Cum unii dintre cititorii care poposesc pe acest blog nu au răgazul de a călători prin bibliografia problemelor atinse aici, le ofer mai jos câteva excerpte în original, spre a lua pulsul discuțiilor mai recente la temă (O.P.).

„I love it when Heidegger gets drubbed for the fact that he was a great big Nazi. And I love watching people who’ve dedicated much of their life’s work to Heidegger or to his disciples, who also believe in their bones that they are in some deep and fundamental sense in the vanguard in the fight against Nazism, explain the contradiction” (Jonah Goldberg, „Heil Heidegger!”, în The Corner, 22 octombrie 2009).

„Faye agrees that it was possible, even in the wake of Farias’s and Ott’s work, «with a lot of self-delusion, to separate the man from the work.» He asserts it’s no longer possible, since scholars can now access «nearly all the courses» that Heidegger taught in the 1930s. According to Faye, «we witness, in the courses and seminars that are ostensibly presented as ‘philosophical,’ a progressive dissolving of the human being, whose individual worth is expressly denied, into a community of people rooted in the land and united by blood.» The unpublished seminar of 1933-34 identifies the people with a «community of biological stock and race. … Thus, through Heidegger’s teaching, the racial conceptions of Nazism enter philosophy.»

The «reality of Nazism,» asserts Faye, inspired Heidegger’s works «in their entirety and nourished them at the root level.» He provides evidence of Heidegger’s «intensity» of commitment to Hitler, his constant use of «the words most operative among the National Socialists,» such as «combat» (Kampf), «sacrifice» (Opfer) and völkisch (which Faye states has a strong anti-Semitic connotation). He also cites Heidegger’s use of epithets against professors such as the philologist Eduard Fraenkel («the Jew Fraenkel») and his fervid dislike for «the growing Jewification» that threatens «German spiritual life,» mirroring Hitler’s discourse in Mein Kampf about «Jewified universities».” (…)

„We must acknowledge,” Faye says in one fierce conclusion, „that an author who has espoused the foundations of Nazism cannot be considered a philosopher.” Finally, he reiterates his opposition to the Heidegger Industry: „If his writings continue to proliferate without our being able to stop this intrusion of Nazism into human education, how can we not expect them to lead to yet another translation into facts and acts, from which this time humanity might not be able to recover?”

His influence will end only when they, and the broader world of intellectuals, recognize that scholarly evidence fingers the scowling proprietor of Heidegger’s hut as a buffoon produced by German philosophy’s mystical tradition. He should be the butt of jokes, not the subject of dissertations.” (Carlin Romano, „Heil Heidegger!”, în The Chronicle of Higher Education, 18 octombrie 2009)

„Heidegger was critical not only of modern industrialism and its destruction of the environment but of modern social institutions as well, including the American and French Revolutions that had promulgated the very human rights I regarded as such important achievements. The same fascist ideology responsible for Auschwitz, I discovered, had also provided the justification in the early 1930s for the most sweeping environmental legislation the world had ever seen. As a famous Nazi slogan put it, “pure land” and “pure blood” went hand in hand” (Michael E. Zimmerman, „My Way to Integral Thinking. An integral ecologist’s personal and philosophical confrontation with modernity” în EnlightenNext Magazine, 16 noiembrie 2009, cu un articol introductiv de Tom Huston).