By James Phillips
Read or Download Heidegger's Volk: Between National Socialism and Poetry PDF
Similar phenomenology books
In exploring the character of extra relative to a phenomenology of the restrict, trying out the restrict claims that phenomenology itself is an exploration of extra. What does it suggest that "the self" is "given"? should still we see it as originary; or relatively, in what approach is the self engendered from textual practices that transgress—or hover round and for this reason within—the threshold of phenomenologial discourse?
Philosophical reflections at the phenomenon of globalization.
This can be the main complete remark on either Divisions of Heidegger's Being and Time, making it the fundamental advisor for novices and experts alike. starting with a non-technical exposition of the query Heidegger poses-"What does it suggest to be? "-and holding that question in view, it steadily raises the closeness of concentrate on the textual content.
- Hermeneutics and Phenomenology in Paul Ricoeur: Between Text and Phenomenon
- Mathematical Intuition: Phenomenology and Mathematical Knowledge
- Supersmmetry and Supergravity - Phenomenology and Grand Unification
- The Unhappy Consciousness: The Poetic Plight of Samuel Beckett An Inquiry at the Intersection of Phenomenology and Literature
Additional info for Heidegger's Volk: Between National Socialism and Poetry
Derrida contends in Of Spirit that, with his opposition to the biologism of National Socialism, Heidegger lapses into the metaphysics of subjectity: One cannot demarcate oneself from biologism, from naturalism, from racism in its genetic form, one cannot be opposed to them except by reinscribing spirit in an oppositional determination, by once again making it a unilaterality of subjectity, even if in its voluntarist form. ^ Derrida's criticism turns upon a direct association of oppositional determination with the metaphysics of subjectity.
47 There is nothing of the biological in this definition. Whoever loves freedom is German. By 1808, le peuple of the French Revolution, which had defined itself by its love of freedom rather than by national characteristics, had shown, through its submission to the Napoleonic dictatorship, the spuriousness of its love of freedom. In contrast, the Germans, so long as they combat their oppression, are seen as the people that loves freedom and are hence the people. And this people, regardless of the speaker, is also always "our" people because it is the people that stands closest to us in the philosophically original freedom of humanity.
Heidegger's clarificatory intervention was too exceptional a gesture, and its circumstances too obviously crucial to the casting of his postwar reputation, for anything here to be straightforward. Thirteen years later, the interview with Der Spiegel on September 23,1966, "Nur ein Gott kann uns noch retten" ("Only a God Can Save Us"), is perhaps even more tortuous. There the rectorship becomes a series of compromises with the NSDAP, and any tie between Heidegger's thinking and the regime is pushed into the background: any attempt at an exposition of this tie is taken as little more than Introduction 31 a foray into persecution.