Heidegger's Children : Hannah Arendt, Karl Lowith, Hans Jonas, and Herbert Marcuse

Rating:
Summary: Insightful
Review: Considering the current emphasis on Martin Heidegger and his thought during the last decade, it is more than a bit surprising this book wasn't written sooner. Besides being one of the most influential philosophers of the twentieth century, Heidegger was also a university professor, and quite a charismatic one at that. Living and teaching in Weimar Germany, it is not surprising, then, that many of his best students were Jews. And if we were to, say, pick a 'cream-of-the-crop' among those Jews, the names of Hannah Arendt, Karl Lowith, Hans Jonas and Herbert Marcuse would easily spring to mind.

It is interesting to note that none of the above were practising Jews; rather they saw themselves as assimilated and cosmopolitan in outlook. Ironically it would be their teacher, one of the greatest existentialist philosophers, who drove home to them the inauthenticity of their position when he dedicated himself to National Socialism. By abandoning them he turned his back on them and forced them to face their Jewishness, no longer as a metaphysical question, but in the harsh light of ontological reality, as an important component of their social being. Despite religious assimilation, they were still outcasts, only this time by basis of their racial identity - their very being.

Though abandoned by their mentor, each of Heidegger's students would go on to make a mark in the field of philosophy. In the chapters concerning their careers Wolin takes the time to carefully not their contribution to phliosophy and their attachments to their former teacher. Each discourse is concise and to the point, often giving the reader important insights into the relationship between student and teacher in ways not directly observable. With Arendt, this is easy due to the mass of scholarship, some excellent, some on the level of a supermarket tabloid. With a thinker such as Jonas, whose public career is not so well known, such insights are most welcome. I remember Jonas as a teacher and remember quite well his relationship with Heidegger. Although he would criticize his mentor in the strongest possible terms, when traveling to Europe he would still be careful to make the pilgrimage to the Black Forest to pay homage to the old man. Jonas made his mark both as an expert on Gnostic philosophy and as a philosopher of the environment, his works helping to build the basis of Germany's Green Party.

Lowith developed a love-hate relationship with his former teacher, becoming one of Heidegger's most insightful critics, and yet refusing to pull the trigger. One should not stop reading Heidegger; but one should refrain from reading him so naively. Perheps it was Heidegger's own latent, and naive, romanticism that led him from a critique of nihilism into the arms of totalitarian philosophy.

Marcuse is the strrangest case yet, if we view he and his teacher merely from the outside. It would appear Marcuse made the strongest reaction of all to his former teacher, by Msarcuse incorporated more of his teacher's thought into his own than any of the others. Compare Marcuse's "One Dimensional Man" with Heidegger's "Letter on Technology." Marcuse's retreat into the pseudo-rationalism of Marx to escape the demons of nihilism strangely mirrors Heidegger's own retreat into National Socialism for the same reason. Taking Spengler at his word, Marcuse accepted the decline and retreated into a new world order of sorts while Heidegger fought Spengler's prognosis by adopting the standards of what he saw as the defence of civilization in the Swatstika.

Wolin wraps all this into 269 tightly constructed pages. Not a wasted word or thought. In other words, an excellent and entertaining introduction into a world of thought not usually considered. Highly recommended.

Rating:
Summary: Wherefore loyalty?
Review: The controversy over Heidegger is likely to continue into future generations. One of the great intellectuals of the twentieth century, he blotted his copybook (so to speak) by becoming one of the leading intellectuals of the National-Socialist movement in Germany in the 1930s, changing from a professor who attracted the best and brightest of students from all over Europe to one of the more rigid and dogmatic defenders of Nazi ideals, even at the expense of colleagues, students and friends. Even after the destruction of Germany, Heidegger remained unrepentent about his history and views.

This book, while a stand-alone text, represents the conclusion of a multi-volume task to examine Heidegger's work and intellectual legacy. The first two texts, 'The Politics of Being' and 'The Heidegger Controversy', represented an attempt to look both the politics and the philosophy of Heidegger -- the latter book having created a bit of a fire-storm due to the inclusion of an article by Derrida, who objected to the inclusion.

One of the more bizarre twists in the tale of Heidegger, however, was in the continuing intellectual development of his legacy among his Jewish students. Many of the top students in Heidegger's following in the 1920s and early 1930s were Jewish, and they would ultimately have to reconcile their associations and attachments to Heidegger (the person and the philosophical ideas) in response or reaction to his actions. Richard Wolin's text looks specifically at four key figures: Hannah Arendt, Karl Lowith, Hans Jonas and Herbert Marcuse.

