Since the seminal 1955 habilitation by Heidegger's pupil, Walter Schulz, it has become an open secret that Schelling's philosophy, more than that of any of the other German Idealists, is an immediate antecedent to Heidegger's thought. For this reason, it is all the more fascinating that to this day research is still lopsidedly concerned with the interpretation of Heidegger's reading of Schelling's Freedom Essay and that a thorough and overarching investigation into the idealistic inheritance of Martin Heidegger's thought remains wanting. (...) The same applies to the debates that Heidegger's students began in the twentieth century. The traditions of modern nature ethics and the criticism of technology, which derive from Schelling, were interpreted and mediated through Heidegger to his students Hans Jonas, Hannah Arendt, and Günther Anders. This essay attempts to delineate some of the basic features of a more bilateral or dialogical relationship between these two philosophers and to more fully appreciate Heidegger's relationship to German Idealism in general and Schelling in particular. (shrink)

According to Jacques Derrida, there is a différance – his infamous mis-spelling of the French différence – that ‘has no name in our language’ (‘Différance’, in Margins of Philosophy); its name is not différance, and it is not just nameless but ‘unnameable’. ‘The a of différance’, he also tells us, ‘remains silent, secret and discreet as a tomb’. My essay, which is haunted throughout by Derrida, seeks to address the following question: if the a of différance is like a tomb, (...) then who or what died? To Kzomil. (shrink)

Martin Heidegger and Ernst Jünger rightly count among the signal examples of intellectual complicity with National Socialism. But after supporting the National Socialist movement in its early years, they both withdrew from political activism during the 1930s and considered themselves to be in “inner emigration” thereafter. How did they react to the end of National Socialism, to the Allied occupation and finally to the foundation of the Federal Republic of Germany in 1949? Did they abandon their stance of seclusion and (...) engage once more with political issues? Or did they persist in their withdrawal from the political sphere? In analyzing the intellectual relationship of Heidegger and Jünger after 1945, the article reevaluates the assumption of a “deradicalization” of German conservatism after the Second World War by showing that Heidegger's and Jünger's postwar positions were no less radical than their earlier thought, although their attitude towards the political sphere changed fundamentally. (shrink)

The importance of education: In conversation with Martin Heidegger and Hannah Arendt. The text is a lecture delivered in German at Augsburg University in 2018. Its aim was to share with German colleagues from the Faculty of Philosophy and Social Sciences the research whose effect was the publication of Hannah Arendt and Martin Heidegger. Philosophy, modernity and education. The thesis of this lecture is that Arendt’s answer to Heidegger’s philosophy, intelligible only within the wide context of both thinkers’ struggles with (...) the philosophical tradition of the West, also opens up a new horizon of conceptualizing the relationship between philosophy and education. This enterprise begins with a critical reconstruction of concepts that traditionally connected education to philosophy. Thereafter, it is a development of Arendt’s thesis of the broken thread of tradition, situated in the wider context of Heideggerian philosophy and his entanglement with Nazism, and consequently, it questions the traditional relationship between philosophy and education. In the final parts of this book returns the problem of dialogue between philosophy, thinking, and university education in times whose political and ethical framework is no longer determined by the continuity of tradition, but the caesura of 20th‑century totalitarianism. (shrink)

El artículo expone la crítica de Heidegger a la idea del pacto social de Rousseau, mostrando cómo ella conduce al pensador alemán a la afirmación de la facticidad por encima de la universalidad. Esta derivación explica por qué Heidegger cayó en el nacionalismo, y por qué simpatizó con el nazismo, alejándose con ello de los propósitos universalistas que conlleva toda filosofía. This article puts forward Heidegger's criticism of Rousseau's idea of the Social Contract and shows how it leads the German (...) thinker to affirm prevalence of facticity over universalism. This drift helps to explain why Heidegger fell into nationalism and why he sympathised with Nazi politics, moving away from the universalist purposes entailed by every philosophy. (shrink)