Gedachtes Wohnen: Heidegger and cultural geography

T. Paddock
{"title":"Gedachtes Wohnen: Heidegger and cultural geography","authors":"T. Paddock","doi":"10.1080/1090377042000285435","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Few figures arouse the kind of passions both for and against as those that are associated with Martin Heidegger do. Perhaps the most important philosopher of the twentieth century (with apologies to Wittgenstein), Heidegger will always be associated with National Socialism. Heidegger the man will forever challenge Heidegger the philosopher, even though the former has led the defense of the latter by trying to distance himself from National Socialism. His critics have not let this claim go unchallenged: Victor Farı́as’ Heidegger and Nazism leads the charge against the philosopher’s revisionist history. Farı́as’ controversial work launched a fierce debate in France among French Heideggerians. Certainly, the link between Heidegger’s thought and his adherence to National Socialism cannot be disputed. Recently, Heidegger’s post-war works, especially those dealing with the impact of technology, have received closer attention. Samuel Weber’s Mass Mediauras: Form, Technics, Media, Miguel de Beistegui’s Heidegger and the Political: Dystopias, and Michael Zimmerman’s Heidegger’s Confrontation with Modernity are just three works that explore themes prominent in Heidegger’s later works. Ironically, there has been a revival of interest on the left from environmentalists who are interested in Heidegger’s view of the relation between man and technology and the earth. This article will examine two of Heidegger’s essays that have received comparatively little attention and that have implications for environmental thought and reveal, in my view, intellectual affinities to National Socialist thought that Heidegger either did not realize or simply chose to ignore. In two essays written during the 1950s, “Das Ding” (The Thing), and “Bauen Wohnen Denken” (Building Dwelling Thinking), Heidegger develops his ideas of space and the human relationship to space. Most peculiar is his view, expressed in “The Thing,” that the empty space inside a jug is what actually defined the jug as a jug, not the sides, bottom, or handles of the said container. Heidegger makes a distinction between two kinds of space. The first is space as extension, which can be best represented as a mathematical conception of space (e.g., geometry). The second view is somewhat trickier to nail down. It does not consider space as an abstract entity but as","PeriodicalId":431617,"journal":{"name":"Philosophy & Geography","volume":"12 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2004-08-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"7","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Philosophy & Geography","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/1090377042000285435","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 7

Abstract

Few figures arouse the kind of passions both for and against as those that are associated with Martin Heidegger do. Perhaps the most important philosopher of the twentieth century (with apologies to Wittgenstein), Heidegger will always be associated with National Socialism. Heidegger the man will forever challenge Heidegger the philosopher, even though the former has led the defense of the latter by trying to distance himself from National Socialism. His critics have not let this claim go unchallenged: Victor Farı́as’ Heidegger and Nazism leads the charge against the philosopher’s revisionist history. Farı́as’ controversial work launched a fierce debate in France among French Heideggerians. Certainly, the link between Heidegger’s thought and his adherence to National Socialism cannot be disputed. Recently, Heidegger’s post-war works, especially those dealing with the impact of technology, have received closer attention. Samuel Weber’s Mass Mediauras: Form, Technics, Media, Miguel de Beistegui’s Heidegger and the Political: Dystopias, and Michael Zimmerman’s Heidegger’s Confrontation with Modernity are just three works that explore themes prominent in Heidegger’s later works. Ironically, there has been a revival of interest on the left from environmentalists who are interested in Heidegger’s view of the relation between man and technology and the earth. This article will examine two of Heidegger’s essays that have received comparatively little attention and that have implications for environmental thought and reveal, in my view, intellectual affinities to National Socialist thought that Heidegger either did not realize or simply chose to ignore. In two essays written during the 1950s, “Das Ding” (The Thing), and “Bauen Wohnen Denken” (Building Dwelling Thinking), Heidegger develops his ideas of space and the human relationship to space. Most peculiar is his view, expressed in “The Thing,” that the empty space inside a jug is what actually defined the jug as a jug, not the sides, bottom, or handles of the said container. Heidegger makes a distinction between two kinds of space. The first is space as extension, which can be best represented as a mathematical conception of space (e.g., geometry). The second view is somewhat trickier to nail down. It does not consider space as an abstract entity but as
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
《海德格尔与文化地理学》
很少有人物能像那些与马丁·海德格尔有关的人那样,既支持又反对。也许是二十世纪最重要的哲学家(向维特根斯坦道歉),海德格尔将永远与国家社会主义联系在一起。作为人的海德格尔将永远挑战作为哲学家的海德格尔,尽管前者试图与国家社会主义划清界限,从而带头为后者辩护。他的批评者并没有让这一说法不受质疑:维克多·法尔比(Victor farkin)的“海德格尔和纳粹主义”领导了对哲学家修正主义历史的指控。法尔达的争议性作品在法国海德格尔学派中引发了激烈的争论。当然,海德格尔的思想与他对国家社会主义的坚持之间的联系是无可争议的。最近,海德格尔的战后作品,特别是那些处理技术影响的作品,受到了更密切的关注。塞缪尔·韦伯的《大众媒介:形式、技术、媒介》、米格尔·德·贝斯特吉的《海德格尔与政治:反乌托邦》和迈克尔·齐默尔曼的《海德格尔与现代性的对抗》只是三部探讨海德格尔后期作品中突出主题的作品。具有讽刺意味的是,左派环保主义者对海德格尔关于人、技术和地球之间关系的观点感兴趣。本文将考察海德格尔的两篇文章,这两篇文章受到的关注相对较少,但对环境思想有影响,在我看来,它们揭示了海德格尔没有意识到或只是选择忽视的与国家社会主义思想的智力联系。在20世纪50年代写的两篇文章《物》(Das Ding)和《建筑居住思维》(Bauen Wohnen Denken)中,海德格尔发展了他关于空间和人与空间关系的观点。最奇特的是他在《物》(The Thing)一书中表达的观点,即壶内的空空间,而不是壶的侧面、底部或把手,才是真正将壶定义为壶的原因。海德格尔对两种空间进行了区分。第一个是空间的扩展,它可以最好地表示为空间的数学概念(例如,几何)。第二种观点有点难以确定。它不认为空间是一个抽象的实体,而是
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
The ethics of metropolitan growth: A framework A vindication of the rights of brutes The self-fulfilling prophecies and global inequality Second thoughts on Gedachtes Wohnen In defense of homology and history: A response to Allen
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1