader? The University of Freiburg i. Br. From 1933 to 1945 . Alber, Freiburg / Munich 2010, p. 175.
- ↑ Anton Knuth: Der Protestantismus als Moderne Religion , p. 70, note 241 : “The 'confession' is based on a speech by Martin Heidegger, which was handed over to the government on November 11, 1933, together with the list of signatures from the National Socialist Teachers' Association (NSLB) "; see. also N. Kapferer, p. 54 : “'Confession of the German Professors (...) to Adolf Hitler' (...). Contains speeches at a rally in the Alberthalle in Leipzig ”; George Leaman, p. 100.
- ↑ cf. also Roger Behrens in: Heidelinde Beckers, Christine Magdalene Noll (eds.): Understanding the world as questionable - a philosophical claim. Würzburg 2006, p. 122, note 89.
- ↑ Martin Heidegger: After the leader's speech (broadcast from the stadium) . GA 16 No. 48, p. 104.
- ↑ Martin Heidegger: The University in the New Reich (June 30, 1933) . Martin Heidegger: Speeches and other testimonials from a life's path (1910–1976), GA 16, No. 286, pp. 761–763.
- ↑ Martin Heidegger: At the beginning of the semester , cf. Universitätsführer 1933/34, published in the Freiburg student newspaper on November 3, 1933, GA 16 No. 101, p. 184 f.
- ↑ Martin Heidegger: Call for Elections (November 10, 1933), published in the election number of the Freiburg student newspaper (Zaborowski 364), GA 16 No. 105, pp. 188–189.
- ↑ Martin Heidegger: Address on November 11, 1933 in Leipzig . GA 16 No. 104, pp. 190-193; Confession of the professors at German universities and colleges to Adolf Hitler and the National Socialist state , presented by the Nat.-soz. Teachers' Association Germany, Gau Sachsen, undated [1933] Dresden-A. 1, Zinzendorfstr. 2; 136 p. With the speeches of the protagonists. With translations into English, Italian, French and Spanish language, p. 13 f.
- ^ Martin Heidegger: Speech to the faculty and student body 'after the speech of the Führer on May 17, 1933' (transferred to the stadium) . Martin Heidegger: Speeches and other testimonials from a life path (1910–1976), GA 16, No. 48, p. 104.
- ↑ Alexander Schwan: Political Philosophy in Heidegger's Thought . 2nd edition. Westdeutscher Verlag, Opladen 1965, Ein Nachtrag , 1988, p. 218 : It was “a fierce struggle to be waged in the National Socialist spirit that should not be stifled by Christian and humanizing ideas”, a “struggle for its realization People's Chancellor Adolf Hitler is a guarantor. "
- ^ Hugo Ott: Martin Heidegger. On the way to his biography . Campus, Frankfurt / M. 1992, p. 160: "This is , emphasized by Martin Heidegger through the italic font, contains the statement of being." For the evaluation of this statement see: Manfred Weinberg: Hitler's hands. Heidegger and euthanasia. In: Ulrich Bröckling and others (ed.): Disciplines of life. Narr Francke Attempto, 2004, p. 306; Peter Trawny: Martin Heidegger. Frankfurt am Main 2003, p. 74 ; Otto Pöggeler: Philosophy and National Socialism - using Heidegger's example. Opladen 1990, pp. 13-37, here 27; Reinhard Mehring: Heidegger's tradition of transmission: a Dionysian self-staging. Königshausen & Neumann, Würzburg 1992, p. 81; Karl-Georg Weber: Self-Image and Deception. Political advertising between influence and manipulation. Centaurus, Pfaffenweiler 1996, p. 173 ; Hassan Givsan: A startling story: Why philosophers allow themselves to be corrupted by the 'Heidegger case'. Königshausen & Neumann, Würzburg 1998, p. 57ff. ; Florian Grosser: Thinking Revolution: Heidegger and the Political 1919 to 1969. Beck, Munich 2011, p. 170 ; Alfred Denker: On the way in being and time. Klett-Cotta, Stuttgart 2011, p. 67 ; Richard Wolin: The Politics of Being: The Political Thought of Martin Heidegger. Columbia University Press, New York 2016, p. 106 ; Tracy B. Strong: On Relevant Events, Then and Now. In: Ingo Farin, Jeff Malpas (eds.): Reading Heidegger's Black Notebooks 1931–1941. MIT Press, Cambridge / MA 2016, pp. 223-238, here pp. 225f.
- ^ Konrad Krause: Alma mater Lipsiensis: History of the University of Leipzig from 1409 to the present. Leipzig 2003, p. 277 : "The 'Führer' was praised as the savior and resuscitator of the German people"; Wolfgang U. Eckart: Ferdinand Sauerbruch - Master surgeon in a political storm , p. 22 ; Victor Farias: Hitler and Nazism , p. 156.
- ↑ Kurt Nowak: Protestant University Theology and "National Revolution". In: Leonore Siegele-Wenschkewitz, Carsten Nicolaisen: Theological Faculties in National Socialism , p. 111, note 60.
- ↑ Vicor Farias: Heidegger and Nazism , p. 156 ff .; after Göpfert's opening speech, the scientists Eugen Fischer , Arthur Golf , Martin Heidegger, Emanuel Hirsch , Wilhelm Pinder , Ferdinand Sauerbruch , Eberhard Schmidt (legal scholar) , Friedrich Karl Schumann and Friedrich Neumann spoke one after the other , cf. Konrad Krause: Alma mater Lipsiensis: History of the University of Leipzig from 1409 to the present. Leipzig 2003, p. 276 f. ; Confession of the professors at German universities and colleges to Adolf Hitler and the National Socialist state, presented by the Nat.-soz. Teachers' Association Germany, Gau Sachsen, undated [1933] Dresden-A. 1, Zinzendorfstr. 2; 136 p. With the speeches of the protagonists. With translations into English, Italian, French and spanish language.
- ^ Norbert Kapferer : The Nazification of Philosophy at the University of Breslau, 1933–1945. Lit, Münster 2001, p. 54 ; George Leaman: Heidegger in context. Complete overview of the Nazi involvement of university philosophers . Argument, Hamburg / Berlin 1993, p. 100.
- ↑ Holger Zaborowski: “A question of error and guilt?” Martin Heidegger and National Socialism . Fischer, Frankfurt / M. 2010, p. 364: "It is ultimately a call to the leader and submission to him."
- ^ Karl Löwith: My life in Germany before and after 1933. Metzler, Stuttgart 2007, p. 39.
- ↑ Dieter Thomä: The time of the self and the time after. On the criticism of the text history of Martin Heidegger 1910–1976 . Suhrkamp, Frankfurt / M. 1990, p. 550.
- ^ Rüdiger Safranski: A master from Germany: Heidegger and his time . (1994) 8th edition. Fischer, Frankfurt / M. 2001, p. 387.
- ↑ Theodor W. Adorno: Interventions: Nine Critical Models . Suhrkamp, Frankfurt / M. 1963, p. 464.
- ↑ See George Leaman, p. 47: membership number 285.217; ibid. p. 100; N. Kapferer, p. 54 ; Geoff Waite in: Bruce Krajewski (Ed.): Gadamer's Repercussions: Reconsidering Philosophical Hermeneutics. Berkeley, Los Angeles, London 2004, pp. 273 f.
- ^ Enrico Heitzer: Heinrich von zur Mühlen (1908–1994). Historian, expert on "folklore" and secret service agent. In: Helmut Müller-Enbergs ; Armin Wagner (Ed.): Spies and news dealers: Secret service careers in Germany 1939–1989 . Ch. Links Verlag, Berlin 2016, ISBN 978-3-86153-872-1 , pp. 109–145, here: pp. 111 f.
- ^ Petra Umlauf, The female students at the University of Munich 1926 to 1945 , Berlin / Boston, 2016, p. 293 m. Note 479
- ^ Hugo Ott: A letter from the rector of the Freiburg University Martin Heidegger to the leader of the German student body and Reichsführer of the NSDStB Oskar Stäbel in: Freiburger Diözesan-Archiv Volume 117, 1997, pp. 229-240, here: p. 236.
- ^ Petra Umlauf, The female students at the University of Munich 1926 to 1945 , Berlin / Boston, 2016, p. 293 m. Note 479 : "For von zu Mühlen, this completely destroyed his own authority 'at the black-reactionary University of Freiburg'."
- ↑ Cf. Hugo Ott: A letter from the rector of the Freiburg University Martin Heidegger to the leader of the German student body and Reichsführer of the NSDStB Oskar Stäbel in: Freiburger Diözesan-Archiv Volume 117, 1997, pp. 229-240, facsimile of the handwritten letter: p 231f. . See also Rüdiger Safranski: A Master from Germany. Heidegger and his time . (1994) 8th edition. Fischer, Frankfurt 2001, p. 317
- ↑ Martin Heidegger: To return to unhindered educational work. To the Minister of Education and Justice (April 14, 1934), GA 16, No. 149, p. 272; Bernd Martin: The University of Freiburg im Breisgau in 1933. In: Zeitschrift für die Geschichte des Oberrheins , 136 (1988), pp. 445–477, here p. 475.
- ^ Hugo Ott: Martin Heidegger. On the way to his biography . Campus, Frankfurt / M. 1992, p. 234 ff .; Holger Zaborowski: “A question of error and guilt?” Martin Heidegger and National Socialism . Fischer, Frankfurt / M. 2010, p. 368; Hans Maier (ed.), The Freiburg circles. Academic Resistance and Social Market Economy , Schöningh, Paderborn, 2014, ders., Academic Resistance in the Third Reich , p. 13 ; Bernd Grün, University Management and Philosophical Faculty In: Eckhard Wirbelauer (Ed.): The Freiburg Philosophical Faculty 1920–1960 , p. 723 .
- ^ Hugo Ott: Martin Heidegger. On the way to his biography . Campus, Frankfurt / M. 1992, p. 227, Eucken on Wolf's relationship with Heidegger: “idolatrous worship”; Hans Maier (ed.), The Freiburg circles. Academic resistance and social market economy , Schöningh, Paderborn, 2014, the other, Academic resistance in the Third Reich , p. 13 : "idolatrously devoted" m. Note 5: "This was at least true for the time of Heidegger's rectorate."
- ^ Rudolf Vierhaus, German Biographical Encyclopedia , Volume 10, Munich, 2008, u. “Erik Wolf” : “Under the influence of Martin Heidegger, W. fell under the spell of Nazi ideology for a short time in 1933/34”; Lutz Hachmeister: Heidegger's Testament: The Philosopher, SPIEGEL and the SS . Propylaen, Berlin 2014, p. 251: “glowing National Socialist”.
- ^ Nils Goldschmidt, The emergence of the Freiburg circles , abridged version of the diploma thesis, Freiburg, 1995, p. 5: "Lampe, later a core member of the Freiburg circles, was nationally minded, but a resolute opponent of National Socialism"; Joachim Scholtyseck, Christoph Studt, Universities and Students in the Third Reich , p. 144 , (about Adolf Lampe): "At the same time, he hated the National Socialists' view of society (...)"; on Eucken's opposition to NS s. u. H. Maier.
- ↑ Lüder Gerken (Ed.), Walter Eucken and his work Retrospect on the Vordenker der Sozial Marktwirtschaft, Tübingen: Mohr Siebeck (2000), 53-115, here p. 86 : “Heidegger prevents, based on the one he appointed dean Legal scholar Erik Wolf that Adolf Lampe is appointed full professor ”, m. Note 199: Letter of November 18, 1933, Heidegger to the Ministry of Culture, Freiburg State Archives 25/2 - 18; Alexander Hollerbach, Jurisprudence in Freiburg: Contributions to the history of the law faculty of the Albert-Ludwigs-Universität , Tübingen, 2007, p. 74 f. ; Hans Maier (ed.), The Freiburg circles. Academic Resistance and Social Market Economy , Paderborn, 2014, the other, Academic Resistance in the Third Reich , p. 13 : “When trying to reorganize the university, Martin Heidegger triggered lively debates, especially in the law and political science faculties. In this faculty he found both: his most passionate supporter and his most violent opponent. One was the legal philosopher Erik Wolf, (...) a man who was idolatrously devoted to the rector and blindly followed him even against the majority of the faculty; the other, the economist Walter Eucken, who used the remnants of the remaining self-government rights and courageously asked unpleasant questions in the faculty and in the senate; he soon rose to the position of secret opposition leader against the rector's Nazi course. "; Bernd Martin: Martin Heidegger and National Socialism - the historical framework. In: Martin Heidegger and the 'Third Reich'. Ein Kompendium, Darmstadt 1989, pp. 14–50, here p. 26: Eucken was the “real adversary and challenger of the rector who promoted National Socialist university policy” Heidegger; Holger Zaborowski: “A question of error and guilt?” Martin Heidegger and National Socialism . Fischer, Frankfurt / M. 2010, p. 342.
- ^ Hugo Ott: Martin Heidegger. On the way to his biography . Campus, Frankfurt / M. 1992, p. 228; Holger Zaborowski: “A question of error and guilt?” Martin Heidegger and National Socialism . Fischer, Frankfurt / M. 2010, p. 373; Bernd Grün, University Management and Philosophical Faculty In: E. Wirbelauer (Ed.): The Freiburg Philosophical Faculty 1920–1960 , Jürgen Malitz, Classical Philology , p. 723
- ^ Hugo Ott: Martin Heidegger. On the way to his biography . Campus, Frankfurt / M. 1992, p. 228.
- ^ Hugo Ott: Martin Heidegger. On the way to his biography . Campus, Frankfurt / M. 1992, p. 236: “Heidegger kept this resignation a secret for the time being”.
- ^ Frank Schalow, Alfred Denker, Historical Dictionary of Heidegger's Philosophy , p. 30 ; Hugo Ott: Martin Heidegger. On the way to his biography . Campus, Frankfurt / M. 1992, p. 236 f .: "So Heidegger took this rather formal matter as an opportunity to throw the gun in the grain"; Holger Zaborowski: “A question of error and guilt?” Martin Heidegger and National Socialism . Fischer, Frankfurt / M. 2010, p. 764; GA 16, 272, 274.
- ↑ Holger Zaborowski: “A question of error and guilt?” Martin Heidegger and National Socialism . Fischer, Frankfurt / M. 2010, p. 373 m. Note 89 f.
- ↑ Bernd Martin, The political and ideological environment. In: Eckhard Wirbelauer (ed.): The Freiburg Philosophical Faculty 1920–1960. Members - Structures - Networks , Freiburg and Munich, 2006, p. 44 .: “But the experiment (...) to lead the leader spiritually failed. Heidegger (…) left an extremely polarized university teaching staff ”; ibid. p. 45, note 67: “UAF B3 / 71: New Habilitation Regulations from February 15, 1934: Requirement, in addition to the scientific work, proof of participation in military sports and a labor camp. Ministry approval. This new habilitation regulation is likely to be a further solo effort in Baden, behind which Martin Heidegger can be assumed as 'spiritus rector' ”; ders., The University of Freiburg im Breisgau in 1933 , p. 475: "The resignation over the failure of his lofty plans to develop the high school into the intellectual center of the Third Reich gave the real reason"; P. Matussek, Martin Heidegger. Preliminary remark: The psychodynamics of personality in its relationship to the work , essay from: ders. Analytische Psychosentherapie , Heidelberg, 1997: "The Rectorate 1933/34, in which Heidegger once again acted with all relentlessness as a leader and 'real Nazi'"; Lutz Hachmeister: Heidegger's Testament: The Philosopher, SPIEGEL and the SS . Propylaen, Berlin 2014, p. 72: “in the style of a university dictator”; Zimmermann, p. 65 : “When Martin Heidegger resigned from the Freiburg rectorate on April 23, 1934, he did so out of disappointment that his radical ideas could not be implemented. The politics of the NSDAP was not revolutionary enough for him ”; Holger Zaborowski: “A question of error and guilt?” Martin Heidegger and National Socialism . Fischer, Frankfurt / M. 2010, p. 340 ff .: “Palace revolt”.
- ↑ Bernd Martin: Martin Heidegger and the Third Reich. Scientific Book Society, Darmstadt 1989, p. 35; Martin Heidegger: Dispute with the leader of the SA-Hochschulamt, GA 16, No. 136, 256f .; Anton M. Fischer: Martin Heidegger - the godless priest: psychogram of a thinker. Rüffer & Rub, 2008, p. 337: "With the parallel authority, which has meanwhile established itself as the SA university office, he engages in a hopeless power struggle."; Alexander Schwan: Political Philosophy in Heidegger's Thought. 2nd edition. Westdeutscher Verlag, Opladen 1965, Ein Nachtrag, 1988, p. 212f. : “He was now the legally and politically clearly guided leader. He had bought his own leadership through an actively driven, but inscrutable, self-disclosure. This fact determined the situation when he resigned in April 1934. [...] Heidegger had accepted that, according to the new Baden university constitution, an SA university office was set up in the university and its leader had to be appointed a permanent member of the Senate. But with that the actual leadership in the university was institutionalized. "
- ↑ D. Morat, p. 126, note 73 ; Victor Farias, p. 213 ff.
- ^ Hugo Ott: Martin Heidegger. On the way to his biography . Campus, Frankfurt / M. 1992, p. 224; Lutz Hachmeister: Heidegger's Testament: The Philosopher, SPIEGEL and the SS . Propylaen, Berlin 2014, p. 261: “In the events at that 'Todtnauberger camp' (...) Heidegger saw 'a peculiar omen' for his fall. The holiday camp (...) was intended as an example of Heidegger's National Socialist university idea ”; Martin Heidegger: The Rectorate 1933/34. Facts and Thoughts, GA 16, No. 180, 372-394, here 386.
- ↑ Martin Heidegger: The Rectorate 1933/34. Facts and Thoughts, GA 16, No. 180, 372-394, here p. 388.
- ^ Hugo Ott: Martin Heidegger. On the way to his biography . Campus, Frankfurt / M. 1992, p. 224.
