PATRICIA COHEN “An Ethical Question: Does a Nazi Deserve a Place Among Philosophers?” http://www.nytimes.com/2009/11/09/books/09philosophy.html
仏蘭西の哲学者、Emmanuel Faye*1の2005年の著書、Heidegger, l'introduction du nazisme dans la philosophie. Autour des séminaires inédits de 1933-1935の英訳本が近々刊行されるが、これはファシスト思想やレイシズムがハイデガー哲学の本質に組み込まれていることを論証したものだという。Faye氏は、そこからハイデガーに影響を受け、或いは彼の思想をベースにした人文系諸学は自らの根本的な再検討を要することを主張する。主張はそれにとどまらない。Faye氏は、ハイデガーのテクストを哲学としてではなくヘイト・スピーチと同列に扱うべきことを主張する。曰く、図書館はハイデガーの本を哲学の棚から外し、「ナチズムの歴史」のコーナーに置くべきである。
勿論、Emmanuel Fayeの主張に同調しない、或いは留保をつける人もいる；
英訳本の刊行前から米国におけるハイデガー論議は盛り上がっているが、バッシングはハンナ・アレントにまで飛び火している。或いは、60年代の〈アイヒマン論争〉の再来；
（前略）Although Mr. Faye talks about the close connection between Heidegger and current right-wing extremist politics, left-wing intellectuals have more frequently been inspired by his ideas. Existentialism and postmodernism as well as attendant attacks on colonialism, atomic weapons, ecological ruin and universal notions of morality are all based on his critique of the Western cultural tradition and reason.Richard Wolin*2, the author of several books on Heidegger and a close reader of the Faye book, said he is not convinced Heidegger’s thought is as thoroughly tainted by Nazism as Mr. Faye argues. Nonetheless he recognizes how far Heidegger’s ideas have spilled into the larger culture.
“I’m not by any means dismissing any of these fields because of Heidegger’s influence,” he wrote in an e-mail message referring to postmodernism’s influence across the academy. “I’m merely saying that we should know more about the ideological residues and connotations of a thinker like Heidegger before we accept his discourse ready-made or naïvely.”
Ron Rosenbaumのテクストは
Ron Rosenbaum, the author of “Explaining Hitler,” even extended the argument to the German Jewish philosopher Hannah Arendt, a former student and lover of Heidegger’s. Citing a recent essay by the historian Bernard Wasserstein, Mr. Rosenbaum wrote in Slate.com that Arendt’s thinking about the Holocaust and her famous formulation, “the banality of evil,” were contaminated by Heidegger and other anti-Semitic writings.Commentators heatedly rejected the notion that significant ideas could not be distilled from vile ones. Writing for The New Republic’s Web site, tnr.com, Damon Linker declared it was “absurd” to “implicate Heidegger’s entire philosophical corpus.”
He and others echoed the views of the influential American philosopher Richard Rorty, who once wrote in The New York Times, “You cannot read most of the important philosophers of recent times without taking Heidegger’s thought into account.” Mr. Rorty added, however, that “the smell of smoke from the crematories” will “linger on their pages.”
“The Evil of Banality: Troubling new revelations about Arendt and Heidegger” http://www.slate.com/id/2234010/pagenum/all/#p2
何だか20年前を思い出す。1980年代後半、ビクトル・ファリス『ハイデガーとナチズム』が刊行され、さらにポール・ドゥ・マンの若き日の反ユダヤ主義的言説が暴露され、バッシングはデリダや〈脱構築〉にまで及んだ。
ところで、今時ナチズムとの関係をスルーしてハイデガーを語る哲学教師なんているのか。
A verbal brawl over Heidegger’s theories should not be surprising, though. After all, the classic American position on how liberal societies should treat dangerous ideas is with more discussion.That is precisely what Mr. Faye says he wants. In his view teaching Heidegger’s ideas without disclosing his deep Nazi sympathies is like showing a child a brilliant fireworks display without warning that an ignited rocket can also blow up in someone’s face.
ハイデガーとナチズムについては、http://d.hatena.ne.jp/sumita-m/20060517/1147834055も参照されたい。
