From: onstott@a.cs.okstate.edu (ONSTOTT CHARLES OR)
Subject: Re: Heidegger, Hitler, Racism and logic.
Organization: Oklahoma State University, Computer Science, Stillwater
Date: Sun, 23 Aug 92 22:05:39 GMT

In article <Bt6ozw.8o2@brunel.ac.uk> Christopher.Carne@brunel.ac.uk (Christopher J Carne) writes:
>I'm a bit hesitant to invoke a Derridean response to this subject given that
>his stuff on Paul de Man's role as a Nazi collaborator has been somewhat
>Nietzsche and Nazism might be enlightening.
>
>Derrida's intention in this paper is to map out how decouncstruction
>s an ethical force able to counter (or at least to document) the
>ways in which (mis)readings of texts are involved in establishing
>power calims.
>
>So where does all this get us with Heidegger? Well, if nothing else it
>suggests that the argument must be more than the:
>
>1. Heidegger's name guarantees readings.
>   Heidegger was a Nazi.
>   All readings of Heidegger then involve the reinforcement of
>   Nazi ideology.
>
>2. Heidegger's name does not gaurantee menaings
>   Heidegger was (or at least might have been occassionally) a Nazi.
>   OUr readings of Heidegger have no connection with his Nazism.
>
>It seems to me that these positions are held fpr the purpose of 
>legitimising or delitimising readings of Heidegger and that responsibility
>must be taken for either reading. Of course this statement goes for my
>readings of Derrida, Heidegger and the net postings in this thread. In any case
>we should reject the idea that any reading of Heidegger is innocent. It is
>not the ethics of Heidegger the man that are at stake, but the ethics of
>the Heideggerian texts, the ethics of our reading of that texts and the
>ethics of how we account for our readings.  
>

  You raise some very important points here.  First of all, I am
convienced that the large recation against Heidegger's writing based
on his "nazism" is simply a way to "push Heidegger" under the rug.
Heidegger presents a threat to the traditional metaphyscial philosophy.
The problem, and the question never posed, is if ethics is of such
critical concern in our reading of Heidegger, so much that we would attempt
to show that Heidegger's writings prove a case for Nazism(which is
debatable), then why do we still study Aristotle whose political 
philosophy requires slavery?  In fact, Aristotle himself draws upon
his own ontology to support the political need for slavery.  Yet, 
we still consider him who studies Aristotle a "classical scholar" who
is not led astray unlike he who studies the "nazistic" writings of
Heidegger.  This is clearly bigotry.  

>
>Chris Carne,
>Centre for Research into Innovation, Culture and Technology [CRICT],
>Brunel University,
>Uxbridge [Most certainly not to be confused with *Oxbridge*]
>Middx.
>UK

BCnya,
  Charles O. Onstott, III

---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Charles O. Onstott, III       Account at Oklahoma State University for summer
Graduate Student in Religious Studies
University of Chicago                             (onstott@a.cs.okstate.edu)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Newsgroups: sci.philosophy.meta