{"title":"海德格尔与种族","authors":"R. Wolin","doi":"10.1080/0031322X.2022.2077926","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"ABSTRACT In this article, Wolin attempts to clarify a fundamental misunderstanding concerning the philosophical grounds of Heidegger’s support for National Socialism. Much of the previous literature has assumed that Heidegger, as an exponent of Existenzphilosophie, opposed Nazism on epistemological grounds. Heidegger’s defenders maintain that, since the Nazi world-view was predicated on ‘biological racism’, and since Heidegger was an inveterate critic of modern science, an unbridgeable gulf separated his Denkhabitus from the Nazi credo. However, careful scrutiny of the basic tenets of Nazi race doctrine indicates that it had very little in common with ‘scientism’. Instead, race thinking was an inherently ideological construct that emerged in polemical opposition to nineteenth-century positivism. As such, it was saturated with mystical and spiritualist elements. The end result was a confused, yet highly potent, amalgam of German romanticism, fin-de-siècle esotericism (Ariosophy), Aryan supremacism and Bismarckian Machtpolitik. At base, Nazi ‘race science’ was a contradictio in adjecto, a paradigmatic instance of modern political myth. As ‘myth’, it was untethered by the customary empirical and disciplinary constraints of the ‘logic of scientific discovery’. Moreover, Heidegger’s views on race thinking were far from unilaterally negative. In the Black Notebooks II–VI, he praised ‘race [as] a necessary and mediate condition of historical Dasein’. Fundamentally, there are very few qualitative differences between Heidegger’s defence of ‘spiritual racism’ and the understanding of race thinking propagated by Nazi ideologues such as Hans F. K. Günther and Ludwig Ferdinand Clauss. According to the philosopher and Heidegger student Karl Löwith, Heidegger ‘was not merely a distinguished representative of the “German revolution”; he was so in a manner much more radical than Ernst Krieck or Alfred Rosenberg.’","PeriodicalId":46766,"journal":{"name":"Patterns of Prejudice","volume":"56 1","pages":"7 - 39"},"PeriodicalIF":0.5000,"publicationDate":"2022-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"1","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Heidegger and race\",\"authors\":\"R. Wolin\",\"doi\":\"10.1080/0031322X.2022.2077926\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"ABSTRACT In this article, Wolin attempts to clarify a fundamental misunderstanding concerning the philosophical grounds of Heidegger’s support for National Socialism. Much of the previous literature has assumed that Heidegger, as an exponent of Existenzphilosophie, opposed Nazism on epistemological grounds. Heidegger’s defenders maintain that, since the Nazi world-view was predicated on ‘biological racism’, and since Heidegger was an inveterate critic of modern science, an unbridgeable gulf separated his Denkhabitus from the Nazi credo. However, careful scrutiny of the basic tenets of Nazi race doctrine indicates that it had very little in common with ‘scientism’. Instead, race thinking was an inherently ideological construct that emerged in polemical opposition to nineteenth-century positivism. As such, it was saturated with mystical and spiritualist elements. The end result was a confused, yet highly potent, amalgam of German romanticism, fin-de-siècle esotericism (Ariosophy), Aryan supremacism and Bismarckian Machtpolitik. At base, Nazi ‘race science’ was a contradictio in adjecto, a paradigmatic instance of modern political myth. As ‘myth’, it was untethered by the customary empirical and disciplinary constraints of the ‘logic of scientific discovery’. Moreover, Heidegger’s views on race thinking were far from unilaterally negative. In the Black Notebooks II–VI, he praised ‘race [as] a necessary and mediate condition of historical Dasein’. Fundamentally, there are very few qualitative differences between Heidegger’s defence of ‘spiritual racism’ and the understanding of race thinking propagated by Nazi ideologues such as Hans F. K. Günther and Ludwig Ferdinand Clauss. According to the philosopher and Heidegger student Karl Löwith, Heidegger ‘was not merely a distinguished representative of the “German revolution”; he was so in a manner much more radical than Ernst Krieck or Alfred Rosenberg.’\",\"PeriodicalId\":46766,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Patterns of Prejudice\",\"volume\":\"56 1\",\"pages\":\"7 - 39\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.5000,\"publicationDate\":\"2022-01-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"1\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Patterns of Prejudice\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"90\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1080/0031322X.2022.2077926\",\"RegionNum\":2,\"RegionCategory\":\"社会学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q4\",\"JCRName\":\"ETHNIC STUDIES\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Patterns of Prejudice","FirstCategoryId":"90","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/0031322X.2022.2077926","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"ETHNIC STUDIES","Score":null,"Total":0}
ABSTRACT In this article, Wolin attempts to clarify a fundamental misunderstanding concerning the philosophical grounds of Heidegger’s support for National Socialism. Much of the previous literature has assumed that Heidegger, as an exponent of Existenzphilosophie, opposed Nazism on epistemological grounds. Heidegger’s defenders maintain that, since the Nazi world-view was predicated on ‘biological racism’, and since Heidegger was an inveterate critic of modern science, an unbridgeable gulf separated his Denkhabitus from the Nazi credo. However, careful scrutiny of the basic tenets of Nazi race doctrine indicates that it had very little in common with ‘scientism’. Instead, race thinking was an inherently ideological construct that emerged in polemical opposition to nineteenth-century positivism. As such, it was saturated with mystical and spiritualist elements. The end result was a confused, yet highly potent, amalgam of German romanticism, fin-de-siècle esotericism (Ariosophy), Aryan supremacism and Bismarckian Machtpolitik. At base, Nazi ‘race science’ was a contradictio in adjecto, a paradigmatic instance of modern political myth. As ‘myth’, it was untethered by the customary empirical and disciplinary constraints of the ‘logic of scientific discovery’. Moreover, Heidegger’s views on race thinking were far from unilaterally negative. In the Black Notebooks II–VI, he praised ‘race [as] a necessary and mediate condition of historical Dasein’. Fundamentally, there are very few qualitative differences between Heidegger’s defence of ‘spiritual racism’ and the understanding of race thinking propagated by Nazi ideologues such as Hans F. K. Günther and Ludwig Ferdinand Clauss. According to the philosopher and Heidegger student Karl Löwith, Heidegger ‘was not merely a distinguished representative of the “German revolution”; he was so in a manner much more radical than Ernst Krieck or Alfred Rosenberg.’
期刊介绍:
Patterns of Prejudice provides a forum for exploring the historical roots and contemporary varieties of social exclusion and the demonization or stigmatisation of the Other. It probes the language and construction of "race", nation, colour, and ethnicity, as well as the linkages between these categories. It encourages discussion of issues at the top of the public policy agenda, such as asylum, immigration, hate crimes and citizenship. As none of these issues are confined to any one region, Patterns of Prejudice maintains a global optic, at the same time as scrutinizing intensely the history and development of intolerance and chauvinism in the United States and Europe, both East and West.