All of these four thinkers, acclaimed in their own rights, considered themselves more assimilated Germans than Jews; however, this was not the thinking of the powers-that-were in the 1930s/40s Germany. Each would have to, in the course of careers including academia and writing, have to reconcile to the past idolisation of Heidegger. Germany was, after all, the centre of culture, a nation of writers and thinkers, all to go horribly mad. Wolin's introductory chapter sets a context -- the real problem for Heidegger's students was to determine whether or not there was something integral, something necessary in the connection between the political totalitarian and vicious National-Socialism and Heidegger's existentialist ideas. Wolin gives a brief overview of the development of philosophy to existentialism. In the second chapter, Wolin gives a brief history of German-Jewish relationships, and looks to the points of divergence that culminated in holocaust.

Wolin devotes a chapter to each of the key 'children'. Hannah Arendt was not only Heidegger's student, but also carried on an affair with him, making Heidegger's betrayal personal as well as political. Arendt's problem was not just a 'Heidegger problem', but also a 'Jewish problem', in the sense of her writing allowing that the line between victim and villain was not as distinct as might be believed. Karl Lowith is less well known outside the German speaking world, but his work in philosophy has made him a significant figure, particularly in examining the history of philosophical development -- this development is very much in line with much of Heidegger's methodology, despite the obvious problem that such development leads to a Heidegger. Hans Jonas did confront Heidegger's past openly and publically, in lecture format no less, causing a shift from theological Heideggerian developments such that the trend fell quickly from vogue. Herbert Marcuse is perhaps the most interesting development among Heidegger's children, having been more of an interested pupil rather than proto-disciple; Marcuse combined Heideggerian influences into a general Marxist framework.

In the final chapters, Wolin looks at the overall synthesis and development of these ideas, the post-war German and European intellectual experience, and the problems and strengths that continue from Heidegger's primary work, 'Being and Time". In the conclusion, Wolin states that while it is hard to find better histories of philosophy than those produced by Heidegger and his students, they make the mistakes of confusing philosophy and history, and this can also explain part of Heidegger's general political trouble.

There are a few issues -- Wolin is occasionally choppy, and sometimes repetitious needlessly. Also, Wolin's lack of inclusion of a few key figures (Strauss comes to mind here) leaves something to be desired. However, the construction with the four figures here is well-done and thorough. This is a fascinating text, highlighting a lesser-known but strangely pervasive strand in intellectual history, and helps to highlight difficulties and opportunities in the continuing development out of the work of Heidegger.

Rating:
Summary: Wherefore loyalty?
Review: The controversy over Heidegger is likely to continue into future generations. One of the great intellectuals of the twentieth century, he blotted his copybook (so to speak) by becoming one of the leading intellectuals of the National-Socialist movement in Germany in the 1930s, changing from a professor who attracted the best and brightest of students from all over Europe to one of the more rigid and dogmatic defenders of Nazi ideals, even at the expense of colleagues, students and friends. Even after the destruction of Germany, Heidegger remained unrepentent about his history and views.

This book, while a stand-alone text, represents the conclusion of a multi-volume task to examine Heidegger's work and intellectual legacy. The first two texts, 'The Politics of Being' and 'The Heidegger Controversy', represented an attempt to look both the politics and the philosophy of Heidegger -- the latter book having created a bit of a fire-storm due to the inclusion of an article by Derrida, who objected to the inclusion.

One of the more bizarre twists in the tale of Heidegger, however, was in the continuing intellectual development of his legacy among his Jewish students. Many of the top students in Heidegger's following in the 1920s and early 1930s were Jewish, and they would ultimately have to reconcile their associations and attachments to Heidegger (the person and the philosophical ideas) in response or reaction to his actions. Richard Wolin's text looks specifically at four key figures: Hannah Arendt, Karl Lowith, Hans Jonas and Herbert Marcuse.

All of these four thinkers, acclaimed in their own rights, considered themselves more assimilated Germans than Jews; however, this was not the thinking of the powers-that-were in the 1930s/40s Germany. Each would have to, in the course of careers including academia and writing, have to reconcile to the past idolisation of Heidegger. Germany was, after all, the centre of culture, a nation of writers and thinkers, all to go horribly mad. Wolin's introductory chapter sets a context -- the real problem for Heidegger's students was to determine whether or not there was something integral, something necessary in the connection between the political totalitarian and vicious National-Socialism and Heidegger's existentialist ideas. Wolin gives a brief overview of the development of philosophy to existentialism. In the second chapter, Wolin gives a brief history of German-Jewish relationships, and looks to the points of divergence that culminated in holocaust.

