Heidegger

In a message dated 30/11/2006 03:42:44 GMT Standard Time, phil at thalasson.com
writes:

Jud:
Earlier: None of the content of the site you mention has EVER been addressed
on this list to my knowledge - unless it took place during my holidays when
I always cancel all my mail?

Philip:
*Philippe Arjakovsky points out that Faye is not quoting from an unpublished
lecture but from one that was published several years ago and nothing
remarkable was seen in it at the time. It only becomes so when Faye quotes out of
context.*

Jud:
Before I deal with Arjakovsky, you claimed that:

*We have been through all this before.*

Please refer me to where and when was this discussed in any depth on this
list, and were and when was Arjakovsky’s feeble attempt at deflection mentioned?

Arjakovsky:

‘There is the question of *the radical need to find the enemy* and *to
initiate an attack with a view to their total annihilation* [quoting H] … One
sees that the passage cited on the enemy and combat is taken in reality from a
commentary on a fragment of Heraclitus, the celebrated fragment DK53 which
says that *polemos is the father of everything that is* and the thesis in
general of the chapter is that polemos, combat, is for the Greeks the essential
home of all that is, well beyond all human activity.”

Jud:
The thesis of Faye’s book is that Heidegger put his philosophy to the
service of the recognition and the diffusion of the same foundations of the Nazism
as Hitler particularly in his of lectures professed between 1933 and 1935.

According to Faye Heidegger makes an explicit defence of the Fuhrer’s world
vision. Moreover he speaks of identifying the hidden enemies within the
nation

(A) Faye’s version of what Heidegger said at the lecture: “hidden enemies
within the nation in order to annihilate them totally:” “hidden enemies within
the nation” means primarily the assimilated Jew.)

(B) Arjakovsky’s version of what Heidegger said at the lecture: “There is
the question of ‘the radical need to find the enemy’ and ‘to initiate an attack
with a view to their total annihilation.’

Assuming that Arjakovsky is correct and Heidegger DID give mention of the
fragment 53 of Heraclitus, in what way is the Nazi fanatic’s observation that
according to Heraclitus: ‘polemos is the father of everything that is,’ got to
do with his demand for the identification of: “the hidden enemies within the
nation (which everybody in the Germany of the time knew meant primarily the
assimilated Jew) in order to annihilate them totally:”

To anyone but the naive, it is obvious that Heidegger was referring to the
fact that for a certain ancient Greek: *polemos is the father of everything
that is,* in in order to provide some grotesque historical justification for
his call to wipe out German Jewry.

Here is a translation of the fragment; Fragment 53, Hippolytus Ref. IX, 9, 4

*War is the father of all and king of all, and some he shows as gods, others
as men; some he makes slaves, others free* 1. G. S. Kirk, J. E. Raven, M.
Schofield., ‘The Presocratic Philosophers’, A Critical History with a selection
of texts, Second Edition, Cambridge University Press [1995]

Faye:
*Moreover he speaks of identifying the hidden enemies WITHIN [my emphasis]
the nation …*

Jud:
As far as I know *polemos* for the Greeks means *war, battle, to destroy*
[1] between city states or other nations, and does not refer to some internal
civil extermination campaign [a la the Sunnis - Shiites ] to kill as many
so-called *enemies,* just because they happen to be of a different religion.

Now YOUR job is to reconcile the Heraclitus quote, which refers to ancient
external war on the one hand, and Heidegger’s call for mass extermination of
his own German people on the other, and I will be MOST interested to see the
way in which you handle it.

[1] Taylor. W.C. *Greek - English Lexicon* Longman. 1841.

regards,

Jud Evans.
Personal Website: http://evans-experientialism.freewebspac…

Posted on Thursday, November 30th, 2006 at 11:45 am
comment | rss 2.0 | trackback