- ↑ Bernd Martin, The political and ideological environment. In: Eckhard Wirbelauer (ed.): The Freiburg Philosophical Faculty 1920–1960. Members - Structures - Networks , Freiburg and Munich, 2006, p. 43 : "the initial triad Baeumler-Heidegger-Krieck".
- ↑ on Baeumler, Krieck and the report by Jaensch s. Hugo Ott: Martin Heidegger. On the way to his biography . Campus, Frankfurt / M. 1992, p. 241 ff; Gerhard Ritter: Self-testimony 3. The University of Freiburg in the Hitler Empire. Personal impressions and experiences. In: Eckhard Wirbelauer (Hrsg.): The Freiburg Philosophical Faculty 1920–1960. Members - structures - networks. Freiburg and Munich 2006, p. 782: Heidegger said to Ritter in the 1945 settlement procedure, “that he was so annoyed about the appointment of Krieck (...) as rector of Heidelberg that he renounced his rectorate. This appointment made it clear to him that he had absolutely no influence on the party's cultural policy ”.
- ^ Hugo Ott: Martin Heidegger. On the way to his biography . Campus, Frankfurt / M. 1992, p. 235: "the bad sentence about the conspiracy of certain university circles with National Socialism".
- ↑ Martin Heidegger: The Rectorate 1933/34. Facts and Thoughts, GA 16, No. 180, 372-394, here p. 388; s. on this Hugo Ott: Martin Heidegger. On the way to his biography . Campus, Frankfurt / M. 1992, p. 234: "The point in time, namely February 1934, should meanwhile no longer want to be maintained".
- ^ Hugo Ott: Martin Heidegger. On the way to his biography . Campus, Frankfurt / M. 1992, p. 345.
- ↑ Martin Heidegger: The Rectorate 1933/34. Facts and Thoughts, GA 16, No. 180, 372-394, here p. 388 f .; Hugo Ott: Martin Heidegger. On the way to his biography . Campus, Frankfurt / M. 1992, p. 234.
- ↑ Lutz Hachmeister: Heidegger's Testament: The Philosopher, the SPIEGEL and the SS . Propylaea, Berlin 2014, p. 251.
- ^ Hugo Ott: Martin Heidegger. On the way to his biography . Campus, Frankfurt / M. 1992, p. 227 f.
- ↑ Holger Zaborowski: “A question of error and guilt?” Martin Heidegger and National Socialism . Fischer, Frankfurt / M. 2010, p. 371.
- ↑ Martin Heidegger: Statement on the retention of the rectorate handover (4.5.34), GA 16, No. 153, p. 278; Holger Zaborowski: “A question of error and guilt?” Martin Heidegger and National Socialism . Fischer, Frankfurt / M. 2010, p. 370 ff.
- ↑ ; Hans Maier (ed.), The Freiburg circles. Academic Resistance and Social Market Economy , Paderborn, 2014, the other , Academic Resistance in the Third Reich , p. 13 : “On the other hand, the rapid failure of its rectorate exemplarily showed that a university in its diversity and complexity deals with the Führer principle and hammering political ideology could not be governed. After Heidegger's resignation, according to the judgment of many contemporary witnesses in Freiburg, there was a relative relaxation of academic life ”; C. Kersting, Pedagogy in Post-War Germany , p. 288 f. : "Kern (...) was preferred to (...) party members in order to (...) ensure peace and order"; At the end of May 1934, Eucken wrote that “a lot has improved since Heidegger and his clique left the leadership of the university”: To Alexander Rustow in Istanbul, quoted from Wendula von Klinckowstroem: Walter Eucken: Eine biographische sketch, in: Lüder Gerken (Ed.), Walter Eucken and his work. Review of the pioneer of the social market economy, Tübingen: Mohr Siebeck (2000), 53-115, here p. 87 ; Nils Goldschmidt, The emergence of the Freiburg circles , abridged version of the diploma thesis, Freiburg, 1995, p. 5: “Gradual calming”.
- ↑ George Leaman: Heidegger in context. Complete overview of the Nazi involvement of university philosophers . Argument, Hamburg / Berlin 1993, p. 13: “Within the NSDAP there were always competing voices that tried to define 'true National Socialism': their struggles were never clearly decided and could not be clearly decided. (...) The often repeated assertion of his defenders that he understood something very special by 'National Socialism' that had nothing to do with real Nazism, proves to be trivial because a multitude of different versions have always been in circulation ”; Gereon Wolters: Philosophy in National Socialism, in: Hans Jörg Sandkühler (Hrsg.): Philosophy in National Socialism. Meiner, Hamburg 2009, 57-81, here p. 64 ; Heidegger also confirms the diversity of Nazi philosophies and the dispensability of philosophy for the worldview in an unpublished addition to “The Time of the World View” (Holzwege, GA 5, 100), in which in 1939 he “spoke of the laborious manufacture of such absurd products as it is the National Socialist philosophies ”speaks that“ only cause confusion. The world view needs and uses the learning of philosophy, but it does not need any philosophy because as a world view it has adopted its own interpretation and design of beings "
- ↑ R. Wolin, “Hohe Luft”, 2015, 03 : “There was no official anti-Semitic doctrine, but always a whole spectrum of anti-Semitic points of view. As long as someone agreed with certain principles for solving the Jewish question, that was accepted by the regime. "
- ↑ Hans Jörg Sandkühler: Forgot? Repressed? Remind? Philosophy in National Socialism. Introduction, in: ders. (Ed.): Philosophy in National Socialism, Meiner, Hamburg 2009, 9-29, here p. 17 : s. also Gereon Wolters: The “Führer” and his thinkers. On the philosophy of the “Third Reich”, in: DZPhil, 47 (1999), 223-251, here p. 229: “Immediately after the 'seizure of power' almost a scramble of the 'best minds' about (...) who (...) was intended to represent the (...) philosophy of the regime (...) ”; G. Wolters, p. 233, evaluates according to two criteria u. a. Baeumler, Krieck, Rothacker and Heidegger as "at least temporarily, Nazi philosophers"; Ralph Stöwer: Erich Rothacker: His life and his science of people , Bonn University Press, Bonn 2011, p. 16: “Like Heidegger, Carl Schmitt, Freyer or Krieck, Rothacker was one of the professors who claimed 'the new one To help shape the state spiritually and politically as an independent thinker '“m. Applied to Rothacker in note 18; Holger Zaborowski: “A question of error and guilt?” Martin Heidegger and National Socialism . Fischer, Frankfurt / M. 2020, p. 251, note 103: “It seems that Heidegger was counted among the 'best people' won in 1932 - alongside Baeumler, Jaensch and Rothacker. However, it is questionable what this means exactly "
- ^ Letter from Heidegger-Rothacker 1922–1924, see. Theodore Kisiel in: Dilthey-Jahrbuch VIII / 1992-1993 , p. 226 ff .; ders., The Genesis of Heidegger's "Being and Time" . P. 477 f. ; George Leaman: Heidegger in context. Complete overview of the Nazi involvement of university philosophers . Argument, Hamburg / Berlin 1993, p. 73
- ^ Hugo Ott: Martin Heidegger. On the way to his biography . Campus, Frankfurt / M. 1992, p. 140
- ^ Hugo Ott: Martin Heidegger. On the way to his biography . Campus, Frankfurt / M. 1992, p. 187
- ↑ George Leaman: Heidegger in context. Complete overview of the Nazi involvement of university philosophers . Argument, Hamburg / Berlin 1993 Leaman, p. 47.
- ↑ “The Führer’s representative for the supervision of the entire ideological and intellectual training and education of the NSDAP and its affiliated associations” (…): “In this capacity he has to guard the purity of the National Socialist idea. His office is divided into administrative office, office for training, office for art care, main office science (philosophy and pedagogy, history, Aryan ideology), office literature maintenance, department for ideological information, office prehistory, main office Nordic questions, main office press. "In: Rudolf Kluge , Heinrich Krüger (Hrsg.): Constitution and administration in the Greater German Reich. Reich Citizenship. 2., rework. Ed., Berlin 1939, p. 197
- ↑ George Leaman: Heidegger in context. Complete overview of the Nazi involvement of university philosophers . Argument, Hamburg / Berlin 1993, p. 134 f. And note 50
- ↑ Ralph Stöwer, Erich Rothacker: His life and his science of people . Bonn University Press, Bonn 2011, p. 243 f. m. Note 633: Use a. the Volkischer Beobachter v. September 2, 1933
- ↑ Oliver Kohns, Purity as Hermeneutic and Paranoid Calculus. The race discourse of the 1920s and 30s , Weimar Contributions 54 (2008) 3, p. 366 f. .
- ↑ Ludwig Ferdinand Clauss , Race and Soul , quoted in. n. O. Kohns, p. 365
- ↑ Oliver Kohns, Purity as Hermeneutic and Paranoid Calculus. The race discourse of the 1920s and 30s , Weimarer Contributions 54 (2008) 3, p. 367 : "The theory of an Aryan race remains effective, especially in terms of real politics , but the racial ideological discourse of the time is far more complex than the common formula of ' pure Aryan race would suggest. "
- ^ Jan Weyand, Historical Sociology of Knowledge of Modern Anti-Semitism . Wallstein, Göttingen 2016, p. 311 ff. “National Racist Antisemitism”; Oliver Kohns: Purity as a hermeneutical and a paranoid calculation. The race discourse of the 1920s and 30s , Weimar Contributions 54 (2008) 3, p. 366 f. ; Brigitte Fuchs: “Race”, “People”, Gender: Anthropological Discourses in Austria 1850–1960 . Campus, Frankfurt 2003, p. 92 f.
- ↑ Sidonie Kellerer: Struggle of reflection . DZPhil 63 (2015), 941-957 , p. 948: “In the autumn of 1938, Heidegger speaks of the machinability-based principles of 'blood and soil' (GA 96, 55). But until about the end of 1936 he repeatedly used the cumulative phrase: 'not just' blood, 'but also' spirit. The importance of blood is not negated; it is relativized in favor of the spirit and the being. "
- ↑ GA 36/37, p. 263
- ↑ Peter Trawny: Heidegger and the myth of the Jewish world conspiracy . 2nd, revised and expanded edition, Klostermann, Frankfurt / M. 2014, p. 61: “Just as Heidegger deals with the term 'race', namely to recognize its positive meaning in order to limit it (...) he also deals with the ideologue of 'blood and soil'. 'Blood and soil' are 'powerful and necessary, but not a sufficient condition for the existence of a people' "; s. also ibid. p. 40: "Heidegger's distance from racial thinking thus relates to the theoretical absolutization of a moment of 'thrownness' among other moments, but not the view that 'race' belongs to existence"; Morat, p. 136 f. : "In this way Heidegger tried to differentiate himself from a purely biological racism, but also represented a völkisch blood-and-soil-thinking".
- ↑ GA 94, p. 189, Considerations III
- ↑ With the reference to unpublished research by Franck Jolles, Emmanuel Faye contradicted this representation and asserted that Heidegger had rather given a manifest eulogy of National Socialism on January 30, 1934, from which Faye cited in conversation with I. Radisch, Die Zeit , 2014, 01
- ↑ GA 36/37, p. 263, Being and Truth , Lecture WS 1933/34: "Essence of Truth"
- ↑ Reinhard Mehring: Heidegger's "great politics" . Mohr Siebeck, Tübingen 2016, p. 165 f. : "Heidegger makes the objection to biologism not racism, but evolutionism"; Meike Siegfried, p. 412 f. : Heidegger's rejection of a “biologistic interpretation of human existence” shows that “the question of who the people is” is a “question of decision” for him; the rejection of biologism and racism "does not necessarily lead to an unbridgeable distance from the Nazi ideology", since the motive "harshness and heaviness" emerges here "overly clearly"; J. Appelhans, Martin Heidegger's unwritten poetology . P. 164 : “In fact, Heidegger does not criticize National Socialism in this lecture, nor does he draw a line under his political commitment, because the figures Rosenberg and Kolbenheyer were thoroughly controversial within the National Socialist movement and the criticism of them was risk-free, even capable of consensus. "
- ↑ cf. z. B. Holger Zaborowski: “A question of error and guilt?” Martin Heidegger and National Socialism . Fischer, Frankfurt / M. 2010, p. 634; Peter Trawny: Heidegger and the myth of the Jewish world conspiracy . 2nd, revised and expanded edition, Klostermann, Frankfurt am Main 2014, p. 29; George Leaman: Heidegger in context. Complete overview of the Nazi involvement of university philosophers . Argument, Hamburg / Berlin 1993, p. 136: “And here lies the essential difference between Heidegger and the other philosopher-rectors: While they came to terms with Rosenberg's biological race theories or at least accepted 'race' as a philosophical term, Heidegger declined consistently from this - but (as we have seen) not because he rejected Nazism ”; Ch.R. Bambach, Heidegger's Roots: Nietzsche, National Socialism, and the Greeks , p. 5 .
- ^ S. Kellerer, Heidegger: Thinking as a fight , p. 948; s. also JA Barash, Heidegger et la question de la race , Les Temps Modernes , 2008/4 (No. 650), pp. 290–305, here: p. 299 f. : “Dans le cours de 1933–1934 'Of the essence of truth', Heidegger prend soin de distinguer son propre concept de race (race, strain, gender, species) des idées de ce qu'il nomme la 'biologie libérale', périmées à son sens. Sous cette expression de 'biologie libérale', il désigne notamment la théorie de l'évolution de Darwin dont il critique les principes biologiques en ce qu'ils expriment les préjugés du libéralisme et du positivisme anglais de son époque. Mais il inclut de façon significative dans sa critique de Darwin le darwinisme tel qu'il a été modifié par les idéologues de la race aryenne. Il s'en prend explicitement à des apologistes du nazisme, notamment au romancier et essayiste Erwin Guido Kolbenheyer (1878–1962) qui l'idéologie de la race aryenne (ou nordique) à la compréhension de la réalité politique de l'époque. (...) Il me semble qu'à placer Heidegger sur le même plan idéologique que Fischer, Günther, voire Bäumler ou Rosenberg, on efface certaines nuances cruciales "; s. also O. Kohns, note 28: “At this point Frank-Lothar Kroll ( Utopia as ideology. Historical thinking and political action in the Third Reich: Hitler - Rosenberg - Darré - Himmler - Goebbels , Paderborn et al. 1998, p. 122) must be contradicted who sees a contrast between a theologically oriented criticism of Judaism (with Alfred Rosenberg) and the racially oriented criticism (with Clauss, Hitler etc.). In fact, both theologically and racially arguing anti-Semitism in the 1930s is based on identical clichés and topoi, identical motifs: the materialism of the Jews, their greed, their tendency to disguise, in short: their connection with representation in all its forms. "
- ↑ Heidegger / Bauch: Correspondence 1932–1975. Karl Alber, 2010, p. 35.
- ↑ Krieck's article in “Volk im Werden”, Germanic myth and Heidegger's philosophy , republished by Schneeberger, 1962, p. 225 ff .; Heidegger-Jahrbuch 4, pp. 193-195; Andreas Luckner, Heidegger and the thinking of technology . transcript, Bielefeld 2008 p. 67
- ↑ Ralph Stöwer: Erich Rothacker: His life and his science of people . Bonn University Press, Bonn 2011, p. 175
- ↑ Hans Naumann in the magazine "Mutterssprache", laudation on Heidegger: concern and readiness. (The myth and the teaching of Heidegger) , Germanischer Schicksalsglaube , Jena 1934, pp. 68–89, now in: Heidegger-Jahrbuch 4, pp. 178–193; Karl A. Moehling in: Thomas Sheehan (Ed.): Heidegger: The Man and the Thinker , New Jersey, 1981, p. 36 ; Holger Zaborowski: “A question of error and guilt?” Martin Heidegger and National Socialism . Fischer, Frankfurt / M. 2010, pp. 563-566: Discussion of the text by Naumann.
- ^ Hugo Ott: Martin Heidegger. On the way to his biography . Campus, Frankfurt / M. 1992, p. 242.
- ↑ cit. n. Hugo Ott: Martin Heidegger. On the way to his biography . Campus, Frankfurt / M. 1992, p. 243.
- ↑ George Leaman: Heidegger in context. Complete overview of the Nazi involvement of university philosophers . Argument, Hamburg / Berlin 1993, p. 53.
- ^ Hugo Ott: Martin Heidegger. On the way to his biography . Campus, Frankfurt / M. 1992, p. 241; s. also R. Marten, think big, err big. Race, people and spirit: Comments on Martin Heidegger's political philosophy , special prints from the Albert-Ludwigs-Universität Freiburg, original article published in: Badische Zeitung Jan. 27, 1988 (= No. 21), p. 12, column 2 : “Kraft and race as each individual German are now the truly universal, from which everything that is 'proper' to others remains essentially excluded. Heidegger conforms to precisely this ideological self-understanding of National Socialism: 1933 and all the time thereafter. "Ibid. Col. 3:" But the Hitler people could not follow his philosophical racism. "
- ↑ Karl Jaspers, Philosophical Autobiography , extended edition, Piper, Munich, 1977, p. 101, quoted. n. Peter Trawny: Heidegger and the myth of the Jewish world conspiracy , Klostermann, Frankfurt / M. 2014, 3rd revised and expanded edition, 2015, p. 45 f.
- ↑ Peter Trawny: Heidegger and the myth of the Jewish world conspiracy , Klostermann, Frankfurt / M. 2014, 3rd revised and expanded edition, 2015, pp. 45, 50.
- ↑ GA 96, Reflections XV, 17, dated 1941, cf. Peter Trawny: Heidegger and the myth of the Jewish world conspiracy , Klostermann, Frankfurt / M. 2014, 3rd revised and expanded edition, 2015, p. 45 f.
- ↑ David Farrell Krell, Ecstasy, Catastrophe: Heidegger from Being and Time to the Black Notebooks , New York, 2015, p. 164 : “who would not be defeated by the phantasm of an international Jewish conspiracy manipulating both Bolshevik Russia and National Socialist Germany ? "
- ↑ GA 96, Considerations , XIII, 77; s. also Peter Trawny: Heidegger and the myth of the Jewish world conspiracy , Klostermann, Frankfurt / M. 2014, 3rd revised and expanded edition, 2015, p. 52: "the 'way of thinking' of the totalitarian states (...) as well as the western democracies".
