论文部分内容阅读
本文依据各种材料,比如有关的海德格尔传记、文章、回忆录、海德格尔本人的著作、通信、和在此问题上的自我辩护等等,就事实与思想两个方面探讨海德格尔与纳粹的关系。关于事实的部分首先概述了海德格尔对此问题的解释,然后给出了不同意这种解释的人们所找到的最重要的一些相关事实。从中可以看出,海德格尔涉入纳粹运动的动机与程度比人们以前所知者更深,但并没有确凿证据证明他有反犹太的种族主义倾向。关于思想的部分在研究海德格尔1933年校长就职演说(“德国大学的自我主张”)的思想来源的基础上,将他的思想与纳粹意识形态做了对比。这些来源中最重要者是他的解释学化的现象学思路和表达方式,以及恩斯特·荣格尔表达于“总动员”和《工作者》之中的观点。在“德国大学的自我主张”中,他用“对于(当场显示)本性的意愿”代替了尼采和荣格尔的“对于力量的意愿”,阐释了这本性“站立在风暴之中”,就在不屈不挠的“发问”中达到实际生活经验本身的“形式—境域显示”,并因此而“保持住了人民的土与血元气的力量”的特点。这种纯构成化的思路与纳粹的现成化了的反现代主义貌合神离。因此,海德格尔在较短时间内看出了纳粹运动不可改变的技术化本质,并在关于尼采的讲课中批判之。 总之,海德格尔绝不是偶然地
Based on a variety of materials, such as the related Heidegger biography, articles, memoirs, Heidegger’s own writings, correspondence, and self-defense on the issue, this article explores the relationship between Heidegger and Nazi relations. The factual section begins with an overview of Heidegger’s interpretation of the problem and then gives the most relevant facts found by those who disagree with the explanation. It can be seen from this that Heidegger’s motives and degree of involvement in the Nazi movement are deeper than those previously known but there is no conclusive evidence that he has anti-Semitic racist tendencies. The section on thought contrasts his thought with Nazi ideology on the basis of studying Heidegger’s sources of thought for the inaugural address of the president in 1933 (“self-assertion of German universities”). The most important of these sources is his hermeneutic phenomenological thinking and expression, as well as the notion of Ernst Roger’s expression of “mobilization” and “worker.” In the “Self-assertion of German Universities,” he replaced “the will to force” with Nietzsche and Ronger in “the will to the (on-the-spot display) nature.” He explained that this “stands in the midst of a storm.” In the indomitable “questioning,” it realizes the “form-territory display” of actual life experience and thus “retains the strength of the people’s soil and blood.” This purely constitutionalist idea fits with the ready-made anti-Semitism of the Nazis. Therefore, Heidegger saw the immutable technical nature of the Nazi movement in a relatively short period of time and criticized it in his lectures on Nietzsche. In short, Heidegger is by no means accidental