Wolin devotes a chapter to each of the key 'children'. Hannah Arendt was not only Heidegger's student, but also carried on an affair with him, making Heidegger's betrayal personal as well as political. Arendt's problem was not just a 'Heidegger problem', but also a 'Jewish problem', in the sense of her writing allowing that the line between victim and villain was not as distinct as might be believed. Karl Lowith is less well known outside the German speaking world, but his work in philosophy has made him a significant figure, particularly in examining the history of philosophical development -- this development is very much in line with much of Heidegger's methodology, despite the obvious problem that such development leads to a Heidegger. Hans Jonas did confront Heidegger's past openly and publically, in lecture format no less, causing a shift from theological Heideggerian developments such that the trend fell quickly from vogue. Herbert Marcuse is perhaps the most interesting development among Heidegger's children, having been more of an interested pupil rather than proto-disciple; Marcuse combined Heideggerian influences into a general Marxist framework.

In the final chapters, Wolin looks at the overall synthesis and development of these ideas, the post-war German and European intellectual experience, and the problems and strengths that continue from Heidegger's primary work, 'Being and Time". In the conclusion, Wolin states that while it is hard to find better histories of philosophy than those produced by Heidegger and his students, they make the mistakes of confusing philosophy and history, and this can also explain part of Heidegger's general political trouble.

There are a few issues -- Wolin is occasionally choppy, and sometimes repetitious needlessly. Also, Wolin's lack of inclusion of a few key figures (Strauss comes to mind here) leaves something to be desired. However, the construction with the four figures here is well-done and thorough. This is a fascinating text, highlighting a lesser-known but strangely pervasive strand in intellectual history, and helps to highlight difficulties and opportunities in the continuing development out of the work of Heidegger.

Rating:
Summary: Heidegger's Children
Review: Wolin appears to be a decent philospher and researcher, but
he needs to learn how to write. Herky jerky style and skewed syntax make this one an almost impossible read. Sorry folks, but
I have to rate this one as unintelligable garble.

Rating:
Summary: Heidegger's Children
Review: Wolin appears to be a decent philospher and researcher, but
he needs to learn how to write. Herky jerky style and skewed syntax make this one an almost impossible read. Sorry folks, but
I have to rate this one as unintelligable garble.

Rating:
Summary: Wolin, Gossip Columnist to the Philosophers
Review: You have to give Wolin credit for choosing a very deserving topic, and the relationship of Heidegger to his many disciples, and especially his Jewish disciples, is worthy of a big fat book. This is not that book. First, he leaves out Leo Strauss, arguably the most interesting case among Heidegger's Jewish students, and the one with the most critical stance towards his teacher. Second, Wolin's ignores the basic fact that the antimodern views of "Heidegger's children" were shared by many in Weimar Germany who never studied with Heidegger. Marcuse, Arendt, etc. were more children of their time and place than of Heidegger.

Wolin also attributes to Heidegger an antimodernism that his philosophy itself dismantles. The real story of Heidegger's Nazism is not how much his philosophy accomodated Nazism but how little mind the opportunistic philosopher paid his own philosophy when the party called. Wolin gives Heidegger more credit for being principled than he deserves. Wolin also pays too much attention to deciphering Heidegger's opinions from his biography and too little time actually reading Heidegger. In fact, at no point in the book does Wolin betray ever having read Being and Time.

Let us take one example of Wolin's woeful prosecutorial method. He refers to some pamphlets that Heidegger wrote as a student for a Catholic, antimodern publisher. In the pamphlets, Wolin reports, Heidegger valorizes reason and strict rationality above the modern devotion to the self, an unsurprising argument coming from a seminary student. Wolin then draws a straight line from that antimodern Catholic upbringing to Heidegger's later devotion for the Fuhrer. This is perhaps the first time that Thomas Aquinas has ever being accused of encouraging Nazism.

One of the most interesting things about Heidegger's students is that they reached such a broad audience in America. Marcuse and friends were the stars of a worldwide youth movement despite having thick German accents. The commanded such a large audience in part because they were so much more impressive than their colleagues. Wolin does not give sufficient weight to the possibility that Heidegger's students may have learned something worthwhile from their teacher. Wolin is too busy contorting himself into fits of indignant censure.