What do you think?
Rate this book
Heidegger's Silence
New hardback with dust jacket
144 pages, Paperback
First published October 1, 1996
20 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 - 2 of 2 reviews
December 26, 2016
Martin Heidegger was an academically prominent philosopher in Germany during the Holocaust and he was a prolific writer, and his silence about the genocide that happened around him has bewildered many. His silence is unlikely to be accidental. Many people try to read into his words and see if he was indirectly trying to highlight the moral problem of the day by what he obviously wasn't saying. Berel Lang points out, however, that Heidegger espoused certain kinds of racism and anti-Semitism. He didn't believe, as the Nazis did, in notions of biological superiority (insofar as he believed that that question could or should be scientifically answered), but he did espouse beliefs in cultural superiority according to which the German Volk had “privileged access to Being and Truth.” He also tended to get into academic tiffs with his colleagues who pushed him ever so gently on this kind of real-life moral question and he gave them the cold shoulder permanently.
Berel Lang says that “Heidegger does not deny that the Nazi genocide against the Jews did occur — only that having occurred, it does not warrant thinking (even about). Nor does it lead to further conclusions bearing on moral judgment or historical responsibility (including his own).” (pp. 14-15) Trackback link to another recent read of mine: Mark Manson's The Subtle Art of Not Giving a F*ck.
Interesting for the historical anecdotes about what Heidegger said and what he didn't say and when he didn't say it, but there is little philosophical mileage to be gotten out of arguments that were never made.
Berel Lang says that “Heidegger does not deny that the Nazi genocide against the Jews did occur — only that having occurred, it does not warrant thinking (even about). Nor does it lead to further conclusions bearing on moral judgment or historical responsibility (including his own).” (pp. 14-15) Trackback link to another recent read of mine: Mark Manson's The Subtle Art of Not Giving a F*ck.
Interesting for the historical anecdotes about what Heidegger said and what he didn't say and when he didn't say it, but there is little philosophical mileage to be gotten out of arguments that were never made.
October 15, 2024
A PROVOCATIVE AND SCHOLARLY LOOK AT HEIDEGGER'S ATTITUDES IN WWII
Berel Lang is Professor of Philosophy and Humanistic Studies at the State University of New York, Albany. He has also written books such as 'Primo Levi: The Matter of a Life', 'Act and Idea in the Nazi Genocide,' 'Writing and the Holocaust,' 'Post-Holocaust: Interpretation, Misinterpretation, and the Claims of History,' 'Philosophical Style: An Anthology About the Reading and Writing of Philosophy,' etc.
He wrote the Preface to this 1996 book, "the thesis I mean to defend is just this: ... that Heidegger's silence on the Jewish Question is intended to speak---addressing and then denying this apparently narrow but, as becomes clear, broadly consequential issue in his thinking. Thus, his answer of silence to the Jewish Question becomes a reflection writ small (as small as absence, but not invisible) of the larger body of writing to which he openly set his name."
He asserts, "for Heidegger to have inadvertently or thoughtlessly neglected either the Jewish Question or the `Jewish Question' is improbable to the point of impossibility... And to this conclusion can be joined yet another consideration....: the fact of his anti-semitism... the main theses asserted here---that there was no `Jewish Question' for Heidegger, and that this came about because there had been for him no `Jewish Question'---would hold even if anti-semitism had occupied no place in the conceptual or historical process that led up to them. Antisemitism is thus not a necessary element in Heidegger's rejection of the `Jewish Question'... But if, on independent grounds, evidence ALSO appears of his anti-Semitism, this would intensify an already consistent line of philosophical argument. For there would then be a basis in experience ... reinforcing the link asserted between his public life and his thought." (Pg. 10)
He quotes theologian/NT scholar Rudolf Bultmann's account of a post-war conversation with Heidegger: "The past was forgotten. If he had once been drawn to National Socialism for good reasons, they had soon turned to disillusionment. Nothing more stood between us. As we were saying goodbye... [Bultmann said] `Now you'll have to write a retraction, like Augustine....not least for the sake of the truth of your thought.' Heidegger's face became a stony mask. He left without another word." (Pg. 13)
He also quotes Heidegger's only written references to the gas chambers and extermination camps: "Agriculture is now a mechanized food industry, in essence the same as the manufacture of corpses in the gas chambers and extermination camps, the same as the blockade and starvation of the countryside, the same as the production of the hydrogen bombs... Hundreds of thousands die en masse. Do they die? They perish. They are cut down. The become items of material available for the manufacture or corpses. Do they die? Hardly noticed, they are liquidated in extermination camps. And even apart from that, in China millions now perish of hunger." (Pg. 16-17)
He also quotes a letter from Heidegger to Herbert Marcuse, in which Marcuse specifically asked Heidegger these matters: "To the serious legitimate charges that you express `about a regime that murdered millions of Jews...' I can merely add that if instead of `Jews' you had written `East Germans,' then the same holds true for one of the allies, with the difference that everything that has occurred since 1945 has become public knowledge, while the bloody terror of the Nazis in point of fact had been kept a secret from the German people." Lang comments, "Heidegger's reference here to the `bloody terror of the Nazis' is, I believe, the strongest condemnation of the Nazi regime to appear anywhere in his writings, public or private. This, together with his acknowledgement of the `legitimate charges' that Marcuse made in respect to the millions of Jews murdered, underlies my qualified reference to the `virtual' silence Heidegger maintained even in the face of Marcuse's challenge." (Pg. 21-22)
He refers to a conversation that Karl Jaspers reported with Heidegger" "I referred to the Jewish Question... and the malicious nonsense about the sages of Zion. He replied: `There really is a dangerous international fraternity of Jews.'" (Pg. 38)
He quotes a letter from Heidegger: "...we confront a choice between again bringing to our German spiritual life authentic, foundational forces and educators... or of finally subjecting it to the growing justification in the broader or narrowed sense." (Pg. 70)
But he points out, "That Heidegger was not a racist on biological grounds---or more generally, a biological or any other kind of determinist---will, however, surprise no one familiar with his work, early or late." (Pg. 64) He adds about Heidegger's defense of himself by referring to his relations with specific Jewish students or colleagues: "It is... as if Heidegger assumed that the evidence of certain individual pedagogical or collegial relationships would be all the proof needed for judging his disposition toward Jews and thus for refuting the charge of anti-Semitism." (Pg. 71-72)
This is a fascinating, and well-documented account of Heidegger's attitudes and actions, that will be of great interest to anyone studying this question.