- ↑ Sidonie Kellerer, review: Heidegger's correspondence with Kurt Bauch , p. 5 f. ; Martin Heidegger, Kurt Bauch, Correspondence 1932–1975, Almuth Heidegger (Ed.): Freiburg, Munich, 2010, p. 61, letter of November 25, 1939 to Kurt Bauch's wife Doris; s. also this., Heidegger. Thinking as a struggle, p. 950 f. ; this, 2014, A source “guerre invisible” Heidegger faisait-il référence?
- ^ Reflections , XIV, 1940
- ↑ The History of Being, GA 69, 74
- ↑ The History of Being, GA 69, 77 f.
- ↑ Peter Trawny: Heidegger and the myth of the Jewish world conspiracy , Klostermann, Frankfurt / M. 2014, 3rd revised and expanded edition, 2015, p. 53 fm note 40
- ↑ Theodore Kisiel, 2016 : “… 'can be counted on the fingers of one hand' (GA 69: 78). Heidegger's select company of global arch-criminals of the 20th century would certainly have included Hitler and at least Stalin, with the possible supplement of a global Jewish cabal working stealthily and conspiratorially behind the scenes of the world stage "; s. also Peter Trawny: Heidegger and the myth of the Jewish world conspiracy , Klostermann, Frankfurt / M. 2014, 3rd revised and expanded edition, 2015, p. 54: "It cannot be ruled out that this designation includes 'Jews' in addition to Hitler and Stalin."
- ↑ Till Kinzel, review by Trawny, Peter: Heidegger and the myth of the Jewish world conspiracy. In: Informationsmittel (IFB): digital review organ for library and science . pdf, p. 3
- ↑ s. also Thomas Vašek , Heidegger. A totalitarian thinker , Hohe Luft , 2014, no. 09, p. 73 : “As Freiburg rector, Heidegger does not take part directly in the Nazis' primitive Jew-baiting. But even then there was evidence of Heidegger's anti-Semitism (...). In a lecture in the winter semester of 33/34, Heidegger said: '(...) This enemy could also' have established itself 'in the innermost roots of the existence of a people ”; James Phillips, Heidegger's Volk: Between National Socialism and Poetry , Stanford, 2005, p. 105 : “Heidegger asserts, again like Hitler, that the real enemy lies invert within the people”; Gaëtan Pégny, Polysemie et Equivoque , p. 129 : "Avec ce que l'on a pu dire en introduction de la généalogie antisémite du re-couvrement du concept grec originel de vérité par le judéo-christianisme faite par Heidegger, le passage suivant, tiré du cours du semestre d'hiver 1933–1934 on L'essence de la vérité consacré au fragment 53 d'Héraclite sur le combat père de toutes choses, ne peut plus lui non plus apparaître comme un accident de parcours ”.
- ^ Daniel Morat; From action to serenity. Conservative thinking in Martin Heidegger, Ernst and Friedrich Georg Jünger , Wallstein, Göttingen 2007, p. 133
- ↑ Thomas Poiss: Cunning. Heidegger as Heraclitus. In: Wolfgang Ulrich (Ed.): Verwindungen. Work on Heidegger , Frankfurt / M., 2003, 63-88, here: p. 73: the word 'fixed' in the context of 'root of existence' undoubtedly suggests: “not primitive, but like a parasite”; Peter Trawny: Heidegger and the myth of the Jewish world conspiracy , Klostermann, Frankfurt / M. 2014, 3rd revised and expanded edition, 2015, p. 103 f .: “Heidegger may want to accommodate the new rulers. Because the semantics of this formulation are current. Isn't it the "parasite" that has "established itself in the innermost roots of a people's existence"? (...) What is left unspoken is (...) 'Judaism', exposed to 'total annihilation' ”.
- ↑ E. Faye, p. 229: "The fight describes the racial struggle of the National Socialists against the Jews, who assimilated into the German people, exactly in the language so characteristic of Heidegger"; ders., National Socialism in Philosophy. Being, historicity, technology and destruction in Heidegger's work In: Hans Jörg Sandkühler (Ed.), Philosophy in National Socialism , Hamburg 2009, 134 f. ( Page no longer available , search in web archives ): “What Heidegger writes corresponds to what the Gestapo was entrusted with as a new mission: 'enemy research'. It is about the enemy grafted onto the innermost roots of the Germanic people, whom it is necessary to identify in order to completely destroy it, thus the opponent of the National Socialist Revolution, of whom the lectures are constantly talking about, but also and above all it is about the Jews assimilated in the German people ”.
- ↑ Gregory Fried in: Ingo Farin, Jeff Malpas, Reading Heidegger's Black Notebooks 1931–1941 , Cambridge / Mass., London, 2016, p. 53 : “Heidegger's cynism is breathtaking: he is willing to allow the manufacture of an enemy (... ), so that Dasein may not lose its edge. "
- ↑ Thomas Poiss: Cunning. Heidegger as Heraclitus. In: Wolfgang Ulrich (Ed.): Verwindungen. Work on Heidegger , Frankfurt / M., 2003, 63-88, here: p. 74: "In the context of 1933/34, Heidegger had to be clear what he was doing by speaking like this: he was rushing." (...) "Someone who, without the slightest extreme compulsion, in his own activity - e.g. B. the interpretation of Heraclitus' polemos fragment, calling for the complete annihilation of an enemy who has established himself parasitically in the existence of the people ”; s. also S. Kellerer, de Gruyter, Heidegger. Thinking as a Struggle, DZPhil 2015; 63 (5): 941-957, here: p. 947 ; Jan E. Dunkhase, German Literature Archive Marburg, source : “where the 'Jewry' in the 'period of the Christian Occident, d. H. of metaphysics 'is presented as' the principle of destruction 'and the struggle of the' essentially 'Jewish' in the metaphysical sense against the 'Jewish' as the 'climax of self-destruction in history' (Notes I, GA 97, p. 20) - only the staunch can deny anti-Semitism. "
- ↑ GA 65, p. 493
- ↑ Tom Rockmore: Philosophy or Weltanschauung? In: Wolfdietrich Schmied-Kowarzik and others (eds.): Recognize - Monas - Language: International Richard Hönigswald Symposium. Kassel 1995
- ↑ GA 95, p. 96 f., Considerations VIII, 9
- ↑ Peter Trawny: Heidegger and the myth of the Jewish world conspiracy , Klostermann, Frankfurt / M. 2014, 3rd revised and expanded edition, 2015, p. 35; ders. ibid. p. 33, refers to a quote from Heidegger from a lecture in the winter of 1933/34, handed down by a student: “The nature of our German area would certainly be revealed differently to a Slavic people than to us; never evident at all ”; the lecture transcript was not published in the complete edition, cf. for on the essence and concept of nature, history and state in Alfred Denker, Holger Zaborowski (ed.): Heidegger and National Socialism: I. Documents. Karl Alber, Freiburg / Munich 2009, p. 82; Emmanuel Alloa, Gagarine Et La Forêt Noire. Métapolitiques Du Déracinement Chez Heidegger, Lévinas Et Blanchot. In: Alfred Bodenheimer, Miriam Fischer-Geboers (Ed.): Lesarten der Freiheit , Munich, 2015, p. 167 f. : "Celui-ci n'est au mieux qu'un antisémitisme culturel (...) un sorte du concession au Zeitgeist ambiant."
- ^ Considerations XII, GA 96, p. 46, 1939
- ↑ Jörg Heidegger, Alfred Denker (Ed.): Martin Heidegger. Correspondence with his parents and letters to his sister , Freiburg, Munich, 2013, p. 56, cited above. n. S. Kellerer, review: Heidegger's correspondence with his family and with Kurt Bauch , p. 3 , m. Used in note 4 a. H. Zaborowski, Heidegger-Jahrbuch, Vol. 5, Freiburg, 2009, p. 261; Peter Trawny: “A new dimension” in: Die Zeit , December 27, 2013, p. 48; Trawny speaks of an "anti-Semitic" resentment that is given "another, terrifying dimension" in the black books .
- ↑ Peter Trawny: Heidegger and the myth of the Jewish world conspiracy , Klostermann, Frankfurt / M. 2014, 3rd revised and expanded edition, 2015, pp. 33–38.
- ↑ Peter Trawny, Mythos , p. 38 f.
- ↑ See the editor's epilogue: Contributions to Philosophy (From the Event). GA 65, p. 511.
- ^ Mario Fischer: Religious experience in the phenomenology of the early Heidegger. Göttingen 2013, p. 265 f., M. Note 61
- ^ Contributions to Philosophy (From the Event), GA 65, p. 163
- ↑ Hartmut Schmidt, The language of the regime and the language of the citizens. Carl Goerdeler and others on the Leipzig university anniversary in 1934 , p. 83 f.
- ↑ Meike Siegfried, turning away from the subject: On thinking about language in Heidegger and Buber , p. 405
- ↑ Günter Hartung, German Fascist Literature and Aesthetics: Collected Studies , p. 97 : The term "Discharge", which comes from Hitler's anti-Semitic Mein Kampf
- ↑ GA 96, p. 56, Considerations XII, 82
- ↑ Peter Trawny: Heidegger and the myth of the Jewish world conspiracy , Klostermann, Frankfurt / M. 2014, 3rd revised and expanded edition, 2015, p. 41 ff. M. Note 18.
- ↑ Peter Trawny: Heidegger and the myth of the Jewish world conspiracy , Klostermann, Frankfurt / M. 2014, 3rd revised and expanded edition, 2015, p. 43.
- ↑ Peter Trawny: Heidegger and the myth of the Jewish world conspiracy , Klostermann, Frankfurt / M. 2014, 3rd revised and expanded edition, 2015, p. 45: "The second type of anti-Semitism in Heidegger can be described as 'racial' or 'racist'".
- ↑ Thomas Vašek, Heidegger. A totalitarian thinker , Hohe Luft , 2014, No. 09, p. 74 : “From Heidegger's point of view, the Jews promote the abandonment of being in the modern world, the 'uprooting of all beings from being'. Such thinking bears conspiracy-theoretical traits. "
- ↑ S. Vietta, Erdball , p. 20 f.
- ↑ Die Geschichte des Seyns, GA 69, p. 223.
- ↑ On Ernst Jünger, GA 90, 99 and 38
- ↑ Freiburger Studentenzeitung , No. 1, November 3, 1933, p. 6, cf. Guido Schneeberger, review of Heidegger , Bern 1962, p. 137
- ^ Call to the educated of the world, GA 16, 217 ; see. on this Victor Farias: Heidegger and the National Socialism , Fischer, Frankfurt / M. 1989, p. 224.
- ↑ Bernd Grün: The rector as a guide? The University of Freiburg i. Br. From 1933 to 1945. Karl Alber, Freiburg / Munich 2010, p. 177, fn. 123.
- ↑ Heidegger / Bauch: Correspondence 1932–1975. Karl Alber, 2010, letter of February 7, 1935, p. 18.
- ↑ Cornelia Schmitz-Berning, Vocabulary of National Socialism , Berlin 2007, p. 292 for "Halbjude"
- ^ Sidonie Kellerer, review. Heidegger's correspondence with his family and with Kurz Bauch , p. 4 , m. Used in note 4 a. H. Zaborowski, Heidegger-Jahrbuch, Vol. 5, Freiburg, 2009, p. 261; Peter Trawny: "A new dimension" in: Die Zeit , December 27, 2013, p. 48.
- ↑ Dieter Thomä, Heidegger and National Socialism. In the darkroom of the story of being. In: Dieter Thomä (ed.): Heidegger manual. Life-work-effect. 2nd, revised and expanded edition. Metzler, Stuttgart and Weimar 2013, p. 116.
- ↑ cit. n. Rüdiger Safranski: A master from Germany. Frankfurt am Main 2001, p. 289; Michael Watts: The Philosophy of Heidegger. McGill-Queen's University Press, 2011, p. 250.
- ↑ cf. on this Martina Thiele, Journalistic Controversies over the Holocaust in Film , pp. 89–91
- ↑ Notes V, GA 97, p. 444.
- ^ D. di Cesare Heidegger, Die Juden, die Shoah , Frankfurt, 2015, 334 ff.
- ↑ Anti-Semitism, Anti-Marxism, and Technophobia: The Fourth Volume of Martin Heidegger's Black Notebooks (1942-1948) , University of Westminster, tripleC 13 (1): 93-100, 2015, p. 96 ; Torben Fischer, Matthias N. Lorenz (eds.): Lexicon of 'coping with the past' in Germany p. 240 : Eggert Blum in the article of the time of November 27, 2014 , in which he found the sentence missing in GA 96 of the “Predetermination of Judaism for planetary crime ”published, cf. also Peter Trawny: Heidegger and the myth of the Jewish world conspiracy , Klostermann, Frankfurt / M. 2014, 3rd revised and expanded edition, 2015, p. 119 f.
- ^ Sidonie Kellerer: Heidegger. Thinking as a Struggle , DZPhil 2015; 63 (5): 941-957, here: p. 952 ; Ernst Jünger / Martin Heidegger: Letters 1949–1975 . Edited, commented on and with an afterword by Günter Figal, Klett-Cotta / Vittorio Klostermann, with the collaboration of Simone Maier. Stuttgart / Frankfurt 2008, p. 13.
- ^ Hugo Ott: Martin Heidegger. On the way to his biography . Frankfurt a. M. 1988, p. 171.
- ↑ Holger Zaborowski: “A question of error and guilt?” Martin Heidegger and National Socialism. Frankfurt am Main 2010, p. 390; Helmuth Vetter: Heidegger floor plan. 2014, p. 407; Hugo Ott: Martin Heidegger. On the way to his biography , Frankfurt a. M. 1988, p. 169 f., On the other hand, dates the letter to April 28, 1933 and points out that there are two "strands of tradition" of the version of the letter: the original of the letter "was in the port of Antwerp in 1940 (...) burned ".
- ↑ Holger Zaborowski: “A question of error and guilt?” Martin Heidegger and National Socialism. Frankfurt am Main 2010, p. 391: Relationship declared ended.
- ↑ Holger Zaborowski: “A question of error and guilt?” Martin Heidegger and National Socialism. Frankfurt am Main 2010, p. 391, note 142.
- ^ Helmuth Vetter: Heidegger floor plan. 2014, pp. 70–72
- ↑ cit. after Hugo Ott: Martin Heidegger. On the way to his biography . Frankfurt a. M. 1988, p. 176.
- ^ Husserl in: Herbert Spiegelberg, Eberhard Avé-Lallemant, Pfänder Studies , The Hague, 1982, p. 342 f. quoted n. H. Ott, p. 175.
- ↑ cit. n. H. Ott, p. 172.
- ^ Rüdiger Safranski: A master from Germany. Frankfurt am Main 2001.
- ↑ GA 16, p. 662; see. also Peter Freienstein: Understanding meaning: the philosophy of Edith Stein. London 2007, p. 169
- ↑ cf. on this Hugo Ott: Martin Heidegger, on the way to his biography. Campus Verlag, pp. 168f .; Walter Biemel: Memory Fragments. In: Günther Neske (Ed.): Memory of Martin Heidegger. 2003, p. 22, cit. n. Zaborowski, p. 391 m. Note 142.
- ↑ “Max Müller: Martin Heidegger - A Philosopher and Politics. A conversation with Bernd Martin and Gottfried Schramm ”. In: Günther Neske, Emil Kettering (Ed.): '' Answer. Martin Heidegger in conversation. '' Pfüllingen 1988, pp. 90–220, here: p. 203; Bernd Grün: The rector as a leader? The University of Freiburg i. Br. From 1933 to 1945. Karl Alber, Freiburg / Munich 2010, p. 253, Max Müller: “A certain contact between the Philosophical Seminar and Husserl was maintained. But both, (...) Honecker as well as Heidegger, (...) no longer went to Husserl personally, but instead sent assistants, for example me, to him. In this way, Husserl was kept informed about which doctoral theses had been done and what was happening in the current semester. He should not consider himself completely isolated ”; s. also the other. in: Waltraud Herbstrith (Hrsg.): Edith Steins supporters: Known and unknown helpers during the Nazi dictatorship. Berlin: Lit, 2010, p. 141
- ↑ Trawny refers to the Heidegger notation "The temporary increase in power of Judaism ...", in: Martin Heidegger: Thoughts XII, 67. In: Ders .: Thoughts XII-XV GA 96; Peter Trawny: Heidegger and the myth of the Jewish world conspiracy. 3rd, revised and expanded edition. Klostermann, Frankfurt 2015, p. 37.
- ^ Hugo Ott: Martin Heidegger. On the way to his biography. Frankfurt a. M. 1988, p. 173.
- ↑ cf. on this Heidegger, GA 16, p. 661, it was finally agreed for the fifth edition in 1941 “at the request and suggestion of Niemeyer to omit the dedication in this edition, on the condition that I set the note on p. 38 also now that actually justified that dedication ”; S. Vietta, p. 44 : “Dedication (...) had to remove Niemeyer at the urging of the publisher”; Manfred Geier, Martin Heidegger , source : "He not only had the dedication (...) deleted in 1941"; Mark Lilla, The Unrestrained Spirit: Die Tyrannophilie der intellectuals Quelle : "(In the early forties he even had the dedication to Husserl removed from Being and Time , but later he also took it up again tacitly)"; Ursula Pia Bauch in: Salvatore Pisani, Elisabeth Oy-Marra (eds.): A house like me: Die built Autobiographie in der Moderne , p. 73 : “from 1941, from the fifth edition, Heidegger will also be dedicating (...) suppress".
- ↑ H. Ott, p. 173.
- ↑ Manfred Geier, Martin Heidegger , source ; GA 16, p. 443; P. 663 f.
