Of course it makes a difference if he supported geonocide. My number one problem with the three major religions on the West are their endorsement of mass murder at "God-Allah-Yawweh's" commands — Gregory

It seems you judge past ages after all, then. Is mass murder the only exception to your inclination not to judge those who lived in the past?

It seems you judge past ages after all, then. Is mass murder the only exception to your inclination not to judge those who lived in the past? — Ciceronianus the White

We know we share some type of "human nature" with the past and we know murder is wrong. I believe we can know some philosophical truth and it is wrong to say "God can command murder". However, we don't know apart from this many circumstances from the past, who was good, who was bad, what was the greater good in each case. You guys are saying we should throw out the entire philosophy of a great writer because of possible poor judgments of his in terms of politics. I don't like the Nazis but we don't even know everything about what was going on back than although we can say, based on human nature, that when they murdered they committed crimes

Psychoanalysis is gibberish with no grounding. — emancipate

Well philosophy and psychology are indistinguishable. It's a modern error to separate them

We are born, open open our eyes, learn to walk and play, then find books. And? Its just other people's words really. We don't know their motives or honesty because their are opinions on opposite sides on all issues of the past. My point is we know our own times far more clearly than we do past ages

you might want to read some of what Thomas Sheehan wrote about Heidi and his devotion to National Socialism sometime. — Ciceronianus the White

I’ve read it. I know Tom Sheehan pretty well. He’s kind of a wild man of activist philosophy, a real character. But as I said before , the route to an adequate understanding of Heidegger and the Nazis is through his philosophy , and I never thought Sheehan grasped his ideas very well . Kind of like Jaspers , who wanted to get rid of Being and Time because he thought it was nothing but dangerous mysticism.

You guys are saying we should throw out the entire philosophy of a great writer because of possible poor judgments of his in terms of politics. — Gregory

"Poor judgments" forsooth. "The Fuhrer alone is the present and future German reality and its law." Also sprach Heidegger. Something more than poor judgment is involved in that kind of thinking.

Regardless, though, I don't think his philosophy should be thrown out, but I'm in any case personally unimpressed by what I've read of Heidegger, as I tend to agree with Carnap that his prose is obscure (and for me often portentous), his views mystical and romantic, and to the extent I can understand what he's said to have written, prefer the views of Dewey regarding technology, art, education and what we are and do as parts of the world. So, my disregard for his work isn't merely based on the fact that he was a Nazi, though I think his romantic and mystical bent inclined him towards fascism and authoritarianism. I find him loathsome as a person, and can't entirely separate the person from his philosophy as others seem able to do.

I referred to Sheehan because of his useful summary of the conduct of Heidegger as a Nazi during and after the rectorate, and because of his analysis of the excuses made by Heidegger in his efforts to rehabilitate himself after the war. Jasper, of course, had his concerns about Heidegger as well, as did others who knew him.

Hitler would have been remembered as a great leader if he was properly lead by his cabinet. He was a crazy man given drugs to appear as if he had the "spirit of Germany". It was an attempt to save a nation, but there were bad people involved who's ambition and pride led them to mass murder

Japan and Germany in WWII were lead by a Zen type of philosophy. Live in the moment. That was their existential philosophy. We can never know for sure, from philosophy, why and how humans came into being, so we should focus on the present. Throw out Heidegger and you throw out Zen

"The central core of experience seems to be the conviction, or insight, that the immediate now, whatever its nature, is the goal and fillment of all living". Allan Watts, 1960, This Is It

Let me connect my previous thoughts. There is something inherently unnatural about sexuality. It is an act of the body, not the body itself. It is like anger in that it can be used in a very bad way like anger does in hate. Yet I would say that sexuality is always like a drug and therefore is self altering. Nobody avoids this or can. Even Jesus, since he was a man, had experienced something of penis autonomy. Because sexuality is an assertion against your parents, we all look to a father, and mother, to trust in. People have turned to Jesus (who supported historical genocide by the Jews) and Hitler and Trump and every other figure of adoration. Every adult struggles with their entry into adulthood because we want to return to the toyland of childhood where everything was fresh and new. Heidegger fell for a type freakshow political ploy where someone who was psychotic was turned by quack doctors into a figure of hope for people who were starving for a better era. I think people are too likely to go with common narratives of these questions instead of thinking for themselves

Whose report are you basing the idea that Hitler was not directly involved in the genocide from its inception to its execution? It contradicts everything I have read upon the subject. It sounds like some crap Buchanan used to spew.

