What do you think?
Rate this book
هايدغر وأسطورة المؤامرة العالمية اليهودية
تم نشر "التأملات" لهايدغر، وهي السلسلة الأولى من "الدفاتر السوداء"، وأثارت استجابة إعلامية غير عادية. يضيف هذا المنشور بعدا جديدا لكتابات هايدغر. لكن النقاش الفلسفي والأكاديمي لم يأت بعد. لقد لوحظ في كثير من الأحيان مدى اهتمام الفلاسفة اليهود بعمق بأعمال مارتن هايدغر. هل وهل هناك قرب خاص هنا؟ تظهر "التأملات" أنه في مرحلة معينة من تفكيره، حاصرت الأفكار المعادية للسامية "تاريخ الوجود". ويبدو أن "بروتوكولات حكماء صهيون"، المصدر الأول لمعاداة السامية الحديثة وما بعد الحداثية، تلعب الدور الرئيسي. في دراسته، يدرس بيتر تراڤني مسألة مدى أهمية هذا الحطام الفكري بالنسبة لفكر هايدغر بأكمله. تم توسيع الطبعة الثانية لتشمل فصلاً عن العلاقة بين هايدغر وهوسرل بالإضافة إلى كلمة لاحقة مفصلة كتبها المؤلف للطبعة الجديدة.
- GenresPhilosophyPolitics
191 pages, Paperback
First published January 1, 2014
9 people are currently reading
72 people want to read
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 4 of 4 reviews
January 29, 2017
When it comes to Trawny and other Heideggerians, his milkshake does bring all the boys to the yard. All Heideggerian sophists squirm in the face of Trawny, relapsing into altogether much too crude, coarse and commonplace thinking. Trawny's work is seriously challenging and easily misunderstood. Much to my surprise, he offers much more arguments against the presence of any viable conception of antisemitism in Heidegger than for. To be clear: I am deeply convinced that he has what you may call a 'hidden agenda', although I am of course of the opinion that this agenda is apparent.
The itinerary of the book is largely unclear and seems associative. It structurally expounds a 'contamination' in Heidegger's thought - a concept that he admits is Heideggerian (I was thinking more Derridean, but whatever). As Trawny explicitly states, one cannot really think through the consequences of this contamination. Ultimately, one must rather attempt the thought of the problem itself and determine how to understand it. Thinking is mutilated by Heidegger. Thinking must bear its proper pain, having been lead astray by Heidegger. Such consistent appeals are entirely consonant with Heidegger's appeal to the thought of Being. The idea that Heidegger reminds us of the darkest pages of our history and we could be thankful for it - is this not the gist of Trawny's essay? Is it not now that we can finally carry the weight of being a German on our shoulders, or that we can start 'trusting the trail of tears' (Celan [so yeah, not the 'Trail of Tears' - sorry])? Unlike the often very complex rhetorical questions posed in Trawny's book, which allow him to avoid drawing any conclusions or condemnations, mine one should simply answer with 'yes'.
It strikes me that at the very least profound irony befalls this whole discussion. Surely, one could ponder the question of Heidegger's nazism long and hard, but perhaps that's altogether not as urgent as Trawny makes it out to be. Trawny's work is not coincidentally 'contaminated'; its train of thought forcefully moves within the Heideggerian framework, further mythologizing it. Let me guess: only in the vicinity of the ultimate obscurity of this problem can a secret become pertinent for us all, and will we be at the height of our thinking? What about all the other worries mankind has?
As part Heidegger enthousiast, I can imagine this to be a pretty profound and touching narrative for most. Peter Trawny is a brave and erudite man and I regret that he's become such a controversial figure (among people he should be getting respect from). But as so much more than part Heidegger enthousiast, I can only giggle at the reception this is getting and shake my head at the often confusing state of philosophical discourse.