- ^ Heinz-Elmar Tenorth, Eduard Spranger's university-political conflict 1933. Political action of a Prussian scholar , Zeitschrift für Pädagogik 36 (1990) 4, pp. 573-596, here: p. 581, note 23 : ZSTA 1 (Central State Archives of the GDR ), Merseburg, Rep. 76 V a Sect. 2, Tit. IV, No. 68 A. The appointment and pay of full and associate professors in the Philosophical Faculty (of the University of Berlin). A Philosophical Sciences, Vol. 2, October 1932 - December 1934; Sheet 158.
- ↑ Holger Zaborowski: “A question of error and guilt?” Martin Heidegger and National Socialism . S. Fischer, Frankfurt / M. 2009, p. 377 m. Note 101; Martin Heidegger: Call to the University of Berlin . Letter to dr. Fehrle, GA 16, no.85, 163
- ↑ Reinhard Mehring, war technician of the term: Biographical studies on Carl Schmitt . Mohr Siebeck, Tübingen 2014, p. 105
- ↑ Holger Zaborowski: “A question of error and guilt?” Martin Heidegger and National Socialism . S. Fischer, Frankfurt / M. 2009, p. 377 f., M. Note 103 f .: Quote from the letter of September 19, 1933 to Blochmann, in: Joachim W Storck (Ed.): Martin Heidegger / Elisabeth Blochmann. Correspondence. 1918–1969 , 2nd edition, Deutsche Schillergesellschaft, Marbach 1990, p. 73.
- ^ Hugo Ott: Martin Heidegger. On the way to his biography . Campus, Frankfurt / M. 1992, p. 244.
- ^ Daniel Morat: From action to serenity: conservative thinking in Martin Heidegger, Ernst Jünger and Friedrich Georg Jünger, 1920–1960 . Wallstein, Göttingen 2007, p. 144 .; Martin Heidegger: On the establishment of the teaching school , GA 16, No. 156, 308-314
- ^ Hugo Ott: Martin Heidegger. On the way to his biography . Campus, Frankfurt / M. 1992, 245.
- ^ Martin Heidegger: On the establishment of the teaching school , GA 16, No. 156, 308-314, 308; Daniel Morat: From action to serenity: conservative thinking in Martin Heidegger, Ernst Jünger and Friedrich Georg Jünger, 1920–1960 . Wallstein, Göttingen 2007, p. 144.
- ↑ Martin Heidegger: On the establishment of the teaching school , GA 16, No. 156, 308-314, 308 f.
- ↑ Martin Heidegger: On the establishment of the teaching school , GA 16, No. 156, 308-314, p. 309; Daniel Morat: From action to serenity: conservative thinking in Martin Heidegger, Ernst Jünger and Friedrich Georg Jünger, 1920–1960 . Wallstein, Göttingen 2007, p. 144
- ↑ Martin Heidegger: On the establishment of the teaching school , GA 16, No. 156, 308-314, p. 311.
- ^ Daniel Morat: From action to serenity: conservative thinking in Martin Heidegger, Ernst Jünger and Friedrich Georg Jünger, 1920–1960 . Wallstein, Göttingen 2007, p. 143
- ^ Rüdiger Safranski, Martin Heidegger: Between Good and Evil , p. 280 , German: Rüdiger Safranski: A master from Germany: Heidegger and his time . (1994) 8th edition. S. Fischer, Frankfurt / M. 2001, 313
- ^ Hugo Ott: Martin Heidegger. On the way to his biography . Campus, Frankfurt / M. 1992, p. 246; Rüdiger Safranski, Martin Heidegger: Between Good and Evil , p. 280 , German: Rüdiger Safranski: A master from Germany: Heidegger and his time . (1994) 8th edition. S. Fischer, Frankfurt / M. 2001, 314
- ^ Wilhelm Bleek, History of Political Science in Germany . Beck, Munich 2001, p. 230 ff.
- ↑ Paul Meier-Benneckenstein in the foreword to Joseph Goebbels, Der Faschismus und seine Praktische Zeiten (writings of the DHfP, issue 1), Berlin 1934, p. 5
- ^ Victor Farias, Heidegger and Nazism , Philadelphia, 1989, p. 208 ; Arnon Hampe, Handbuch des Antisemitismus , Berlin, de Gruyter, 2009, p. 345 : "Consultant at the German University for Politics in Berlin, (1935-1936)"
- ↑ Holger Zaborowski: “A question of error and guilt?” Martin Heidegger and National Socialism . S. Fischer, Frankfurt / M. 2009, p. 272 m. Note 30; Martin Heidegger: The German University (two lectures in the foreigners ' courses at the Freiburg University, August 15 and 16, 1934) , GA 16, No. 155, 284-307, p. 284.
- ↑ George Leaman: Heidegger in context. Complete overview of the Nazi involvement of university philosophers . Argument special volume 205, Hamburg / Berlin 1993, p. 47.
- ^ Victor Farías, Heidegger and National Socialism , Frankfurt 1989, p. 261; Völkischer Beobachter No. 231/232, p. 2.
- ↑ Martin Heidegger: The German University (two lectures in the foreigner courses of the Freiburg University, August 15 and 16, 1934) , GA 16, No. 155, 284-307, p. 302.
- ↑ Martin Heidegger: The German University (two lectures in the foreigner courses of the Freiburg University, August 15 and 16, 1934) , GA 16, No. 155, 284-307, p. 307; Holger Zaborowski: 'A question of error and guilt?' Martin Heidegger and National Socialism . S. Fischer, Frankfurt / M 2009, pp. 337, 396 f.
- ↑ Martin Heidegger: Introduction to Metaphysics (summer semester 1935) , Ed .: P. Jaeger, Klostermann, Frankfurt 1983, GA 40, p. 51; see. to Reinhold Aschenberg , de-subjectivisation of man stock and Shoah in philosophical reflection , page 142 f.
- ↑ Cf. Hugo Ott: Martin Heidegger. On the way to his biography , Frankfurt am Main, 1988, 1992, p. 261.
- ↑ Papenfuss, Dietrich / Pöggeler, Otto (eds.): Symposium of the Alexander von Humboldt Foundation from 24.-28. April 1989 in Bonn-Bad-Godesberg . Volume 2. Klostermann, Frankfurt a. M. 1990, p. 264.
- ↑ Martin Heidegger: Introduction to Metaphysics (summer semester 1935) , Ed .: P. Jaeger, Klostermann, Frankfurt 1983, GA 40, p. 28.
- ↑ cit. n. Hugo Ott: Martin Heidegger. On the way to his biography , Frankfurt am Main, 1988, 1992, p. 277 m. Note 207: Pöggeler, 1983, p. 340 ff.
- ^ Rainer Marten: A racist concept of humanity. Reflections on Victor Farías' Heidegger book and the correct use of Heidegger's philosophy , PDF; 123 kB , Badische Zeitung No. 293, 19./20. December 1987; see. also: Otto Pöggeler: Heidegger's political self-image. In: Heidegger and the practical philosophy . ed. by Annemarie Gethmann-Siefert and Otto Pöggeler, Suhrkamp, Frankfurt / M. 1988, p. 38; Wolfgang Müller-Lauter, Heidegger and Nietzsche , de Gruyter, Berlin 2000, p. 13 f., M. Note 42 .
- ^ Rainer Marten: A racist concept of humanity. Reflections on Victor Farías' Heidegger book and the correct use of Heidegger's philosophy , PDF; 123 kB , Badische Zeitung No. 293, 19./20. December 1987.
- ^ Hugo Ott: Martin Heidegger. On the way to his biography , Frankfurt am Main, 1988, 1992, pp. 277 f.
- ↑ Ralf Frassek: Ways to the National Socialist “renewal of the law” - science between “conformity” and competition. In: Hans-Georg Hermann u. a. (Ed.): From the Leges Barbarorum to the ius barbarum of National Socialism , p. 354 , Böhlau, Cologne 2008, 351-377
- ↑ Hans-Detlef Heller: The civil law legislation in the Third Reich: the German civil law legislation under the rule of National Socialism - claim and reality , Monsenstein u. Vannerdat, Münster 2015, p. 112 f.
- ^ Benedikt Hartl: The National Socialist will criminal law . Weißensee, Berlin 2000 (Diss.Regensburg 2000), p. 70
- ↑ Dietmar Willoweit in: Michael Stolleis, Dieter Simon (Ed.) Legal History in National Socialism , p. 27 ; Hans Frank: National Socialism in Law; in: Journal of the Academy for German Law, 1st year (1934), issue 1 (June), p. 8.
- ↑ Victor Farías, Heidegger and Nazism , pp. 205-207 ; ders., German version: Heidegger and the National Socialism , pp. 277–279.
- ^ Rüdiger Safranski: A master from Germany: Heidegger and his time. (1994) 8th edition. S. Fischer, Frankfurt / M. 2001, 316.
- ^ Hugo Ott: Martin Heidegger. On the way to his biography . Campus, Frankfurt / M. 1992, p. 253; Frank-Rutger Hausmann, Reinhart Kosellek (eds.): Karl Löwith: My life in Germany before and after 1933 , Stuttgart 2007, new edition; First edition: 1986, p. 58 f. .
- ↑ Victor Farías, Heidegger and Nazism , p. 207 ; ders., German version: Heidegger und der Nationalozialismus , p. 279: Due to the lack of sources, since most of the documents about the academy “in the Bavarian main state archive in Munich have been destroyed, more details about Heidegger's collaboration in the Do not identify the Legal Philosophy Committee. (A file on the constituent meeting of the committee is in the Goethe and Schiller archive in Weimar; it mentions Heidegger's participation without further comments.) ”; see. Werner Schubert, Academy for German Law. 1933–1945 protocols , TIB Leibniz Universität Hannover , in which the committee for legal philosophy is missing.
- ↑ Emmanuel Faye: National Socialism in Philosophy. Being, historicity, technology and destruction in Heidegger's work. In: Hans Jörg Sandkühler (Ed.): Philosophy in National Socialism . Meiner, Hamburg, 2009, p. 135 f. : Victor Farías has "shown that Heidegger (...) is again committed (...) for example through his active participation (...) in a committee for legal philosophy which (...) was charged with legitimizing the future Nuremberg Laws"; Farías does not refer to the Nuremberg Laws in the context, pp. 277–279; S. Kellerer, answer to Hermann Heidegger's letter to the editor in Die Zeit : "The committee played a key role in the preparation of the Nuremberg Laws."
- ↑ Hans-Detlef Heller: Civil Law Legislation in the Third Reich: German Civil Law Legislation under the Rule of National Socialism - Claims and Reality , Münster 2015, p. 114, m. Note 1074: Hans Frank, In the face of the gallows , Munich, 1953, p. 178; Hans-Rainer Pichinot, The Academy for German Law - Structure and Development of a Public Law Body of the Third Reich , Kiel 1981, p. 62 ff .; see also: H.-G. Hermann (Ed.): From the Leges Barbarorum to the ius barbarum of National Socialism , p. 354 ; Lothar Gruchmann, Blood Protection Act and Justice. On the origin and effect of the Nuremberg Law of September 15, 1935 , Institute for Contemporary History Munich, Heftarchiv, 31st year, 3rd volume (July, 1983), pp. 418–442 .
- ↑ George Leaman: Heidegger in context. Complete overview of the Nazi involvement of university philosophers . Argument special volume 205, Hamburg / Berlin 1993, p. 47; Richard Wolin: Heidegger's Children: Hannah Arendt, Karl Löwith, Hans Jonas, and Herbert Marcuse . Princeton University Press 2015, p. 36 f.
- ↑ Kaveh Nassirin: Worked against the genocides? In: FAZ.net . Retrieved July 17, 2018 . ; ders., Martin Heidegger and the legal philosophy of the Nazi era: detailed analysis of an unknown document (BArch R 61/30, sheet 171) , FORVM u. PhilPapers pdf ; François Rastier, Heidegger, théoricien et acteur de l'extermination des juifs ?, The Conversation, November 1, 2017
- ↑ Kaveh Nassirin, Shipwreck of a Semiotic: On François Rastier's thesis that Martin Heidegger participated in the Holocaust , FORVM
- ^ Martin Heidegger: Seminars: Hegel - Schelling . Peter Trawny (Ed.): Klostermann, Frankfurt / M 2011, GA 86, 85.
- ↑ Walter Pauly, "The people is being, whose being the state", movements in the history of science and the history of being with Martin Heidegger and beyond , Rechtsgeschichte , Rg 19 (2011), Journal of the Max Planck Institute for European Legal History, p . 255–262 , here: p. 261.
- ↑ Almuth Heidegger (ed.): Martin Heidegger / Kurt Bauch: Briefwechsel 1932–1975 . Martin Heidegger letter edition Dept. II, vol. 1. Alber, Freiburg 2010, p. 27.
- ↑ George Leaman: Heidegger in context. Complete overview of the Nazi involvement of university philosophers . Argument special volume 205, Hamburg / Berlin 1993, p. 134: "The comparison will show that Heidegger, in contrast to them, made a distinction between an ordinary or vulgar NS (...) and a 'true' NS"; Tom Rockmore, philosophy or worldview. About Heidegger's statement on Hönigswald In: Wolfdietrich Schmied-Kowarzik (Ed.): Recognize - Monas - Language , International Richard Hönigswald Symposium Kassel, 1995, Würzburg 1997, p. 176 f. :, re. 1935: "But even if Heidegger had distanced himself later from the real existing National Socialism, there is not the slightest indication that he would have distanced himself from Nazism in general"; Rainer Marten, A Racist Concept of Humanity: Reflections on Victor Farias' Heidegger Book and the Correct Use of Heidegger's Philosophy , Badische Zeitung , 19./20. Dec. 1987 (No. 293), p. 14, special prints from the Albert-Ludwigs-Universität Freiburg, p. 4 : “Anyone who objects to Farias (...) that he has overlooked Heidegger's criticism of National Socialism can look to the fact that Heidegger never settled with a fascism other than what he saw as false "; Paul Matussek: Martin Heidegger. In: Analytische Psychosentherapie, Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg, New York, 1997, pp. 49–78, p. 68 : “What ultimately keeps him at a distance is (...) the hurtful experience that the Nazis did not take him seriously becomes"; J.-P. Faye, Le piège '. La philosophie heideggerienne et le nazisme , Balland 1994.
- ↑ George Leaman: Heidegger in context. Complete overview of the Nazi involvement of university philosophers . Argument special volume 205, Hamburg / Berlin 1993, p. 134.
- ↑ Holger Zaborowski: “A question of error and guilt?” Martin Heidegger and National Socialism. Fischer, Frankfurt / M. 2010, p. 493, Amn. 59.
- ↑ François Rastier, shipwreck of a prophet. Heidegger today . Neofelis, Berlin 2017, p. 129.
- ↑ Sidonie Kellerer, review: Heidegger's correspondence with his family and with Kurt Bauch, p. 7 .
- ^ Martin Heidegger: Black books. Considerations and Winke III , 1934, GA 94, p. 194
- ↑ Daniel Morat: From action to serenity . Wallstein, Göttingen 2007, p. 182 .
- ↑ Martin Papenbrock: Review of Heidegger / Bauch. Correspondence between 1932 and 1975. In: Regine Hess, Martin Papenbrock, Norbert Schneider (Hrsg.): Church and art: art policy and art funding of the churches after 1945 (art and politics) . V&R unipress, Göttingen 2012, p. 158 : “Both Heidegger and Bauch were convinced of the notion of a historically and culturally founded German claim to leadership, which they mutually confirmed in their letters with undisguised national chauvinism (cf. the letters of April 27th. 1937, May 14, 1937 and May 1, 1942) ".
- ^ Helmuth Vetter, Heidegger floor plan: A handbook on life and work . Meiner, Hamburg 2014, p. 218, note 519 .
- ↑ Lutz Hachmeister, Heidegger's Testament. The philosopher, the mirror and the SS . Propylaea, Berlin 2014, p. 325.
- ↑ See Eckhart Goebel: Heidegger and Löwith. “He did not speak to me about the Jewish question”. In: Die Welt , April 2, 2017.
- ^ Frank-Rutger Hausmann, Reinhart Kosellek (Ed.): Karl Löwith: My life in Germany before and after 1933 . Stuttgart 2007, p. 57.
- ^ Hugo Ott: Martin Heidegger. On the way to his biography . Campus, Frankfurt / M. 1992, p. 131 f.
- ^ Heinrich Buhr: The worldly theologian In: Günter Neske, memory of Martin Heidegger . Neske, Pfullingen 1977, pp. 53–59, here: p. 55.
- ↑ Martin Heidegger: The Rectorate 1933/34. Facts and Thoughts , GA 16 No. 180, 372-394, GA 16, p. 391 f .
- ↑ Lutz Hachmeister: Heidegger's Testament. The philosopher, the mirror and the SS . Ullstein, Berlin 2014, p. 279 ff .; Gideon Botsch: "Political Science" in World War II. The "German Foreign Studies" in action 1940–1945 . Schöningh, Paderborn 2006, p. 252.
- ↑ Lutz Hachmeister: Heidegger's Testament. The philosopher, the mirror and the SS . Ullstein, Berlin 2014, p. 281.
- ^ Hugo Ott: Martin Heidegger. On the way to his biography . Campus, Frankfurt / M. 1992, p. 254.
- ↑ Martin Papenbrock: Review of Heidegger / Bauch. Correspondence between 1932 and 1975. In: Regine Hess, Martin Papenbrock, Norbert Schneider (Hrsg.): Church and art: art policy and art funding of the churches after 1945 (art and politics) . V&R unipress, Göttingen 2012, p. 159 .
- ↑ Egon Vietta, Das deutsche Wort 12, 1936, pp. 830-835, here: p. 835, quoted. n. Holger Zaborowski: “A question of error and guilt?” Martin Heidegger and National Socialism. Fischer, Frankfurt / M. 2010, p. 599, note 130.
