[lit-ideas] Re: Reading Heidegger

  • From: Adriano Palma <Palma@xxxxxxxxxx>
  • To: "lit-ideas@xxxxxxxxxxxxx" <lit-ideas@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
  • Date: Mon, 16 Feb 2015 16:13:55 +0000

Has always been a great sacrifice and a huge waste of time imposed by the 
intellectual fascists who fllowed him.
The nuances introduced by the invading troops from the western part of Europe 
saved this crock of shit a bullet, imho well deserved for his lovers, wife, 
friend E Fischer, and others. The swine insisted and the military authorities 
made decisions that I personally find dubious (nuke the Japanese and not the 
germans etc., it may be that the usual pro Christian bias emerges, but I am 
unable to tell.)
Even this "bhl", who is a demented exhibitionist notes how the inheritors of 
Heidegger are famous cocksuckers, honourable exception J Lacan who did not have 
a cock since his phallus/cock/dick etc. was an imaginary number.
Even more regrettable the spawn of the somewhat semi respectables in the shape 
of the Cassin & Agamben et al.
On the issue raised by the list, Pound at least was a poet, Heidegger never 
said anything of any interest to anybody (consider: is there causality? Given 
that Heidegger claims that animals cannot have a sense of temporality, is this 
true? Why? Suppose, as Heidegger says, that "people are afraid to die etc." why 
should anyone care about a coward -Heidegger skirted service in both world wars 
to spend his time fucking his students, etc. all of this is documented, Gadamer 
told me that in his opinion Heidegger was rather dumb and followed his wife who 
was a fanatical Hitlerite, suppose this is true, why then talk about him and 
not about someone of some interest who had some ideas (Benn, e.g.)? nobody 
answers these questions since the members of the cult of mumbo jumbo never tell 
us what did Heidegger do, what problem he solved, what idea he had (the issue  
is serious, this is undoable since only the jargon allows even the statement, 
the ontological difference is a difference when and only when one accepts that 
there is no verb "to be" but beings and being etc. etc. etc.) now the buttplug 
imposed by the family was partially removed and another eruption  of this 
vulture eating jewish flesh Durchfall producing "thing" came about. The bishops 
immediately organized a symposium in Paris and a scandal in Bremen etc.

Come on...
-----Original Message-----
From: lit-ideas-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx [mailto:lit-ideas-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx] On 
Behalf Of cblists@xxxxxxxx
Sent: 16 February 2015 16:46
To: Lit-Ideas
Subject: [lit-ideas] Reading Heidegger after publication of the 'Black 

For those who want a more nuanced discussion of the publication of Heidegger's 
'Black Notebooks' and their relevance in assessing Heidegger's importance as a 
philosopher I recommend reading the following three articles (from which I 
quote short excerpts):

Bernard-Henry Levy's "Why read Heidegger?"

"The real question [is] not to recall for the umpteenth time that this great 
philosopher was also a real Nazi.

"Rather it was to ask what can and should be done today about the living 
paradox, the terrifying oxymoron, of an individual about whom we cannot even 
say, as we could about Céline, that he had two separate faces. We cannot do 
that with Heidegger because in the same works, the same sentences, often the 
same word, the man appears as a lofty philosopher and as a purveyor of infamy.

"Should we just forget him? ... Jump at finally having a good reason not to 
have to struggle with one of the most arduous and complex of contemporary 

"I don't think so. ..."


Jonathan Ree's "In defence of Heidegger: You do not have to admire a 
philosopher personally to admire his work"

"I think that those who say that because [Heidegger] was anti-Semitic we should 
not read his philosophy show a deep ignorance about the whole tradition of 
writing and reading philosophy. The point about philosophy is not that it 
offers an anthology of opinions congenial to us, which we can dip into to find 
illustrations of what you might call greeting card sentiments. Philosophy is 
about learning to be aware of problems in your own thinking where you might not 
have suspected them. It offers its readers an intellectual boot camp, where 
every sentence is a challenge, to be negotiated with care. The greatest 
philosophers may well be wrong: the point of recognising them as great is not 
to subordinate yourself to them, but to challenge yourself to work out exactly 
where they go wrong."


Richard Polt and Gregory Fried in conversation with Thomas Sheehan: "no one can 
jump over his own shadow"

"RP & GF: The three volumes of 'Black Notebooks' ... leave no reasonable doubt 
that Heidegger had anti-Semitic attitudes. And his public statements, even into 
the 1940s, indicated that he supported ... the Nazi regime and its war efforts. 
How do you see this affecting his philosophy?

"TS: Heidegger’s attempt to launder his cultural pessimism and revanchist 
nationalism through his “metaphysical history” of the downfall of the West is a 
complete failure and should be recognized as such. This includes, most 
saliently and infamously, his undeniable anti-Semitism and Nazism.

"In my opinion, the attempts of Heideggerians to 'explain' his anti-Semitism 
via exculpatory qualifications (e.g., 'he wasn’t a biological anti-Semite like 
the Nazis') are abject strategies of avoidance, a desperate refusal to accept 
the obvious. The question, rather, is whether his deep cultural anti-Semitism, 
along with his craven allegiance to Hitler, hemorrhage into the core of his 

"Some, like the indefatigable but philosophically challenged Emmanuel Faye, 
insist that Heidegger was a Nazi even before he was born and that from 
beginning to end his philosophy was nothing but an effort—in Faye’s words—'to 
introduce Nazism into philosophy.'

"I argue ... that the essential core of Heidegger’s philosophy was in place by 
the end of 1930 and that it is in no way tainted by his later Nazism or his 
abiding anti-Semitism."


Chris Bruce,
in Kiel, Germany

P.S. Please note that 'recommend reading' is not semantically equivalent to 
'agree uncritically with the entire contents of'.

- CB------------------------------------------------------------------
To change your Lit-Ideas settings (subscribe/unsub, vacation on/off, digest 
on/off), visit www.andreas.com/faq-lit-ideas.html

Other related posts: