gedavis.com home page button heidegger studies
 
        Heidegger and reading political times
endeavoring to think well about marginality
----------March 2016
        gary e. davis

---
     
     


Our fascination with the German 1930s may be somewhat perverse, but living through it—surviving those times as a German philosopher after WWI, making a career during the Weimar years, being complexly inspired by emancipatory interest, and envisioning university leadership for economic recovery, then surviving actuality in whatever ethical way would allow him to stay free to teach—is altogether beyond a ready horizon of understanding. Those were times whose lived horizon is excluded from our understanding, because Heidegger’s hours and days and years, unspoken understandings, interactions, confidences, and intimacies are almost entirely undocumented, and sparse documentation lacks context, sometimes because it’s none of our business (private life), never anticipated to be evaluated. Second-hand opinion is not documentation of anything.

Writing after the horror, then insisting that such writing should be the reader’s window on earlier work (including Heidegger’s overt framing of his earlier work) calls for taking him to heart in his claims about what he was doing (as local hopes were painfully betrayed by distant deception).

Mapping into his works one’s need for easy cohering of a graspable authorship betrays the hermeneutical (protean) character of action which is philosophically integral to situated and other-oriented perception (and such mapping doesn’t provide for any reconciled consequentialism about presumed behavior that is, I would argue, likely ethical).

Thinking with Heidegger for Our times, in our Time, is what Heidegger intended, not thinking about Heidegger in his own times, unless that’s done relative to the former (what matters) and exemplifies a hermeneutical vigilance like what his own work during those times displays.  

So, at this time (November 2015) the emptiness below of links to sections 1, 2, and 5 symbolizes a huge scale of relevant Time (historicity in historicality) that is missing in tunnel vision toward a few years of Heidegger’s career. I’ve tried to expediently show (thus, being unduly dense) how fairness to Time may be read into a few moments of his life.


getting historiographical

My long blog posting about Heidegger and educational leadership (item 3.1 below)—his aspiring to enable authentic community—has been segmented offline into more topics (not adding more there; rather, for here later) that will be amplified as separate pages of focus, and linked below. Material from my “Heidegger” Facebook Page has been listed below in apt sequence (some anticipates item 3.1, so is nearly redundant here—but not entirely). The scale of this project is hardly suggested by what’s listed (except 3.1). New foci below will have benefitted from lively disagreement I’ve had with some paranoid Heidegger scholars (e.g., items 4.2, and 4.3 below). Altogether, I’ll continue to put some silly notions to rest in terms of how Heidegger understands (hermeneutically and phenomenologically) [re-]appropriative work (and doing sketches for a supplementary critique of ideology, re: the Considerations volumes, i.e., the so-called “black notebooks.”)

I’m unsure about timeline for completing this project online, because it’s marginal to my current interests, part of appropriating a past. But this page will be the main project page for considerations of Heidegger’s work relative to journalistic interest; it’s the permanent URL. A topic now-and-then may gain a link, which I’ll note, as always, at my home page space (top left) for “new in site.”

   
  August 24, 2014
  prologue: being in liminality
    being in Time: between a sidewalk and a high path. Liminality is the between of two stances or modes of being such that the two with their between is a betweenness of being there. For example, private and public, self and personality (teacher, counselor, parent, etc.)—yet one’s self is the temporal cohering through the days of all modes of oneself in being present with others. Differently is the betweenness of two persons in interaction, which is like the liminality of a text between authorship and reader. Liminality of “our” communicative situation is between us as the alive betweenness (like a story that inhabits one).
 
  date
  1 being german in the turn of a century
    item
 
  date
  2 weimar time
    item
 
  September 26, 2013
  3 striving for great renewal of university leadership
   

1 | Heidegger and reading political times | Sept. 2013
2 | Why Do I Stay in the Provinces?" | M.H., 1934
3 | What is being German?: 1934-35 | May 2014 translation of Heidegger’s course on Hölderlin

 
  March 9, 2016
  4 surviving nazism
    This is the first area of my project here that warrants a page of its own, apart from component postings for this area.
 
  date
  5 surviving horror
    whom was entitled to speak?
 
  January 2016
  6 for fair flourishing
   

1 | fairness—right | Nov. 2014 photo
2 | to malicious readers
| Oct. 2013
3 | framing Heidegger is just doing business | Oct. 2013
4 | one’s resistance to dwelling with Heidegger | Jan. 2016


 
  date
  7 “Heidegger” in america
    item
 

 

 

 
Be fair. © 2017, g. e. davis.