- ↑ Alexander Schwan: “In love with downfall and abyss,” Rheinischer Merkur, Christ und Welt, No. 17 (April 28, 1989), p. 15: “So the 'contributions' become the great revocation of everything that was for Heidegger in 1933 was connected. However, they do not lead to an active turn against the 'machinations' of National Socialism, which have degenerated into sheer tyranny, but only to 'contemplation' in the renunciation of any action, albeit with constant expressions of displeasure, so not entirely of one's own free will. "
- ^ Martin Heidegger: Contributions to philosophy . GA 65, p. 493
- ↑ Cf. Alexander Schwan: "In love with downfall and abyss," Rheinischer Merkur, Christ und Welt, No. 17 (April 28, 1989), p. 15; T. Rockmore, On Heidegger's Nazism and Philosophy , Berkeley, Los Angeles, 1992, p. 347, note 16: “Already in his book on Heidegger's political philosophy, Schwan claimed that the relation between Heidegger's thought and Nazism could not be maintained after 1933 to the same degree as in 1933 unless Heidegger simply abandoned philosophy. See Schwan, Political Philosophy in Heidegger's Thought (see chap. 3, n. 115), p. 101. Schwan seems not fully to have realized the extent of the compatibility between Heidegger's thought and Nazism and the durable nature of his commitment. "
- ↑ Bruno Altmann: “Disenchantment of a philosopher. Heidegger no longer likes to play paws ”. In: Neuer Vorwärts, 1938, No. 256 (May 15, 1938); reprinted in: Heidegger-Jahrbuch 4, Alber, Freiburg 2009, pp. 206–209; see. also Holger Zaborowski: “A question of error and guilt?” Martin Heidegger and National Socialism . Fischer, Frankfurt / M. 2010, p. 596.
- ↑ cf. Silvio Vietta: Heidegger's criticism of National Socialism and of technology . Niemeyer, Tübingen 1989 p. 47; Daniel Morat: From action to serenity . Wallstein, Göttingen 2007, p. 143, note 1 ; Holger Zaborowski: “A question of error and guilt?” Martin Heidegger and National Socialism. Fischer, Frankfurt / M. 2010, p. 542 ff .; Hassan Givsan: A startling story: Why philosophers allow themselves to be corrupted by the "Heidegger case" . Königshausen & Neumann, Würzburg 1998, p. 24 .
- ↑ See Jörg Appelhans, Martin Heideggers unwritten poetology . Niemeyer, Tübingen 2002, 2.1.1 .: “Poetry and thinking. Heidegger seeks the lost wholeness ”, pp. 37–44 u. ibid. p. 43 : “Hölderlin is a thinker from the beginning - based on this premise, Heidegger declares Hölderlin's poetry to be the poetic paradigm of his philosophy. Heidegger explains Nietzsche, the 'last thinker of Western philosophy', who 'as a thinker is a poet', whose philosophy is at the same time the culmination point of Western metaphysics ”, as the counter-figure of Holderlin on the side of the thinker”, m. Use a. Martin Heidegger: Introduction to Philosophy. Aborted lecture winter semester 1944/45 , GA 50, p. 95; 150 u. 154; Holger Zaborowski: “A question of error and guilt?” Martin Heidegger and National Socialism . Fischer, Frankfurt / M. 2009, p. 516 ff. M. Use a. Martin Heidegger, Kurt Bauch. Correspondence 1932–1975 , ed. by Almuth Heidegger, Alber, Freiburg / Munich 2010, p. 70.
- ^ Philippe Lacoue-Labarthe: The fiction of the political. Heidegger, art and politics . Schwarz, Stuttgart 1990, pp. 89–127: thesis of “national aestheticism”, which contains the “aspect of the aesthetic staging of National Socialist politics”; on overcoming the limits of logic through the essence of poetic language in Heidegger's turn to Holderlin s. Peter Trawny: Martin Heidegger . Campus, Frankfurt / M. 2003, p. 127 .
- ↑ Anja Lemke, In the realm of the transitional - reflections on Heidegger's Hölderlin interpretation In: Peter Brandes, Michaela Krug (ed.): Transitions: Lectures on the aesthetics of transgression . Lit, Münster 2003, p. 11 .
- ^ Andreas Großmann: Heidegger Readings. About art, religion and politics . Königshausen & Neumann, Würzburg 2005, p. 51.
- ↑ Martin Heidegger: Contemplation , GA 66, p. 426; s. on the conception of the other beginning in the lecture of 1934/35 also Anja Lemke, Im Reich des Übergangslichen - Reflections on Heidegger's Hölderlin interpretation In: Peter Brandes, Michaela Krug (Ed.): Transitions: Lectures on the aesthetics of transgression . Lit, Münster 2003, p. 20 ; further to the "other beginning" re. Hölderlin: Holger Zaborowski: “A question of error and guilt?” Martin Heidegger and National Socialism . Fischer, Frankfurt / M. 2009, p. 502, m. Use a. Martin Heidegger: Introduction to Metaphysics. Lecture summer semester 1935 , GA 40, p. 4f .; 520 m. Use a. Martin Heidegger: Contemplation , GA 66, p. 426, GA 88, p. 15; Jörg Appelhans, Martin Heidegger's unwritten poetology . Niemeyer, Tübingen 2002, p. 43 .
- ^ Andreas Grossmann: Heidegger Readings. About art, religion and politics . Königshausen & Neumann, Würzburg 2005, p. 51: “When Heidegger explicitly turns to Hölderlin's hymns 'Germanien' and 'Der Rhein' in 1934/35, this may be an initial distancing from his own political commitment and from official National Socialism. This, however, is a distancing which has nothing to do with the fact that Heidegger had converted to a democrat, but - on the contrary - seems to have sprung from the conviction that the course of the 'revolution' of 1933 was not radical, not 'original' had been enough (so that Heidegger was able to defend the 'inner truth and greatness of the NS' against the official 'philosophy of National Socialism' in an introduction to metaphysics in 1935) ”; Anja Lemke: In the realm of the transient - reflections on Heidegger's Hölderlin interpretation In: Peter Brandes, Michaela Krug (Ed.): Transitions: Readings on the aesthetics of transgression . Lit, Münster 2003, p. 11 f. : “The fact that this turn to poetry happened immediately after the resignation of the Freiburg rectorate linked it to politics from the start. (...) The accusation that these poetics are essentially an aestheticized form of National Socialist politics relates primarily to the conception of history and community that Heidegger developed in the Hölderlin lectures ”; on the political implications of the Hölderlin lectures s. Theodore Kisiel: Political Interventions in the Lecture Courses of 1933–1936 , pp. 121 f .; ders. The Siting of Hölderlin's “Secret Germany” in Heidegger's Poetizing of the Politica In: Heidegger-Jahrbuch 5. Heidegger and National Socialism II. Interpretations. Alber, Munich 2009, pp. 145–154, cited above. n. Holger Zaborowski: “A question of error and guilt?” Martin Heidegger and National Socialism Fischer, Frankfurt / M. 2009; on the other hand, id., p. 520: "connected with the (...) turning away from the world of immediate (university) politics"; P. 592: “Access to Hölderlin entirely a- or even anti-political”; Daniel Morat: From action to serenity . Wallstein, Göttingen 2007, p. 196: The “turn to poetry and to the poet Hölderlin” means “at the same time a turning away from politics and the politician Hitler”.
- ↑ Cf. on this information Martin Heidegger: Explanations to Hölderlins Dichtung , GA 4, p. 203; Daniel Morat: From action to serenity . Wallstein, Göttingen 2007, p. 186 m. Note 77.
- ^ Daniel Meyer: The discovery of the Greek myth: Heidegger's historical philosophical turn , Germanica , 45, 2009, pp. 13–26, here, pdf p. 4 ; s. also Charles Bambach: Heidegger, the National Socialism and the Greeks , abstracts, quoted. n. Heidegger Yearbook 5. Heidegger and National Socialism II. Interpretations. Alber, Munich 2009, p. 461 : “Again and again - from his remark about“ the inner truth and greatness ”of National Socialism in the Introduction to Metaphysics (1935) to his remark about the“ historical uniqueness of National Socialism ”in its Ister -Lecture (1942) - Heidegger's vision of a German future is legitimized by its inner relationship to the Greek arche. Heidegger's Hölderlinisch-Nietzschean repetition of the power of the first beginning as a transition (and decision) to the other beginning is decisive for this vision ”; H. Zaborowski, p. 519: "Hölderlin and the search for a 'different beginning'".
- ↑ Martin Heidegger: Vom Wesen der Truth , GA 36/37, p. 89.
- ^ Daniel Meyer: The discovery of the Greek myth: Heidegger's historical-philosophical turn , Germanica , 45, 2009, pp. 13–26, here, pdf p. 7
- ^ Andreas Grossmann: Heidegger Readings. About art, religion and politics . Königshausen & Neumann, Würzburg 2005, p. 52.
- ↑ Reinhard Mehring: Heidegger's tradition of delivery: a Dionysian self-staging . Königshausen & Neumann, Würzburg 1992, p. 66 f. : "He reads 'source' philosophically as 'origin' (...) conflict of the river in itself (...) counter-will in the river itself to leave its source", in the sense of "dispute at the source", the unity of opposites at Heraclitus ; Michael Schödlbauer, Psyche - Logos - Reading Circle: a conversation with Martin Heidegger . Königshausen & Neumann, Würzburg 2000, p. 385 .
- ^ Andreas Grossmann: Heidegger Readings. About art, religion and politics . Königshausen & Neumann, Würzburg 2005, p. 53.
- ↑ cit. n. Andreas Grossmann, Heidegger Readings. About art, religion and politics . Königshausen & Neumann, Würzburg 2005, p. 53, Verw. On Martin Heidegger: From the essence of truth. Lecture winter semester 1933/34 , GA 39, p. 51; 79; 58 fu 220.
- ↑ Martin Heidegger: Contemplation , GA 66, p. 426, cited above. n. Holger Zaborowski: “A question of error and guilt?” Martin Heidegger and National Socialism Fischer, Frankfurt / M. 2009, p. 520; Felix O'Murchadha: Time of Action and the Possibility of Transformation: Heidegger's cairology and chronology in the decade of being and time . Königshausen & Neumann, Würzburg 1999, p. 202 : “The poetry designs the other beginning”.
- ↑ Michael Schödlbauer: Psyche - Logos - Reading Circle: a conversation selbdritt with Martin Heidegger . Königshausen & Neumann, Würzburg 2000, p. 380 .
- ↑ cf. Peter Trawny: Martin Heidegger . Campus, Frankfurt / M. 2003S. 127 m. Note 26: Martin Heidegger: Notes, I , 30, GA 97; the complete quote, ibid .: “From here it is possible to assess what remembrance means in Greece for thinking in the hidden, initial essence of the history of the West, outside of Judaism and d. H. of Christianity remained. "
- ↑ cf. Daniel Morat: From action to serenity . Wallstein, Göttingen 2007, p. 187 m. Note 79.
- ↑ Reinhard Mehring: Heidegger's tradition of delivery: a Dionysian self-staging . Königshausen & Neumann, Würzburg 1992, p. 70 .
- ↑ Rainer Marten: Radicality of the spirit. Heidegger - Paul - Proust . Herder, Freiburg 2016, p. 78, m. Note 56 : “Heidegger needs Hölderlin in order to be sure of his ethnic-spiritual view of being as the only true one through prophetic words of the poet”, whereby he has the future of the fatherland in view and deviates in this from Holderlin.
- ↑ Martin Heidegger: Hölderlin's hymns 'Germanien' and 'Der Rhein'. Lecture winter semester 1934/35 , GA 39, p. 121.
- ↑ Jörg Appelhans: Martin Heidegger's unwritten poetology . Niemeyer, Tübingen 2002, p. 191 u. 194, note 344 .
- ↑ See e.g. B. Reinhard Mehring: Heidegger's tradition of tradition: a Dionysian self-staging. Königshausen & Neumann, Würzburg 1992, p. 67 ; Andrea Barbara Alker: The other in the same: criticism of subjectivity and philosophy of art in Heidegger and Adorno . Königshausen & Neumann, Würzburg 2007, p. 320 m. Use in note 591 on the last subtitle of the lecture from 1942, Holderlin's hymn: Der Ister : “Holderlin's essence of the poet as the essence of demigod”. (GA 53)
- ↑ Martin Heidegger: On the essence of truth. Lecture winter semester 1933/34 , GA 39, p. 210.
- ↑ Rainer Marten: Radicality of the spirit. Heidegger - Paul - Proust . Herder, Freiburg 2016, p. 76 .
- ^ Peter Trawny: Martin Heidegger . Campus, Frankfurt / M. 2003, p. 127.
- ↑ Martin Heidegger: On the essence of truth. Lecture winter semester 1933/34 , GA 39, p. 166, quoted in n. Michael Schödlbauer: Psyche - Logos - Reading Circle: a conversation with Martin Heidegger. Königshausen & Neumann, Würzburg 2000, p. 382 .
- ^ Hugo Ott: Martin Heidegger. On the way to his biography . Campus, Frankfurt / M. 1992, p. 70 m. Use a. Martin Heidegger: On the essence of truth. Lecture winter semester 1933/34 , GA 39, p. 145.
- ↑ Martin Heidegger: On the essence of truth. Lecture winter semester 1933/34 , GA 39, p. 289, quoted in n. Daniel Meyer, The discovery of the Greek myth: Heidegger's historical and philosophical turn , Germanica , 45, 2009, pp. 13–26, here, PDF p. 7 .
- ↑ Reinhard Mehring: Heidegger's tradition of delivery: a Dionysian self-staging . Königshausen & Neumann, Würzburg 1992, p. 66 f .; 72 ; Jennifer Anna Gosetti-Ferencei, Heidegger, Hölderlin, and the Subject of Poetic Language . Fordham Univ. Press, New York 2004, p 93 : "'event' of returning".
- ↑ cf. Georg Geismann: Review by: Martin Heidegger, complete edition. 4 sections: Complete edition 2nd section Vol. 53: Hölderlin's hymn “Der Ister”. 2nd edition, Frankfurt / Main 1993 , Berlin 2014, The rape of Hölderlin ; Thomas Sheehan: Heidegger and the Nazis , The New York Review of Books, XXXV, No. 10, 1988, pp. 38–47, pdf, p. 14 .
- ↑ Martin Heidegger: Hölderlin's hymn 'Der Ister' , GA 53, p. 68.
- ↑ Holger Zaborowski: “A question of error and guilt?” Martin Heidegger and National Socialism Fischer, Frankfurt / M. 2009, p. 521 u. 526 f .; O. Pöggeler, p. 321: "The Hölderlin lecture of the winter of 1934/35 resolutely polemicizes against racial ideas and the falsification of the spirit as well as against the appropriation of poetry and thinking by a totalitarian policy".
- ^ Hugo Ott: Martin Heidegger. On the way to his biography . Campus, Frankfurt / M 1992, p. 133.
- ^ Marion Heinz, Theodore Kisiel: Heidegger's relationships with the Nietzsche archive in the Third Reich. In: Hermann Schäfer (Ed.): Approaches to Martin Heidegger . Campus, Frankfurt / M. 1996, 103-136
- ↑ Holger Zaborowski: “A question of error and guilt?” Martin Heidegger and National Socialism. Frankfurt am Main 2010, p. 502.
- ↑ See GA 06.2, 23; Wolfgang Müller-Lauter: Heidegger and Nietzsche. Berlin 2000, de Gruyter, p. 104, fn. 187.
- ↑ See GA 48, 267; Rüdiger Safranski: A master from Germany. Frankfurt am Main 2001, p. 464 f.
- ↑ GA 50, 55.
- ↑ GA 50, 56 f.
- ^ Emmanuel Faye: Heidegger: The Introduction of Nazism Into Philosophy. Yale University Press, 2009, p. 272.
- ↑ Holger Zaborowski: “A question of error and guilt?” Martin Heidegger and National Socialism. Frankfurt am Main 2010, p. 627 ; GA50, 56 f.
- ↑ Krzysztof Ziarek: Beyond Revolution: Benjamin and Heidegger on Violence and Power. In: Andrew Benjamin, Dimitris Vardoulakis (Eds.): Sparks Will Fly: Benjamin and Heidegger. New York, SUNY Press 2015, p. 228.
- ↑ Sebastian Kaufmann: Metaphysics of Evil. In: Lore Hühn, Jörg Jantzen (Ed.): The minutes of Martin Heidegger's seminar on Schelling's “Freiheitsschrift” (1927/28) and the files of the International Schelling Day 2006. Stuttgart, p. 209.
- ↑ GA 50, 56 f .; Nietzsche: The Wanderer and His Shadow. n.218.
- ↑ GA 47, 72; Daniel Morat: From action to serenity. Göttingen 2007, p. 178.
- ↑ GA 48, 333.
- ^ Herman Philipse: Heidegger's Philosophy of Being: A Critical Interpretation. Princeton University Press, Princeton 1998, p. 273.
- ↑ Daniel Morat: From action to serenity. Göttingen 2007, p. 177.
- ↑ GA 06.2, 131; Silvio Vietta: Heidegger's Critique of National Socialism and Technology. Tübingen 1989, p. 63.
- ↑ GA 50, Introduction to Philosophy. Thinking and Poetry , Frankfurt a. M. 1990, p. 103, cit. n. D. Morat, Von de Tat zur Gelassenheit , Göttingen 2007: "This belief in the 'historical determination' (...) of the German people was particularly evident in the lectures and records of the war years."
- ↑ for the historical context of the quote, see D. Morat, From deeds to serenity , Göttingen 2007, p. 189.
- ↑ GA 54, Parmenides (lecture WS 1942/43), Frankfurt a. M. 1982, p. 114, cit. n. D. Morat, From deeds to serenity , Göttingen 2007, p. 188.
- ↑ cit. n. Reinhard Mehring, Heidegger's tradition of delivery: a Dionysian self-staging , Würzburg 1992, p. 84 .
- ↑ GA 48, p. 205, quoted in n. D. Morat, Von de Tat zur Gelassenheit , Göttingen 2007, p. 156, note 25 .
- ↑ W. Müller-Lauter, Heidegger and Nietzsche , Berlin 2000, p. 112 .