The itinerary of the book is largely unclear and seems associative. It structurally expounds a 'contamination' in Heidegger's thought - a concept that he admits is Heideggerian (I was thinking more Derridean, but whatever). As Trawny explicitly states, one cannot really think through the consequences of this contamination. Ultimately, one must rather attempt the thought of the problem itself and determine how to understand it. Thinking is mutilated by Heidegger. Thinking must bear its proper pain, having been lead astray by Heidegger. Such consistent appeals are entirely consonant with Heidegger's appeal to the thought of Being. The idea that Heidegger reminds us of the darkest pages of our history and we could be thankful for it - is this not the gist of Trawny's essay? Is it not now that we can finally carry the weight of being a German on our shoulders, or that we can start 'trusting the trail of tears' (Celan [so yeah, not the 'Trail of Tears' - sorry])? Unlike the often very complex rhetorical questions posed in Trawny's book, which allow him to avoid drawing any conclusions or condemnations, mine one should simply answer with 'yes'.
It strikes me that at the very least profound irony befalls this whole discussion. Surely, one could ponder the question of Heidegger's nazism long and hard, but perhaps that's altogether not as urgent as Trawny makes it out to be. Trawny's work is not coincidentally 'contaminated'; its train of thought forcefully moves within the Heideggerian framework, further mythologizing it. Let me guess: only in the vicinity of the ultimate obscurity of this problem can a secret become pertinent for us all, and will we be at the height of our thinking? What about all the other worries mankind has?
As part Heidegger enthousiast, I can imagine this to be a pretty profound and touching narrative for most. Peter Trawny is a brave and erudite man and I regret that he's become such a controversial figure (among people he should be getting respect from). But as so much more than part Heidegger enthousiast, I can only giggle at the reception this is getting and shake my head at the often confusing state of philosophical discourse.
February 7, 2026
Filosofen hebben vaak de neiging om in hun uiteenzettingen over complexe metafysica zeer specifiek, haast persoonlijk, vakjargon te gebruiken. Soms verzinnen ze zelfs woorden. Martin Heidegger is hiervan een uitstekend voorbeeld. Daarom is het altijd handig om eerst een boek te lezen geschreven door een expert die de filosofie als het ware zal 'vertalen'. Wanneer die experts echter exact diezelfde taal spreken wordt het iets moeilijker. Peter Trawny spreekt voor een lezerspubliek van Heideggerkenners en niet voor een algemeen publiek. Het thema is evenwel echt boeiend omdat de vraag of Heidegger - en in hoeverre - antisemitisch was een zeer genuanceerd antwoord behoeft. Zo had hij kritiek op het wereldjodendom, maar ook op het nationaalsocialisme. Zijn kritiek was bovendien veel eerder filosofisch, en niet raciaal, hoewel hij ook filosofeerde over ras. Kortom, de nuance is hier erg belangrijk en erg complex en de auteur slaagt er naar mijn gevoel niet in om dit uit te leggen voor niet-Heideggerspecialisten. Een voorbeeld van een zin: "Heeft men niet het gevoel dat het Duitse volk en land nu reeds één enkel concentratiekamp vormen, een kamp zoals de wereld dat nog nooit gezien heeft en dat de wereld ook niet wil zien - en dat dit niet-willen nog willender is dan onze willoosheid tegenover de verwildering van het nationaalsocialisme?" Het is een zin - weliswaar van Heidegger zelf - die haast elke lezer meermaals moet lezen maar die vervolgens beter zou moeten worden uitgelegd door een kenner. Maar ook de zinnen van Trawny dienen vaak opnieuw gelezen te worden. Kan beter.
January 21, 2025
3.8?? An sich ein schlüssiges Werk, welches sehr interessante Parallelen und Bezugspunkte in der Argumentation herstellt. Aber Trawny scheut sich vollends, Heidegger Antisemitismus zuzuschreiben. Manchmal finden sich auch komische Formulierungen im Text...Aber an sich ein sehr guter Einstieg in das Thema.
February 9, 2016
Good, as far as it goes.
Displaying 1 - 4 of 4 reviews