Berel Lang is Professor of Philosophy and Humanistic Studies at the State University of New York, Albany. He has also written books such as 'Primo Levi: The Matter of a Life', 'Act and Idea in the Nazi Genocide,' 'Writing and the Holocaust,' 'Post-Holocaust: Interpretation, Misinterpretation, and the Claims of History,' 'Philosophical Style: An Anthology About the Reading and Writing of Philosophy,' etc.
He wrote the Preface to this 1996 book, "the thesis I mean to defend is just this: ... that Heidegger's silence on the Jewish Question is intended to speak---addressing and then denying this apparently narrow but, as becomes clear, broadly consequential issue in his thinking. Thus, his answer of silence to the Jewish Question becomes a reflection writ small (as small as absence, but not invisible) of the larger body of writing to which he openly set his name."
He asserts, "for Heidegger to have inadvertently or thoughtlessly neglected either the Jewish Question or the `Jewish Question' is improbable to the point of impossibility... And to this conclusion can be joined yet another consideration....: the fact of his anti-semitism... the main theses asserted here---that there was no `Jewish Question' for Heidegger, and that this came about because there had been for him no `Jewish Question'---would hold even if anti-semitism had occupied no place in the conceptual or historical process that led up to them. Antisemitism is thus not a necessary element in Heidegger's rejection of the `Jewish Question'... But if, on independent grounds, evidence ALSO appears of his anti-Semitism, this would intensify an already consistent line of philosophical argument. For there would then be a basis in experience ... reinforcing the link asserted between his public life and his thought." (Pg. 10)
He quotes theologian/NT scholar Rudolf Bultmann's account of a post-war conversation with Heidegger: "The past was forgotten. If he had once been drawn to National Socialism for good reasons, they had soon turned to disillusionment. Nothing more stood between us. As we were saying goodbye... [Bultmann said] `Now you'll have to write a retraction, like Augustine....not least for the sake of the truth of your thought.' Heidegger's face became a stony mask. He left without another word." (Pg. 13)
He also quotes Heidegger's only written references to the gas chambers and extermination camps: "Agriculture is now a mechanized food industry, in essence the same as the manufacture of corpses in the gas chambers and extermination camps, the same as the blockade and starvation of the countryside, the same as the production of the hydrogen bombs... Hundreds of thousands die en masse. Do they die? They perish. They are cut down. The become items of material available for the manufacture or corpses. Do they die? Hardly noticed, they are liquidated in extermination camps. And even apart from that, in China millions now perish of hunger." (Pg. 16-17)
He also quotes a letter from Heidegger to Herbert Marcuse, in which Marcuse specifically asked Heidegger these matters: "To the serious legitimate charges that you express `about a regime that murdered millions of Jews...' I can merely add that if instead of `Jews' you had written `East Germans,' then the same holds true for one of the allies, with the difference that everything that has occurred since 1945 has become public knowledge, while the bloody terror of the Nazis in point of fact had been kept a secret from the German people." Lang comments, "Heidegger's reference here to the `bloody terror of the Nazis' is, I believe, the strongest condemnation of the Nazi regime to appear anywhere in his writings, public or private. This, together with his acknowledgement of the `legitimate charges' that Marcuse made in respect to the millions of Jews murdered, underlies my qualified reference to the `virtual' silence Heidegger maintained even in the face of Marcuse's challenge." (Pg. 21-22)
He refers to a conversation that Karl Jaspers reported with Heidegger" "I referred to the Jewish Question... and the malicious nonsense about the sages of Zion. He replied: `There really is a dangerous international fraternity of Jews.'" (Pg. 38)
He quotes a letter from Heidegger: "...we confront a choice between again bringing to our German spiritual life authentic, foundational forces and educators... or of finally subjecting it to the growing justification in the broader or narrowed sense." (Pg. 70)
But he points out, "That Heidegger was not a racist on biological grounds---or more generally, a biological or any other kind of determinist---will, however, surprise no one familiar with his work, early or late." (Pg. 64) He adds about Heidegger's defense of himself by referring to his relations with specific Jewish students or colleagues: "It is... as if Heidegger assumed that the evidence of certain individual pedagogical or collegial relationships would be all the proof needed for judging his disposition toward Jews and thus for refuting the charge of anti-Semitism." (Pg. 71-72)
This is a fascinating, and well-documented account of Heidegger's attitudes and actions, that will be of great interest to anyone studying this question.
Displaying 1 - 2 of 2 reviews