- ↑ Fredrik Agell, The question about the meaning of life , Munich, 2006, p. 211, note 111 .
- ↑ Roland Wagner, Des übermenschen Schönheit came to mir als Schatten , p. 460, note 3660 : “strange comment on the defeat of France (...): The French are described as unable to continue to carry Descartes' philosophy, and it becomes a Superman postulates who takes technology and metaphysics into himself ”.
- ^ Silvio Vietta: Heidegger's Critique of National Socialism and Technology , Berlin 1989, p. 64 .
- ^ Silvio Vietta: Heidegger's Critique of National Socialism and Technology , Berlin 1989, p. 68 .
- ↑ Fredrik Agell, The question about the meaning of life , Munich, 2006, p. 212, note 111 .
- ↑ Hassan Givsan, Zu Heidegger: an addendum to “Heidegger - the thinking of inhumanity” , Würzburg 2011 p. 73 .
- ↑ GA 55, p. 180 f.
- ↑ cit. n. D. Morat, From deeds to serenity , Göttingen 2007, p. 188 f.
- ↑ GA 55, p. 123, cit. n. Daniel Morat, From deeds to serenity , Göttingen 2007, p. 188 ; see. also the comment by A. Schwan, cited above. n. D. Wyss, Kain: a phenomenology and psychopathology of evil , p. 457 : "In contrast to his subsequent statements, Heidegger still defended Hitler's regime and its warfare between 1940 and 1944."
- ↑ Martin Burger: Finite Dasein. Heidegger's analysis of existence and Beckett's novel “Molloy” (Epistemata Literaturwissenschaft, Vol. 508). 115 p., Würzburg 2004, p. 11 .
- ↑ GA 77, 240 f.
- ^ Günter Figal, FAZ October 10, 1995, review: Der Ingrimm des Aufruhrs. Heidegger's thoughts on the end of the war .
- ↑ Roger Behrens, People Without Waiting Room , 2006/01 .
- ↑ GA 77, p. 233; see. also Peter Trawny, Heidegger and Hölderlin or Der Europäische Morgen , p. 204: "In this environment of 'devastation' the speakers discuss the 'waiting people' of the Germans."
- ↑ Daniel Morat, From deeds to serenity , Göttingen 2007, p. 256 .
- ↑ Hans Dieter Zimmermann, Martin and Fritz Heidegger: Philosophy and Fastnacht , Munich, 2005, p. 100 : "On December 2, 1944, Martin Heidegger was released after his company had retreated across the Rhine"; Thomas Sheehan, The New York Revierw of Books , December 4, 1980 Caveat Lector: The New Heidegger : "being drafted into the Volkssturm in 1944, at the age of fifty-five, to work on construction projects on the Rhine".
- ^ Hugo Ott: Martin Heidegger. On the way to his biography , Frankfurt / M 1992, p. 156; see. also ibid. p. 282: "The Heidegger matter had been settled in the meantime, Heidegger himself was busy with the recovery of his manuscripts to Bietingen near Meßkirch"; Safranski, p. 333 English: “the matter had settled itself”; GA 16, p. 827: “December 1944 released from the Volkssturm”; on the other hand Bernd Martin in: Eckhard Wirbelauer (ed.), The Freiburg Faculty of Philosophy 1920–1960 , p. 51, note 90: "Martin Heidegger, originally also assigned to fortification work in the Volkssturm, was dismissed and retired on the intervention of the highest authorities"; Alexandru Dragomir, The World We Live In , Bucharest, 2004, Springer-Verlag, 2017, p. 10 : "he managed to take ill".
- ↑ Bernd Martin: Martin Heidegger and the Third Reich , Darmstadt 1989, p. 40.
- ↑ GA 16, p. 666 ; see. H. Ott, p. 155; 279-282; Rudolf Augstein, review of the book by V. Farias, 1987 : “How did he get away from the fortification work? You don't know, he only speaks of 'finishing the digging work'. "
- ↑ Alexandru Dragomir, The World We Live In , Bucharest, 2004, Springer-Verlag, 2017, p. 10 .
- ↑ at the time at Wildenstein Castle and Heidegger's relationship with the Princess of Saxony-Meiningen s. Lutz Hachmeister, Heidegger's will. The philosopher, the mirror and the SS , Berlin 2014, p. 62 f .; see. also Bernd Martin in: Eckhard Wirbelauer (Ed.), The Freiburg Philosophical Faculty 1920–1960 , pp. 50 f., m. Note 91: “Heidegger was the driving force behind the move”; Hugo Ott: Martin Heidegger. On the way to his biography , Frankfurt / M 1992, p. 285 f .; Peter Berz in: Friedrich Kittler, Peter Berz, Joulia Strauss, Peter Weibel (eds.): Paderborn, 2017, Gods and writings around the Mediterranean , p. 39 f.
- ↑ cit. n. Hans Dieter Zimmermann, Martin and Fritz Heidegger: Philosophy and Fastnacht , Munich, 2005, p. 99 f. ; see. H. Ott, p. 156: "After the destruction of Freiburg (November 27, 1944) Heidegger withdrew to salvage his manuscripts - at a safe distance from the Rhine front, which others would then probably want to defend"; D. Morat, Von de Tat zur Gelassenheit , Göttingen 2007, p. 299: “Heidegger did not experience the end of the Second World War in Freiburg, but in Upper Swabia, where he had already retired in December 1944 to secure and organize his manuscripts he was briefly drafted into the 'Volkssturm' in November 1944. "
- ↑ Lutz Hachmeister, Heidegger's Testament. The philosopher, the mirror and the SS , Berlin 2014, p. 62.
- ^ Gunter Cordes, The military occupation of Baden-Württemberg 1945. In: Historical Atlas of Baden-Württemberg: Explanations , Stuttgart, 1980, p. 8 ; Jürgen Klöckler, Abendland - Alpenland - Alemannien , p. 27 f.
- ↑ H. Ott, pp. 294-296; L. Hachmeister, p. 68.
- ↑ Norbert Ohler, you lived next to than with the Germans - the members of the "Forces Françaises en Allemagne" in Freiburg 1945–1992 In: Ulrich P. Ecker (Ed., Among others): Migration in Freiburg im Breisgau: their story from 1500 to to the present. Freiburg i. Br .: Archive of the City of Freiburg im Breisgau, 2014, pp. 115–126, here: p. 115 .
- ↑ GA 16, p. 367.
- ↑ H. Ott p. 296.
- ↑ H. Ott. P. 297 f.
- ↑ Alexander Hollerbach, Jurisprudenz in Freiburg , p. 325 .
- ↑ H. Zaborowski, p. 654.
- ↑ H. Ott, p. 299.
- ↑ The text of the report is documented by H. Ott, p. 305 f .; see. Also D. Morat, p. 300.
- ^ F. Böhm, letter to the rectorate, October 9, 1945, cited above. n. H. Ott, p. 308.
- ↑ Dietze report printed in: Bernd Martin (Hrsg.): Martin Heidegger and the 'Third Reich'. A compendium , pp. 191-206, quoted here. n. H. Zaborowski, p. 660; 662; see. also D. Morat, p. 301 m. Note 65.
- ↑ See letter from Friedrich Oehlkers to Karl Jaspers dated December 15, 1945: "He asks that you be questioned about this point," quoted above. n. H. Ott, p. 314, "this point", H. Ott, ibid .: "... whether Heidegger was an anti-Semite."
- ↑ Jaspers report printed in: H. Ott, pp. 315-317; see. for evaluation also H. Zaborowski, p. 664 ff .; D. Morat p. 301; L. Hachmeister, p. 77 f.
- ↑ Dieter Speck, Kreise, Krånzchen and Camorra: Informal Relationships Freiburg Professors In: E. Wirbelauer (Ed.): The Freiburg Philosophical Faculty 1920–1960 , p. 611: “Ritter tried nevertheless at the end of 1945, a very moderate retirement for Heidegger to enforce at the faculty, but the report by Karl Jaspers brought a certain preliminary decision by spring / summer 1946, which made it clear to Heidegger that he could no longer be held as a full professor at the university and that he had to reckon with being decommissioned without a teaching license. "
- ↑ H. Ott, p. 323.
- ↑ D. Morat, p. 302: "The state adjustment committee set up by the French military government in the summer of 1946 went beyond the judgment of the Senate and not only decreed a teaching ban in the winter of 1946, but also forbade Heidegger to participate in academic life."
- ↑ D. Morat, pp. 301 f .; L. Hachmeister, p. 78; H. Ott, p. 300.
- ^ Zaborowski, p. 674 m. Note 65.
- ↑ H. Ott, p. 321.
- ↑ GA, 16, p. 432; s. on this H. Ott, p. 335 f.
- ↑ H. Ott, p. 337.
- ^ Kurt Hochstuhl, Baden-Baden. French city on the Oos. In: Karl Moersch, Reinhold Weber (ed.): The time after the war: Cities in Reconstruction , pp. 36–58, here: p. 45 .
- ↑ D. Morat, p. 302; H. Ott. P. 336; Hans Maier, Bad Years, Good Years: A Life 1931 ff. , P. 105 : Max Müller helped Heidegger in his trial chamber proceedings.
- ↑ H. Ott, p. 340; D. Morat, p. 302.
- ↑ GA 16, No. 178, pp. 367-369.
- ↑ GA 16, No. 180, pp. 372–394 (text not used in the proceedings, only published in 1983)
- ↑ GA 16, No. 182, pp. 397-404
- ↑ GA 16, No. 184, pp. 409-415
- ↑ GA 16, No. 188, p. 421 f.
- ↑ GA 16, p. 430 ff.
- ↑ Martin Heidegger / Karl Jaspers: Briefwechsel 1920–1963, ed. v. Walter Biemel u. Hans Saner, Munich / Frankfurt a. M. 1990, pp. 199-203, cf. D. Morat, p. 173; 372.
- ↑ GA 16, No. 235, pp. 568-573.
- ↑ GA 16, 652-683 (here: 652-668).
- ↑ GA 40, p. 233.
- ↑ See the list in Hugo Ott, Martin Heidegger. On the way to his biography , Frankfurt / M. 1988, p. 302 u. ibid. p. 276: “Always in ever new turns and versions with a few facts raised”; 296: Letter to the Lord Mayor in which Heidegger "first laid out the basic lines of his defense"; also D. Morat, p. 304 fm the mention of the above point 4 and the memo from Adolf Lampe about the conversation with Heidegger on July 25, 1945, which mentions the above points 1-3 and 5 and P. 143 and ibid. p. 372: "Heidegger's explanations in this letter [to Jaspers] corresponded to the apologetic arguments he had already developed during the purification process"; Letter to Marcuse: "Spiritual Renewal"; GA 16, p. 402: “Spiritual Resistance”; Heidegger / Jaspers, p. 173: “into the opposition”.
- ↑ Daniel Morat, Von de Tat zur Gelassenheit, Göttingen 2007, p. 304: “This biographical strategy allowed the admission of limited errors, but no admission of fundamental mistakes or even of guilt. In his apologetic argument after 1945, Heidegger always stuck to the fact that in 1933 he wanted the right thing, namely the essential renewal of the university, and that he was only temporarily mistaken about the politically possible and the character of the National Socialist movement. "
- ↑ See e.g. B. Magnus Brechtken, The Globke case. In: ders., Hans-Christian Jasch, Christoph Kreutzmüller, Niels Weise (eds.), The Nuremberg Laws - 80 Years Later , p. 265 : "The thesis of so many that they 'stayed in office to prevent worse things.' , seems so grotesque today that its temporary acceptance can only be explained with social indifference, which still connected those who expressed and those who received them in the 1950s and 1960s. In other words: Anyone who said they wanted to 'prevent worse things' in 1955 could have been asked back then, given the six million murdered Jews, three million Soviet prisoners of war consciously abandoned to starvation, the extermination policy in the conquered East, the systematic terror in in large areas of the practice of German-European rule was even 'worse' than these acts ”; Hans-Peter de Lorent, Perpetrator Profiles: Those responsible in the Hamburg education system under the swastika , Volume 2, 2017, Hugo Millahn , quoted. n. State Center for Civic Education Hamburg : “Millahn pretended to have been pushed into party functions and leading positions in the NSLB without any ambitions, and repeatedly exposed to hostility in order to prevent worse. This is what many argued in their denazification proceedings ”; Alexander and Margarete Mitscherlich, The Inability to Mourn. Basics of collective behavior . Munich 1977, p. 42: “The most serious consequences are likely to be emotional anti-communism. It is the official civic attitude, and in it ideological elements of Nazism have amalgamated with those of the West. "
- ↑ George Leaman: Heidegger in context. Complete overview of the Nazi involvement of university philosophers . Argument Sonderband 205, Hamburg / Berlin 1993, p. 27: “Farias (1989), Ott (1988) and Martin (1989) have shown that Heidegger's statements in this respect cannot be relied on, and the present study shows that Heidegger's Deceptions were not the exception ”; Helmut Heiber, University under the swastika , Volume 1, Munich, London, New York, Paris, 1991, p. 483: "Saga crocheted by himself from the post-war years"; Lutz Hachmeister, Heidegger's Testament p. 35: "Martin Heidegger has repeatedly overwritten, retouched and readjusted his biography and his path of thought in numerous resumes and self-reflections."
- ^ Gérard Raulet, The 'Community' with the young Marcuse. In: ders., Manfred Gangl (Ed.): Intellectual discourses in the Weimar Republic: On the political culture of a mixed situation , Frankfurt am Main 2007, p. 181 f.
- ↑ Heidegger in “Introduction to Metaphysics”, GA 40, p. 151, s. on this, H. Ott, The White Rose '. Your environment in Freiburg and Munich , 2004 and later, Hugo Ott, Martin Heidegger. On the way to his biography , Frankfurt / M. 1988, pp. 255–267, ibid. P. 258, Ott asks whether Heidegger had the right to “defame accusingly”.
- ↑ GA 16, 392.
- ^ Hugo Ott, Martin Heidegger. On the way to his biography , Frankfurt / M. 1988, p. 266.
- ↑ Lothar Struck, review of the book by L. Hachmeister : “You don't really need to waste a word about it when Heidegger makes a comment as the inspirer of the 'White Rose'; a veritable insolence and profanity ”; H. Ott, p. 266: "The 'relieving' statements of Heidegger in facts and thoughts are therefore devoid of any basis".
- ↑ Daniel Morat, Von de Tat zur Gelassenheit , Göttingen 2007, p. 145: “In the files of the Security Service (SD) of the Reichsführer SS about Martin Heidegger, which are kept in France today, there is a 'Questionnaire for political judgment' Heidegger dated May 11th 1938, in which he was still classified as politically reliable. "
- ↑ See Hugo Ott, Martin Heidegger. On the way to his biography , Frankfurt / M. 1988, pp. 225 f., 300, 305; Daniel Morat, From action to serenity , Göttingen 2007, p. 143 f. u. P. 402, note 143: In an interview with Heribert Heinrichs in 1958, Heidegger named the "turning point" not 1934 but 1938; Hans Köchler, Politik und Theologie bei Heidegger , 1991, p. 13 : "The credibility of his change due to violent reinterpretation (...) severely restricted".
- ↑ Cf. Victor Farías, Heidegger and National Socialism , Frankfurt / M., 1989, p. 247 ; Lutz Hachmeister, p. 67 f .; H. Zaborowski largely follows Heidegger's relief thesis, p. 258; GA 16, p. 345 ff .; P. 393 ( Facts and Thoughts ); P. 665 ( Spiegel interview).
- ↑ Gerhard Ritter 1946 to Karl Jaspers: “Heidegger is not a strong character. Maybe he's not necessarily sincere, at least somehow 'cryptic' in the sense of the Black Forest 'rascal' ”, quote. n. Klaus Schwabe, Rolf Reichardt (ed.): Gerhard Ritter: A political historian in his letters , Oldenbourg, Munich 1996, p. 409; Hannah Arendt, letter to Blücher, February 8, 1950: "He who notoriously always and everywhere lies where he can"; Letter to Blücher, January 3, 1950: "A mixture of authenticity and mendacity or rather cowardice", cf. . also Maria Robaszkiewicz, exercises in political thinking: Hannah Arendt's writings as an introduction to political practice , p. 102. with note 66 .; Georg Steiner, Heidegger, again , Merkur, 43 (480), p. 97 : “ As we know from the Spiegel interview, for the posthumous publication he prepared a particularly lying apology for his role in the 30s and 40s ”.
- ↑ cf. Conversation with Ulrike Herrmann, July 28, 2007, taz .
- ^ Letter to K. Jaspers dated September 29, 1949, Martin Heidegger / Karl Jaspers: Briefwechsel 1920–1963, ed. v. Walter Biemel u. Hans Saner, Munich / Frankfurt a. M. 1990, p. 178, cit. n. Annette Vowinckel, Hannah Arendt: Between German Philosophy and Jewish Politics , Berlin 2004, p. 48 ; Maria Robaszkiewicz, Exercises in Political Thinking: Hannah Arendt's Writings as an Introduction to Political Practice , Wiesbaden, 2017, p. 102, note 67 .
- ↑ Günther Anders, About Heidegger , Munich 2001, p. 360 ff. The chapter "Heidegger's falsehood".
- ↑ Cf. Daniel Morat, Von de Tat zur Gelassenheit , Göttingen 2007, p. 372 u. 375 fm note 49: Hannah Arendt / Karl Jaspers, correspondence 1926–1969 , Lotte Köhler u. Hans Saner (Ed.): Munich, Zurich, 2001, p. 198 u. 204.
- ↑ Martin Heidegger / Karl Jaspers: Briefwechsel 1920–1963, ed. v. Walter Biemel u. Hans Saner, Munich / Frankfurt a. M. 1990, pp. 209 f., Cited therein. n. Daniel Morat, From deeds to serenity , Göttingen 2007, p. 373.
- ↑ cf. Maria Robaszkiewicz, Exercises in Political Thinking: Hannah Arendt's writings as an introduction to political practice , p. 99 fm, note 54 ff.
