Martin Heidegger 50 years after his death, between philosophical genius and the Nazi shadow

The German philosopher Martin Heidegger which marks the 50th anniversary of his death, has aroused fascination, due to the radicality of his thought, and repulsion, due to his involvement with Nazism. For some, it was simply a mistake due to political naivety, while for others, it was an intrinsic element of his work. “I urge philosophers of all countries to unite and never again mention Heidegger or speak to other philosophers who defend him,” he stated Karl Poppera key figure of critical rationalism, on the occasion of his ninetieth birthday.

However, calls to “cancel” Heidegger – Popper was not alone – were unsuccessful, and his work continues to be studied in philosophy departments around the world. Nonetheless, the fascination that his thoughts have on many cannot completely dispel the shadow of his Nazi affiliation.

Heidegger was born in Messkirch (southwestern Germany) in 1889 and died in Freiburg, 94 kilometers from his birthplace, on May 26, 1976. He always tried to stay close to his home region. His refuge was a legendary cabin in Todtnauberg, Germany Black Forestwhere he retreated to meditate, read and write.

The oblivion of being and the criticism of technology

“The whole history of Western metaphysics is the history of the forgetting of the question of being“, begins his most significant work, “Being and Time”, published in 1927. Entire generations of philosophy students have recited this phrase by heart, and legions of critics of Heidegger’s thought have considered it absolutely incomprehensible.

The idea was that all Western philosophy, at least since Plato and Aristotle, had took the wrong road focusing on things, on what is, and not on being itself. The real philosophical question, according to him, should be: why do things exist and not, rather, nothingness?

The concentration on what is, on things and not on beinghad led to an excessive veneration of technology and pushed humanity to try to dominate the planet. “The forest becomes a deforestation activity. The mountain a quarry, the river a hydroelectric power station… Nature no longer appears as nature, but as energy, as a resource for technology”, he stated in another of his writings.

The idea of ​​revising the entire Western philosophical tradition – and of go back to the pre-Socratics – was born precisely in a period of multiple crises, a period in which an answer to these crises was incessantly sought and in which the criticism of civilization was launched on various fronts. This critique of civilization led many to sympathize with National Socialism and embrace barbarism; Heidegger, who had already voted for the Nazis in 1931 and joined the party in 1933, was a prime example.

However, fears related to various technological developments, from nuclear energy to artificial intelligence, give a certain relevance to this reflection, as noted, among others, by the German writer Harald Stutte in an article for the RND group.

Opportunism, naivety or conviction?

Heidegger’s defenders, as Hans-Georg Gadamerone of his most eminent disciples, tend to regard his membership of the Nazi Party – and his active involvement as rector of the University of Freiburg between 1933 and 1934 – as a sign of political naivety. Others interpret it as an act of opportunism. And there are also those, like Theodor W. Adorno, who see a direct link between Nazi militancy and Heidegger’s thought.

A more benevolent interpretation considers that his involvement lasted only a year, although Heidegger remained a member of the party until the end of the war. However, after the publication of the so-called Black notebooksa series of philosophical diaries, in 2014, it became clear to many that Heidegger’s closeness to Nazism was much stronger than many had believed or wanted to believe.

A key testimony regarding the Heidegger phenomenon was released shortly before his death by the Jewish philosopher Hans Jonaswho stated that, with his former teacher’s embrace of Nazism, he had lost faith in the power of philosophy, which had failed to protect one of the greatest philosophers of the 20th century from succumbing to barbarism.