He was technically insane so there is no way to know

So, your testimony is a first hand account?

No but we have video of Hitler. Just look at him and you know he's crazy. You can't really judge a puppet mental patient like you do. We know who the people were behind the Holocaust (Himmler, ect). Hitler was in his own world and Heidegger was not a member of that group

A lot of people watch Hitler's speeches and think he's possessed. They really are witnessing the effects of methamphetamine

I was only asking where you got the information that Hitler was outside of the Holocaust or was simply the tool of others. The passage I quoted earlier shows him the author of a role you claim was impressed upon him. None of your perspective makes sense from anything I have read of the history.
What have you read to give you such a different understanding of the facts?

Hitler didn't write all of his rambling book. What I'm saying is that the man was psychotic most of his life and watching videos of him completely confirms this. People watch him with a fascination with the Nazis. Yes! it's not me who is doing this, it is people obsessed with the "evil man Hitler". He was mentally ill and may have been evil but I don't know that and neither do you considering he had a serious mental illness. You can't know how those people really process reality and its irrelevant what papers Hitler signed

Are you really saying you can't tell Hitler was 1) crazy, and 2) on drugs from his videos? That's ridiculous

I am not disputing any claims about his condition. I am disputing the distance you place between him and the crimes he committed as reported in multiple histories, biographies, etc.
So far, all I can tell is that you watched a lot of the History Channel.

I don't own a TV. I go by what I've studied about Hitler's doctors and above all on reading Hitler' condition from all his videos out of here. If a person is crazy and on drugs he can't possibly be the one really running a nation. He's a puppet

Have you read any history books or biographies that detail what he did and when he did it?

Hitler was crazy long before he came to power. Dr. Morell gave him meth, opiods, and cocaine on a regular basis. Hitler was given shots around every hour and they were concoctions of over 70 substances. They had to keep him under control

I've read books Hitler, yes. I consider writings of such to be easily mistaken about facts of personality. I have known a lot of people who were crazy and a lot of people who used drugs. Watching Hitler is seeing all of them in one person

:up:
:up:

The ethical void (re: Destruktion ... das Man .. die Kehre) at the heart of Heidi's philosophy was/is susceptible to being filled unapologetically by "Only das Führerprinzip can save us" (i.e Seinsgeschichte aka "destiny").

From previous threads:

For all his oompah oompah on "the question of the meaning of being" (or, according to Rorty, "myth of being"), Heidi's daseinanalysis is as autistic as it is solipsistic - I agree with the critical observations of Karl Löwith, Theodor Adorno, Immanuel Levinas, Hannah Arendt, Walter Kaufmann, George Steiner, et al - which makes his indefensible political "stupidity" somewhat intelligible. — 180 Proof

[ ... ] For Heidi ... shared practices (somehow) "impoverish understanding" of "the meaning of ... ", suggesting a preference for, or priority of, withdrawal from shared practices – the commons, or cosmopolity – into (the) "ownmost". IIRC, this 'solipsistic stance' is Heidi's ethical (Levinas, Adorno) failing ... — 180 Proof

You seem very racists against Germans. I'm Italian and not offended, but your use of words is racist

People give Nietzsche a free pass although he said cruelty was a good thing. Heidegger is thrown out for something that has nothing to do with his philosophy

I'm only against fatuous mystagogues, unapologetic nazi-sympathizers & (their) incorrigible apologists. :shade:

Why are you quoting German words as if they are wicked?

:smirk: For the wicked thrill of schadenfreude, baby!