- ↑ cf. z. B. George Steiner, Martin Heidegger. An introduction , New York 1978, Munich 1989, p. 33 u. 36 f; Rudolf Ringguth, Der Spiegel (August 18, 1986), Führer der Führer ; Ute Guzzoni: Comments on Heidegger 1933. In: Gottfried Schramm, Bernd Martin (Hrsg.): Martin Heidegger. A philosopher and politics . 2nd Edition. Freiburg 2001, p. 203; Philippe Lacoue-Labarthe: The Fiction of the Political. Heidegger, art and politics . (Paris 1987) Stuttgart 1990, p. 201; Maurice Blanchot: A letter from Maurice Blanchot to Catherine David. Think the apocalypse . 1987. In The Heidegger Controversy . 1988, p. 99; Otto Pöggeler (Ed.): Heidegger and the practical philosophy . Suhrkamp, 1988, p. 62.
- ↑ Jacques Derrida: Heidegger's silence. In: Emil Kettering, Günther Neske (Ed.): Answer. Martin Heidegger in conversation. Klett-Cotta, 1988, p. 160.
- ↑ See e.g. B. Karl-Heinz Reuband: Rumors and knowledge of the Holocaust in German society before the end of the war. An inventory based on population surveys. In: Jahrbuch für Antisemitismusforschung 9 (2000), pp. 196–233, here: p. 207: “As you can see from the information, around a third of those questioned stated that they had heard of the mass murder of the Jews before the end of the war ", see. also ibid. p. 220: "The real knowledge values are likely to be somewhat lower than a third"; Saul Friedländer, “They just shrugged their shoulders” , Neues Deutschland , 2007: The Germans “knew much earlier and much more than was previously thought and than I would have dared to suspect. The reports of the security service, which described the public mood quite precisely, prove this clearly. People talked about it everywhere, but not with horror or horror, but rather with a shrug: that's the way it is. "
- ^ Heiko Wegmann: The night of fire 75 years ago, The SS and the Reichspogrom on November 9, 1938 in Freiburg, Badische Zeitung, November 9, 2013
- ↑ University of Freiburg course catalog, WS 1938/39 ; see also Eggert Blum: The Heidegger Debate after the 'Black Hefts' In: “Voices of Time” ; As E. Blum confirms upon request, the Nietzsche seminar he mentioned (“The Philosophical and Scientific Formation of Concepts”) took place on November 9th, the lecture (“Introduction to Philosophy”) on November 10th, but not until November 17th Clock.
- ↑ See Martin Papenbrock, review: Martin Heidegger / Kurt Bauch, Briefwechsel 1932–1975, Freiburg, 2010, in: Regine Hess, Martin Papenbrock, Norbert Schneider (eds.): Church and Art: Art Policy and Art Promotion of the Churches after 1945 ( Art and politics) . Göttingen 2012, pp. 157–162, here: p. 159 , Daniel Morat, Von der Tat zur Gelassenheit , Göttingen 2007, p. 253 .
- ↑ Hermann Heidegger, “He was a dear father”, interview in “Die Zeit”, 2014, 11, p. 3 : “I knew about it since the night of June 21-22, 1941 during the advance in Romania. It was then that I first saw that Jews were being murdered. (...) Later, in Freiburg, an old boy scout friend who had become an SS officer told me that Jews were being killed in Russia. "/ Zeit :" But you didn't tell your father? "/ H:" No. "
- ^ Richard Wolin, French Heidegger Wars. In the S. (Ed.): The Heidegger Controversy - A Critical Reader , 1998, p. 283 : "because of his ties with Fischer, the philosopher may well have been aware of the nazi preparations for genocide".
- ↑ Peter Trawny, Hohe Luft , 2015, 2 "Moral guilt is not possible in Heidegger's philosophy" : "It is very clear that Heidegger knew about the persecution and the deportations."
- ↑ See the interpretations in Reinhard Mehring, Heidegger's "Große Politik": The semantic revolution of the complete edition , Tübingen, 2016, on "Self-destruction of Judaism", p. 208 : "Heidegger (...) interprets the genocide as a kind of 'self-destruction' of Judaism. The entry is to be dated after August 1942 (see GA 97, 17 Fn), after the Wannsee Conference of January 1942 and in the middle of the execution of the Holocaust. Heidegger describes the genocide, the extent of which he certainly had no idea at the time, as a kind of euthanasia: obedience to self-destruction. The Jews are therefore not only to blame for their extermination - metaphysically - they even wanted it! It is an act of obedience or “submission” when National Socialism carries out this metaphysical will ”; Peter Trawny, Afterword, GA 97: Heidegger also counted the "Annihilation of the Jews" among the "annihilations" of the Second World War; In it, “nothing other than the 'self-destruction' of 'machinism' took place, which Heidegger ascribes to the 'essentially' Jewish 'in the metaphysical sense' and which is fighting in this war against 'Judaism' and destroying it; Ders., Heidegger and the Myth of the World Conspiracy , Frankfurt / M., 2014, 2015 p. 111: “The 'self-destruction' of the 'machinations' happens in the form of the annihilation of the' Jewish 'by the' Jewish ': Auschwitz - the' Self-destruction 'of Judaism? The thought annihilates the annihilated again ", m. Note 24, in which Trawny classifies the quotation as an anticipation of what Heidegger said in 1949 about the “fabrication of corpses in gas chambers”: “What is, however, ascribed neutrally-relativistically to the 'Ge-stell', is about eight years earlier attributed to the 'Jewish'. "
- ↑ Martin Heidegger, GA 97 ( Notes IV, Schwarze Hefte , 1942–1948), Frankfurt / M., 2015, p. 20.
- ↑ Pauls Jurevics: My encounter with Heidegger and his philosophy. In: Alfred Denker, Holger Zaborowski (Ed.): Heidegger and National Socialism I. Documents. Heidegger-Jahrbuch 4, Munich 2009, Karl Alber, p. 265: “He asked what had happened to the Jews brought to our countries. When I said that, he became even darker and expressed himself ever more sharply about the current mischief when everything is determined by totally blinded party bosses. "
- ↑ Peter Trawny, Heidegger and the Myth of the Jewish World Conspiracy , Frankfurt / M., 2014, 2015, p. 118.
- ^ Martin Heidegger, GA 97 ( Notes IV, Schwarze Hefte , 1942–1948), Frankfurt / M., 2015, pp. 99–100
- ↑ Sidonie Kellerer, The Master's New Clothes , Hohe Luft, 2015, 03 .
- ^ Letter to H. Marcuse, January 20, 1948 in: Martin Heidegger, GA 16 ( speeches and other testimonies of a life path , 1910–1976), Frankfurt / M., 2000, p. 430 ff .; Peter Trawny, Heidegger and the Myth of the Jewish World Conspiracy , Frankfurt / M., 2014, 2015, p. 118.
- ↑ Printed in: Bernd Martin, Martin Heidegger and the Third Reich , 1989, p. 156; Ortwin Reich-Dultz, The Nuremberg Prosecution against German Cultural History , Diss., Flensburg, 2006, p. 168 f.
- ^ Otto Pöggeler, Philosophy and National Socialism - using the example of Heidegger , Rheinisch-Westfälische Akademie der Wissenschaften, lectures G 301, Opladen, 1990, p. 34 ; Hassan Givsan, A dismaying story: why philosophers allow themselves to be corrupted by the "Heidegger case" , Würzburg 1998 p. 80 .
- ^ Martin Heidegger, GA 79 / III ( Bremen and Freiburg lectures ), Frankfurt am Main 2005, p. 27.
- ^ Martin Heidegger, GA 79 / III ( Bremen and Freiburg lectures ), Frankfurt am Main 2005, p. 56.
- ↑ Enzo Traverso, Auschwitz Think. The intellectuals and the Shoah , Hamburg, 2000, p. 23.
- ↑ Hans Jörg Sandkühler, Philosophy in National Socialism , p. 145 ( Memento of the original from January 5, 2018 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. .
- ↑ Florian Grosser, Thinking Revolution: Heidegger and the Political 1919 to 1969 , Munich 2011, p. 351 .
- ^ Daniel Morat, From deeds to serenity , Göttingen 2007, p. 465.
- ↑ Holger Zaborowski, A Question of Erre and Guilt? , Frankfurt / M., 2010, p. 643.
- ↑ Cf. Florian Grosser, Thinking Revolution: Heidegger and the Political 1919 to 1969 , Munich 2011, p. 351 .
- ↑ Jürgen Habermas, Heidegger - Werk und Weltanschauung , foreword to: Victor Farías, Heidegger and National Socialism, Frankfurt / M., 1989, pp. 11–37, here: p. 32.
- ↑ See e.g. B. Richard Wolin, Heidegger considered 'final solution' to be necessary , “Hohe Luft”, 2015, 03 : “Since Heidegger believed that the tendencies towards dissolution of modernity were driven by the Jewish 'metaphysical' tendency towards 'calculating thinking', he held one 'Final solution' for necessary. (...) In Heidegger's view, a 'new beginning' is only possible when the Jewish spirit has been defeated. (...) Here Heidegger's use of the word 'annihilation' is free of any ambiguity ”; Sidonie Kellerer, The Master's New Clothes , Hohe Luft, 2015, 03 : "According to Heidegger, the Allies have incurred immeasurable guilt by stopping the Germans in their history of being task, 'the principle of destruction' (GA 97, 29), by which he means to wipe the Jews from the earth. "
- ↑ Miguel de Beistegui, Heidegger and the Political , London, New York, 1998, p. 153: “he will have broken his silence only to reveal the extent to which the Holocaust remained to him an event amongst others”.
- ↑ Thomas Rohkrämer, Heidegger, cultural criticism and nationalist ideology. In: Marion Heinz, Sidonie Kellerer (Ed.): Martin Heidegger's 'Black Hefts'. A philosophical-political debate , Berlin 2016, p. 273.
- ↑ Peter Trawny, Conceivable Holocaust: Hannah Arendt's political ethics , Würzburg 2005, p. 57 f.
- ↑ Holger Zaborowski, A Question of Erre and Guilt? , Frankfurt / M., 2010, p. 627.
- ↑ Hubert Lenz, The final line. Thoughts on denazization , Cologne 1948, cf. on this: Bernd Struß, “Ewiggestigte” and “Nestbeschmutzer”: the debate about the Wehrmacht exhibitions - a linguistic analysis , Frankfurt / M., 2009, p. 132, note 198 .
- ↑ Martin Heidegger, GA 16 ( speeches and other testimonials from a life's path , 1910–1976), Frankfurt / M., 2000, p. 453.
- ^ Theodore Kisiel, Heidegger's Way of Thought: Critical and Interpretive Signposts , New York, London, 2002, p. 1 ff : “as an international convention” with the examples: “ le cas Heidegger, il caso Heidegger, the Heidegger case ”.
- ↑ Hassan Givsan, A dismaying story: why philosophers allow themselves to be corrupted by the "Heidegger case" , Würzburg 1998, p. 10 ff .
- ↑ M. Heidegger, letter to Max Müller, August 14, 1950, MH / MM, 25f .: “I now wish above all that the Heidegger case is now finally settled at the university . The ongoing back and forth of negotiations is burdening my rest from work to such an extent that I have asked to leave the matter alone now. "
- ↑ Ralph Giordano in: Hans O. Hemmer, The great peace with the perpetrators , conversation about the “second guilt” with Ralph Giordano, August 29, 1988, p. 610 ; ders., The second guilt: Or from the burden of being German , Hamburg, 1987, Cologne 2000, p. 235 .
- ↑ Daniel Morat, From deeds to serenity , Göttingen 2007, p. 302 f.
- ↑ An overview of the criticism of Heidegger's Nazi era: Tom Rockmore, On Heidegger's Nazism and Philosophy , Berkeley, Los Angeles, Oxford, 1991, Reception of Heidegger's Nazism .
- ↑ Jürgen Habermas: Thinking with Heidegger against Heidegger: on the publication of lectures from 1935. In: FAZ. July 25, 1953; Daniel Morat, From deeds to serenity , Göttingen 2007, p. 311.
- ↑ cf. Daniel Morat, From deeds to serenity , Göttingen 2007, p. 311 f; Heidegger about Heidegger. In: Die Zeit , No. 39, September 24, 1953, p. 18.
- ↑ Paul Hühnerfeld: In the matter of Heidegger. Experiment about a German genius , Hamburg 1959, p. 98.
- ↑ Ludwig Marcuse, The most delicate subject of contemporary philosophy In: Die Zeit , May 1, 1959, 18 .
- ↑ Guido Schneeberger: Supplements to a Heidegger bibliography . With four supplements and a plate, Bern 1960.
- ↑ Guido Schneeberger: Gleanings on Heidegger. Documents on his life and thinking . With two plates, Bern 1962.
- ^ Theodor W. Adorno: Interventions: Nine Critical Models , Frankfurt / M. 1963, p. 464.
- ^ Theodor W. Adorno: Collected writings. Volume 19, Frankfurt / M. 1976, p. 637 ff.
- ↑ Daniel Morat, From deeds to serenity, Göttingen 2007, p. 481.
- ↑ Martin Jörg Schäfer, Pain to Be With , Würzburg 2003, p. 16 .
- ↑ Theodor Adorno, Jargon of Authenticity , Frankfurt / M. 1964, p. 9; Hartmut Scheible: Theodor W. Adorno with self-testimonies and photo documents. Rowohlt, Reinbek 1989, p. 139: During the 1950s, the jargon, as it were, replacing the Nazi language, asserted itself in almost all public statements.
- ↑ Alexander Schwan, Political Philosophy in Heidegger's Thought , Opladen, 1965, foreword to the 2nd edition ; “Der Spiegel”, February 7, 1966, Heidegger: “Midnight of a world power” .
- ↑ Lutz Hachmeister, Heidegger's Testament: Der Philosopher, der SPIEGEL and the SS , Berlin 2014, p. 177 .
- ↑ Lutz Hachmeister, Heidegger's Testament: Der Philosopher, der SPIEGEL and the SS , Berlin 2014, p. 178, “because Wolff and the documentation department took it over without fact checking ”.
- ↑ Lutz Hachmeister, Heidegger's Testament: Der Philosopher, der SPIEGEL and the SS , Berlin 2014, p. 184 f.
- ↑ “Der Spiegel”, internal communication , March 14, 1966, Re .: Philosophers .
- ↑ Lutz Hachmeister, Heidegger's Testament: Der Philosopher, der SPIEGEL and the SS , Berlin 2014, p. 95: “He [Wolf] is also the one who, with his review of Alexander Schwan's Freiburg dissertation Political Philosophy in Heidegger's Thought, 1966 a Heidegger- Letter to the editor provoked, which is then the occasion for the talks with the philosopher. "
- ↑ cf. on this Lutz Hachmeister, Heidegger's Testament: The Philosopher, the SPIEGEL and the SS , Berlin 2014, the chapter “That's striking, Professor!”, z. BS 216: "He and Augstein roll out the red carpet for those who are often insulted"; P. 253 f .: "The philosopher does not want to answer the shy and almost stammered questions of Georg Wolff, who is also looking for a kind of personal salvation, about 'Hitler' and the mass murder of the Jews."
- ↑ Der Spiegel , 1976, No. 23, p. 3: "According to the strict wish of the philosopher, the Spiegel conversation with Martin Heidegger (...) was only allowed to come to light after his death."
- ↑ Lutz Hachmeister, Heidegger's Testament: Der Philosopher, der SPIEGEL and the SS , Berlin 2014, pp. 246-252, reiterated the criticism of Heidegger's self-portrayal based on the statements of the interview in “Der Spiegel”.
- ↑ Maria Robaszkiewicz, Exercises in Political Thinking: Hannah Arendt's writings as an introduction to political practice , Wiesbaden, 2017, p. 103 .
- ↑ Cf. the presentation of v. a. due to both correspondence with Elzbieta Ettinger: Hannah Arendt - Martin Heidegger. A story. Munich 1995.
- ↑ Hannah Arendt, What is Existential Philosophy? 1948, Frankfurt / M. 1990, pp. 28f, 38 .; Annette Vowinckel, concept of history and historical thinking with Hannah Arendt. Cologne, Weimar, Vienna, 2001, p. 39 .
- ^ Letter of July 9, 1946. Lotte Köhler, Hans Saner (eds.), Hannah Arendt, Karl Jaspers: Correspondence 1926–1969. Munich 1993, p. 84; see. Maria Robaszkiewicz, Exercises in Political Thinking: Hannah Arendt's writings as an introduction to political practice. Wiesbaden, 2017, books.google.it p. 90 m. Note 13; however, the decree A 7642 mentioned there was from Wacker, Heidegger's answer was decision 4012, s. o., cf. also GA 16, p. 85.
- ^ Letter of September 29, 1949. Lotte Köhler, Hans Saner (eds.), Hannah Arendt, Karl Jaspers: Briefwechsel 1926–1969 , Munich 1993, p. 178; see. on this Annette Vowinckel, Hannah Arendt: Between German Philosophy and Jewish Politics. Berlin 2004, p. 50 ff.
- ↑ Hassan Givsan, Eine dismembering story , Würzburg 1998, p. 113 : "What is particularly striking is the incomprehensible change in mood."
- ↑ Martin Heidegger is eighty years old In: People in dark times. Munich, Zurich 2001 (Tb), p. 177f.
- ↑ Martin Heidegger is eighty years old In: People in dark times. Munich Zurich 2001 (Tb), p. 177.
- ↑ Martin Heidegger is eighty years old In: People in dark times. Munich Zurich 2001 (Tb), p. 178.
- ↑ Christian Dries, Günther Anders and Hannah Arendt - a relationship sketch In: Günther Anders: Die Kirschenschlacht. Dialogues with Hannah Arendt , Munich 2011, p. 73.
- ↑ Günther Anders, About Heidegger , Munich 2001, p. 70.
- ↑ Günther Anders, About Heidegger , Munich 2001, p. 275.
