Read the full-text online edition of Martin Heidegger: A Political Life (). One of the many virtues of Hugo Ott’s recent biography of Heidegger is the Ott characterizes Heidegger’s later religious views as a “broadly Protestant band. Hugo Ott · American Catholic Philosophical Quarterly 69 (2) () Martin Heidegger’s Thinking and Japanese Philosophy and From Martin.
|Published (Last):||1 August 2015|
|PDF File Size:||15.47 Mb|
|ePub File Size:||18.95 Mb|
|Price:||Free* [*Free Regsitration Required]|
However, his approach entails a limitation of a different kind. Does Heidegger really return repeatedly, as Stern asserts, to the question: There are more than twenty huge iron lockers of them, but it does not seem likely that the eventual disclosure of their contents will greatly affect our picture of the man and our reading of his work.
It cannot have been an easy book to write, and it is not an easy book to read. Again, here we simply need to turn to what Heidegger himself actually wrote, on this occasion in a letter to Father W. Unlike Mr Jones, I tried to be accurate in my translations from Heidegger, quoting his ontological question in the form in which it occurs on the first page of his most important work, Time and Being: He is an interpreter: Stern writes a nasty letter, and I squirmed all the way through.
Hugo Ott, Martin Heidegger’s Catholic Origins – PhilPapers
From this arrogance — the forgetfulness of his own standards of Gelassenheit as a hermeneutic stance — arose his dismissive attitude towards his colleagues.
There came a point when we failed to keep up with these Joneses. Ott is particularly strong on Swabian local and ecclesiastical history, and provides a vivid account of the youth and schooling of a poor Roman Catholic scholarship boy; it becomes clear that, but for an asthmatic heart condition, Heidegger would have taken Holy Orders. I just happen to have a different understanding of how that event came to take place.
I was pleased, at last, to get into your long-running debate about Heidegger Letters, 31 August. Ot the contrary, is the interpretative stance necessary to any understanding of an event. Log In Register for Online Access. My complaint against Professor Stern was that in loading the dice in favour of Being and Timehis comments were misleading.
Richardson in the early Sixties: You are not logged in If you have already registered please login here If you are using hridegger site for the first time please register here If you would like access to the entire online archive subscribe here Institutions or university library users please login here Learn more about our institutional subscriptions here. The first and most important of these institutions is the Church. Whatever the outcome of such psychological conjecture, however, one thing seems clear: First, he identified the rise to power of National Socialism as an event: He does this when writing, not about Heidegger whose war experience turns out to have been markedly less heroic than he made outbut in praise of some of the colleagues among them Jews whom Heidegger calumniated.
As Stern indicates, this problem — which Heidegger himself might have described as single-mindedness — seems to hufo been caused by character defects. Thus the reader is left with the unfortunate impression that the dismissal of these men from their university posts after was particularly ignoble, and the fate of those who were not able to leave Heeidegger particularly unjust: This may all seem pedantic, but there is an important point lurking here.
On the contrary, it seems clear that the question which Heidegger constantly returned to was: I am thinking here, for example, of his remark upon the death of Max Scheler: We bow before his fate. This is in no sense an intimate biography: In his important text, Was heisst Denken?
Martin Heidegger a Political Life
Sein is nothing like the Hegelian Geistor even the Christian God. He was far too subtle not to realise that others were also capable of such encounters and events, and thereby of bringing meaning to expression.
He saw himself as a contributor to this tribal lineage, and associated his writings with it; his biographer reports on this powerful rural mystique, and is as far as I know the first author to do so fairly and soberly. What I was trying to demonstrate, however — and nothing that Professor Stern has said has changed my mind on this point — was that Heidegger could only write of the event of Sein as he himself encountered it.
Toward his Biography stands out as the most detailed and scrupulously accurate.
Jones gives the appearance of quoting Heidegger Letters, 17 Augustand then says he has been quoting Leibniz. It is this Gelassenheit which Heidegger attempts to practise in heidegged interpretations of such writers as Trakl, Rilke and Holderlin. Heidegger is of course more ambitious than that.
However, Mr Jones may console himself: We academics have to put up with this sort of thing, of course. Contact us for rights and issues inquiries.