- ↑ Doctorate in 1924 according to Hans Rainer Rupp (ed.), Edmund Husserl and the phenomenological movement. Testimonials in text and images , Freiburg / Munich (Karl Alber) 1988, p. 423.
- ^ Letter to Arendt of October 18, 1925, in: Ursula Ludz (ed.), Hannah Arendt / Martin Heidegger, letters 1925–1975 and other testimonials, Frankfurt am Main (Vittorio Klostermann) 1998, p. 49 ff., Here: P. 51.
- ↑ Günther Anders, About Heidegger , Munich 2001, p. 362.
- ↑ "Der Spiegel", May 30, 1994, historiography: The double outsider .
- ↑ Ernst Nolte, Martin Heidegger: Politics and history in life and thinking , Berlin, Frankfurt / M., 1992, p. 151 f.
- ↑ Walter Euchner. Philosopher in the World Civil War , Die Zeit , March 19, 1993.
- ↑ Livia Profeti, Heidegger's Daseinsontologie and the destruction of equality In: Marion Heinz, Sidonie Kellerer (ed.): Black Hefts. A philosophical-political debate , Berlin 2016, p. 167.
- ↑ Hassan Givsan p. 21 : "already in being and time the question of existence led to the question of community, the people", m. Use on Being and Time , p. 384.
- ↑ Martin Heidegger, Sein und Zeit , 1927, Tübingen 2006, p. 384f.
- ↑ Daniel Morat, From deeds to serenity , Göttingen, 2007, p. 113.
- ↑ Thomas Sheehan, Emmanuel Faye, The introduction of Fraud into Philosophy , Philosophy Today, 2015, pp. 367-400, here 80 fm note 45.
- ↑ Dieter Thomä, The time of the self and the time after. On the criticism of the text history of Martin Heidegger 1910–1976 , Frankfurt / M., 1990, p. 545; on the change in the meaning of the term “people” in Heidegger's work cf. Dieter Thomä (Hrsg.): Heidegger manual: Life - work - effect u. "People", p. 115 .
- ↑ Meike Siegfried, turning away from the subject: On thinking about language in Heidegger and Buber , p. 419 .
- ↑ Gaëtan Pégny, Heidegger's self-interpretation in the Black Hefts In: Marion Heinz, Sidonie Kellerer (ed.): Black Hefts. A philosophical-political debate , Berlin 2016, pp. 326–346, here: p. 335.
- ↑ George Leaman, Heidegger in context. Complete overview of the Nazi involvement of university philosophers , Hamburg, Berlin 1993, p. 128.
- ↑ Alfred Denker, Heidegger and National Socialism II. Interpretations , Freiburg, Munich 2009, p. 43.
- ^ Frank-Rutger Hausmann, Reinhart Kosellek (Ed.): Karl Löwith: My life in Germany before and after 1933. Stuttgart 2007, p. 34.
- ↑ Daniel Morat, From deeds to serenity , Göttingen, 2007, p. 114 m. Reference to Johannes Fritsche Historical Destiny and National Socialism in Heidegger's “Being and Time” , Berkeley / Los Angeles 1999, p. 216: “a brilliant summary of the politics of the revolutionary Right”; see. also Domenico Losurdo, The Community, Death, the Occident. Heidegger and the war ideology Stuttgart, Weimar 1995, p. 52 ff, identifies the national-conservative war ideology from the First World War in Heidegger's themes; Johannes Fritsche, Historical Destiny and National Socialism in Heidegger's “Being and Time , Berkeley 1999, p. 218, sees Being and Time as the paradigmatic text of the national conservatives of the Weimar Republic.
- ↑ Alexander Schwan, asking for a Heidegger from within. An addendum in 1988. In: ders. Political philosophy in thinking Heidegger , Opladen 1965, 1989, p. 223; "For Mark Blitz and Karsten Harries this is the" 'determination "that determined Heidegger's affinity for the National Socialist movement", m. Verw. On Mark Blitz, Heidegger's Being and Time and the Possibility of Political Philosophy , Ithaka, London, 1981, Karsten Harries, Heidegger as a Political Thinker. In: Michael Murray (Ed.): Heidegger and Modern Philosophy. Critical Essays , New Haven, London, 1978, pp. 304-328; Dieter Thomä, Heidegger and National Socialism. In the darkroom of the story of being. In: ders. (Ed.): Heidegger-Handbuch. Life - Work - Effect, Stuttgart, Weimar, 2003, pp. 141–162, here: p. 142; Daniel Morat, Von der Tat zur Gelassenheit , Göttingen 2007, p. 43: In the transfer to Martin Heidegger, Löwith spoke of the 'inner nihilism of this naked determination' ”; Jürgen Habermas, Heidegger - Werk und Weltanschauung In: Victor Farías, Heidegger and National Socialism , Frankfurt / M., 1989, 2007, p. 32 : “The dialectic of claim and correspondence could still be in harmony with the activist basic trait of being and time to be thought of as national revolutionary (...) decisionism of self-asserting existence "
- ↑ Daniel Morat, From deeds to serenity , Göttingen 2007, p. 118 m. Verw. Auf Haucke, Welt, p. 137.
- ↑ Dominique Janicaud: Heidegger en France ., Paris 2001, vol 1, p 103 m. Note 88 ; On the reception of Heidegger in France see also Ethan Kleinberg, Generation Existential: Heidegger's Philosophy in France, 1927–1961 .
- ↑ Jean-Paul Sartre, On Existentialism - A Clarification. In: Existentialism is a humanism and other philosophical essays 1943–1948 , Philosophische Schriften I, Frankfurt / M 1994, p. 114.
- ↑ Ethan Kleinberg, Generation Existential: Heidegger's Philosophy in France, 1927–1961 , p.166 .
- ↑ D. Morat, Von de Tat zur Gelassenheit , Göttingen, 2007, p. 309.
- ^ Tom Rockmore: Heidegger and French Philosophy. Humanism, Antihumanism, and Being , London, New York 1995, p. 153 .
- ↑ Alexander Schwan, Heidegger's Political Philosophy in Thinking , Opladen 1965, 1988, p. 12: "With numerous students and followers of the thinker it has become customary to dismiss and ignore his political statements and statements as incidental and incidental side effects."
- ^ Tom Rockmore: Heidegger and French Philosophy. Humanism, Antihumanism, and Being , London, New York 1995, pp. 153 f.
- ↑ Ethan Kleinberg, Generation Existential: Heidegger's Philosophy in France, 1927–1961 , p.166 fm note 22 .
- ↑ Lutz Hachmeister, Heidegger's Testament , Berlin 2014, p. 79; on Beaufret as Heidegger's apologist, s. also: Erich Burghardt, Through historical crises: a life between the 19th and 20th centuries , Vienna, Cologne, Weimar, 1998, p. 479 .
- ↑ Ethan Kleinberg, Generation Existential: Heidegger's Philosophy in France, 1927–1961 , p. 161.
- ^ H. Ott, Martin Heidegger. On the way to his biography , Frankfurt / M., 1992, p. 14 f.
- ^ Tom Rockmore: Heidegger and French Philosophy. Humanism, Antihumanism, and Being , London, New York 1995, p. 154 ; Jean-Pierre Faye, Heidegger et la "revolution" , Médiations No. 3, 1961, pp. 151–159; ders. “La lecture et l'énoncé,” Critique No. 237, February 1967.
- ↑ Ethan Kleinberg, Generation Existential: Heidegger's Philosophy in France, 1927–1961 , p. 201.
- ↑ Peter Trawny, Die Zeit , December 27, 2013, “A New Dimension” .
- ^ Tom Rockmore: Heidegger and French Philosophy. Humanism, Antihumanism, and Being , London, New York 1995, p. 155 : "Fédier, for instance, routinely poses as someone who knows German in the appropriate manner, presumably but improbably better than such native German speakers critical of Heidegger as Löwith, or later Pöggeler, Marten and Thomä. Fédier suggests that a 'real' translation of the rectorial address will remove the traces of nazism injected into it ".
- ↑ Pierre Joris, Heidegger, France, Politics, The University : "Fédier himself has given what one can only call sanitized French translations of certain of Heidegger's texts", m. Used in note 20: Jean-Pierre Faye, “La lecture et l'énoncé,” Critique No. 237, February 1967, and Fédier's reply of July 1967, “A propos de Heidegger, une lecture dénoncée”; see. also Friederike Reents, Mood Aesthetics: Realizations in Literature and Theory from the 17th to the 21st Century , Göttingen, 2015. P. 430 f.
- ^ Anton M. Fischer: Late twilight of the gods. In: Marion Heinz, Sidonie Kellerer (ed.): Martin Heideggers 'Schwarze Hefte' , Berlin 2016, pp. 416–439. here: p. 425 f.
- ^ Anton M. Fischer: Late twilight of the gods. In: Marion Heinz, Sidonie Kellerer (ed.): Martin Heideggers' Schwarze Hefte , Berlin 2016, pp. 416–439. here: p. 423 m. Note 16: John van Buren (" Heidegger Incorporated ").
- ^ Anton M. Fischer: Late twilight of the gods. In: Marion Heinz, Sidonie Kellerer (ed.): Martin Heideggers 'Schwarze Hefte' , Berlin 2016, pp. 416–439. here: p. 425.
- ^ Anton M. Fischer: Late twilight of the gods. In: Marion Heinz, Sidonie Kellerer (ed.): Martin Heideggers 'Schwarze Hefte' , Berlin 2016, pp. 416–439. here: p. 421 f.
- ^ Anton M. Fischer: Late twilight of the gods. In: Marion Heinz, Sidonie Kellerer (ed.): Martin Heideggers 'Schwarze Hefte' , Berlin 2016, pp. 416–439. here: p. 422.
- ^ Tom Rockmore: Heidegger and French Philosophy. Humanism, Antihumanism, and Being , London, New York 1995, p. 155 .
- ^ German version: Victor Farías, Heidegger and National Socialism , Frankfurt / M., 1989, 2007.
- ^ Hugo Ott, ways and astray: On Victor Farías' critical Heidegger study. In: Neue Zürcher Zeitung , No. 275, November 27, 1987.
- ↑ Andreas Luckner, Heidegger and the thinking of technology , Bielefeld 2008, p. 64 .
- ↑ Dominique Janicaud, Heidegger en France , Paris 2001, Vol. 1. P. 349.
- ↑ See Heinrich Schmidinger, Wolfgang Röd, Rainer Thurnher: History of Philosophy Volume XIII: Philosophy of Life and Existential Philosophy , Munich 2002, p. 392, note 21 .
- ^ Richard Wolin, French Heidegger Wars , in: ders. (Ed.), The Heidegger Controversy: A Critical Reader. New York, 1991, pp. 273-300.
- ^ Alan Milchman, Alan Rosenberg: The philosophical stakes of the Heidegger wars, Part I: Methodologies for the reading of Heidegger. In: The Journal of Value Inquiry. December 1993, pp. 509-520, here: p. 509 : “The publication of Victor Farías's Heidegger and Nazism in 1987 set off the Heidegger wars, which have grown in intensity over the succeeding years”; see also: A. Reif: The case of Martin Heidegger. From "historians 'dispute" to "philosophers' dispute". A conversation with Professor Dr. Alexander Swan. In: Political Studies. Volume 40, Stuttgart 1989, p. 296.
- ^ H. Ott: Martin Heidegger. On the way to his biography. Frankfurt / M., 1992, p. 8: "Anyone who approaches Heidegger critically, even shaking the fixed structure in a corrective manner, will inevitably be classified in the opposing camp."
- ↑ Jürgen Habermas: Heidegger - work and world view. In: Victor Farías: Heidegger and the National Socialism. Frankfurt / M., 1989, 2007, p. 14 .
- ↑ Jürgen Habermas: Heidegger - work and world view. In: Victor Farías: Heidegger and the National Socialism. Frankfurt / M., 1989, 2007, p. 15 .
- ↑ Emmanuel Faye: Heidegger. The Introduction of National Socialism into Philosophy. In the vicinity of the unpublished seminars between 1933 and 1935. Berlin 2009, p. 16.
- ^ Rejecting review by Thomas Meyer , Die Zeit , July 21, 2005; the philosophers Jacques Bouveresse , Georges-Arthur Goldschmidt , Jean Bollack , Michel Onfray , the historians Jean-Pierre Vernant , Pierre Vidal-Naquet , Paul Veyne and Serge Klarsfeld defended the book; Daniel Morat, on the other hand, is also critical, Von der Tat zur Gelassenheit , Göttingen, 2007, p. 25: "However, his study, which is aimed at a French audience, does not reveal anything substantially new for the German reader, but annoyed by many inaccuracies and historical simplifications"; Thomas Sheehan, Emmanuel Faye, The introduction of Fraud into Philosophy , Philosophy Today , 2015, pp. 367-400, ( [1] PDF).
- ↑ Emmanuel Faye, François Rastier, Sidonie Kellerer, Heidegger and the annihilation of the Jews , taz , April 7, 2015.
- ↑ Dieter Thomä: How anti-Semitic is Heidegger? In: Marion Heinz, Sidonie Kellerer (ed.): Martin Heideggers' Schwarze Hefte , Berlin 2016, pp. 211–233, here: 231 f.
- ↑ Martin Heidegger: Thoughts XII – XV (Black Booklets 1939–1941), Heidegger Complete Edition 96. Ed. By Peter Trawny, Frankfurt a. M. 2014; Vers .: Reflections II – VI (Black Hefts 1931–1938), Heidegger Complete Edition 94th Ed. By Peter Trawny, Frankfurt a. M. 2014; Ders .: Reflections VII – XI (Black Booklets 1938/39), Heidegger Complete Edition 95th Ed. By Peter Trawny, Frankfurt a. M. 2014; Ders .: Notes I – V (Schwarze Hefte 1942–1948), Heidegger Complete Edition 97. Ed. Peter Trawny, Frankfurt a. M. 2015.
- ↑ Trawny, Die Zeit , December 27, 2013: “… the fact that some passages from these notes became known in Paris triggered some hysterical reactions. (...) French scholars, who have been interpreting Heidegger's thinking for decades, ran, so to speak, intellectually amok ”.
- ↑ In the time of December 27, 2013, the articles by Peter Trawny: A new dimension and Thomas Assheuer : He speaks of the racial principle and an interview with Emmanuel Faye: The coronation of the complete edition
- ^ Zeit online , January 22, 2014, Heidegger's missing work surfaced .
- ↑ Peter Trawny, Heidegger and the Myth of the Jewish World Conspiracy , Frankfurt / M., 2014, p. 69: "The anti-Semitism of the history of being consists in the fact that Heidegger means: The Jews who live according to the racial principle make (...) those in this" Racial principle 'well-founded self-interpretation (...) for the meaning and purpose of their' development of power '”; Alain Badiou, zit, n. Deutschland Radio Kultur, December 18, 2013, controversial philosopher, “Reflections on Judaism that are clearly anti-Semitic” : “actually a very common anti-Semite”; Donatella di Cesare in Thomas Vašek (Hohe Luft. February 10, 2015), Heidegger revelation : “That is why I would speak of metaphysical anti-Semitism”; Jean-Luc Nancy (“Faustkultur”, February 16, 2015), facts from booklets : “At least this means that Heidegger, based on a criticism of the“ modern times ”, repeats the most banal anti-Semitism of his time”; Wolfram Eilenberger, Deutschlandfunk "There is a systematic, there is a philosophical relationship between Heidegger and anti-Semitism, and this is a new and important event not only in Heidegger research, but also in the philosophy of the 20th century."
- ↑ R. Wolin In conversation with Thomas Vašek (Hohe Luft. March 27, 2015), "Heidegger thought the 'final solution' was necessary"
- ↑ Thomas Vašek, Hohe Luft (June 23, 2015): The Heidegger Society must open up .
- ↑ S. Vietta, p. 622 : "How the reader wants to name this Heidegger's criticism of the Jews, whether anti-Semitism or not, everyone has to decide for himself."
- ↑ See chairman of the Heidegger Society resigned , press release SWR2, January 16, 2015; The end of Heideggerianism. Interview Figals in the Badische Zeitung, January 23, 2015 : “Despite Heidegger's great sympathy for National Socialism, I did not think that he would deliberately and convincingly make anti-Semitic statements, and of such an infamy. It was the compelling reason to rethink my relationship with Heidegger as a person. "
- ^ Statement by the chairman of the Martin Heidegger Society
- ↑ GA 97, 159
- ↑ Final report of the commission to review the Freiburg street names , to justify the proposal to rename the Martin-Heidegger-Weg in Freiburg, p. 42.
- ^ Badische Zeitung , March 3, 2020, Freiburg municipal council decides to rename other streets
- ^ Anton M. Fischer: Late twilight of the gods. In: Marion Heinz, Sidonie Kellerer (ed.): Martin Heideggers 'Schwarze Hefte' , Berlin 2016, pp. 416–439. here: p. 423.
- ↑ Anton M. Fischer, Anton M. Fischer: Late Götterdämmerung. In: Marion Heinz, Sidonie Kellerer (ed.): Martin Heidegger's "Black Hefts". Berlin 2016, pp. 416–439. here: p. 423.
- ↑ See Eggert Blum, Schwarze Hefte, geschönte Werke , "SWR2", November 12, 2014.
- ↑ Julia A. Ireland, Research in Phenomenology , Vol. 44, 2014, cf. on this Vittorio E. Klostermann, A reliable edition and a dishonest attack , Hohe Luft Magazin, August 31, 2015.
- ^ Richard Wolin: Heidegger's "Black Hefts": National Socialism, World Jewry and History of Being. In: Quarterly issues for contemporary history (Issue 3-2015). de Gruyter, Munich 2015.
- ↑ Richard Wolin, J'accuse! An answer to Vittorio Klostermann , in: "Hohe Luft" from November 2nd, 2015.
- ^ Statement by Vittorio E. Klostermann in: "Hohe Luft", November 9, 2015.
- ^ Rainer Marten, Guardian of the Grail with the last willingness to be loyal , in: Die Zeit , March 22, 2015.
