Heidegger: Thinking the Unthinkable
German philosopher Martin Heidegger addressed the central question of human existence full on, by examining how human self-awareness depends on concepts of time and death. His preoccupation with ontology – the form of metaphysical inquiry concerned with the study of existence itself – dominated his work. The central idea of his complex Sein und Zeit (Being and Time) (1927) could be summed up in the phrase ‘being is’.
Man had to ask himself ‘what is it to be?’ and only by doing this, and standing back from absorption into objects and other distractions, could he actually exist. For Heidegger, the constant fear of death and the anxieties of life helped man to ask this central question – the mystery of life was intimately linked to the individual’s confrontation and consideration of the temporary nature of their own existence.
Heidegger also felt that art, like language, was important evidence of existence, something which was a real existence rather than a mere recreation of reality. He opposed technology, which he believed caused alienation, and advocated a return to an agrarian economy in which the individual had a greater role. For many Heidegger’s reputation is tainted by his association with Nazism in 1930’s Germany; he actively supported Adolf Hitler during the dictator’s first years in power and after World War II he was banned by the Allies from teaching and publishing for five years.
Despite this, his work has been widely influential, especially on the thought of twentieth century philosophical giants such as Sartre, Lacan and Derrida. (Excerpt from bbc.co.uk)
Watch the full documentary now
thanks for digging out these great docos. A shame google is shutting down their upload service in a few months. Will have to find another reliable service.
cheers.
Always enjoy pondering the mysteries of the universe…
It’s a shame that there isn’t really anything about his ideas, in fact there is basically only one paragraph about it about 15 minutes in, the rest is just “nazi this, nazi that, never forgive, total nazi, bad man don’t even bother looking into what he wrote, nazi nazi nazi”
Sure it’s a fairly important part of who he was, and should be mentioned, but not for 47 of the 49 minutes.
I think the thing about all these movies is that it is tough to make a film documentary about a particular philosopher’s philosophy and make it interesting. What you don’t often get with books by these philosophers are their backgrounds, which can often be almost as important as what they write. Watch the movie, but if you want to learn about the philosophy itself, read some books.
As Rorty well puts it there are plenty of cases of bad men writing great books. The only real question for me is: Is Heidegger’s philosophy in any way Fascist? The documentary mentions some things in relation to this question but it’s rather vague. I studied Heidegger quite a while ago and was hoping for more insight into his philosophy. However this docu was a little light in that respect.
I think the movie does what it purports to do. Why is he both admired and reviled? What sort of man was he? How did he become aligned with the Nazi movement and to what extent should his Nazi involvement detract from his status of a thinker? You have to know who the man was if you want to understand what he wrote and its purpose. Yes, it may not be the best illustration of the man, but it is said within the time allotted; better to read about him, of course. Good to hear other sides, but why let others do the work for you?
I completely agree with Vec’s point, I think that the documentary spent most of the time talking about his relation with Fascism. But I also think that Tamara Novak reasonably argues that the documentary did what it promised: to answer why he was both admired and reviled.
However I think the documentary could have been improved if it changed its thesis slightly so that it leaves enough room to distribute its focus on his notorious political life and his profound philosophical life.
I also agree with Tamara and Paul’s point of view. the documentary does not aim at reconstructing an in-depth analysis of Heidegger’s ideas. However it gives us a nice summary of the circumstances and facts. It’s an enjoyable documentary to watch, done with a lot of objectivity in my view.
Can we admire the works of somebody and in the same time despise the same person? It is what at the end should be found. My grandfather was abusing his wife and childrer beating them while alcoholic, but when I read his poems I am being transported to a beautiful place in a beautiful way. How can Husserl really appreciate any of Heideggers works if he was hurt by th same persona? Difficult to know… But, beyond all doubts was the words Heideger wrote in one of the letters shown in this docs putting next to heil hitler his signiture. That really hurts to see.
I agree with Vec. 47 minutes of “Nazi this, Nazi that.” Being Nazi back in those days was like being Republican nowadays. Understand the context (!!!!) of those times and judge him OBJECTIVELY! Isn’t that the cornerstone of our academic tradition?! Objectivity?!
So what?! WTF does that have to do with philosophy? I want to know about BEING and TIME, about phenomenology, ontology, epistemology, heuristics and all that, not about some sensationalistic yellow-journalist’s petty judgments.
The truth is that the Jews are the real Nazi of our time, maybe even worse, killing men, women and children for more than half a century and nobody says anything. The atrocities of Hitler Nazi are nothing compared to what the Jews do today.
It is a troubling documentary in that it presents a man who had some great ideas but deep and troubling shadows. I am still curious about his work and hope to read him more. I think the BBC does present a good introduction to him and that is all it can do in a documentary of this type.
@the real Nazi. Suppose there is a shred of truth to your claims about Jews. Can two wrongs ever make a right? I don’t think so!
My concern is, why wasn’t he jailed after the war?
Call me simple minded. However, I believe that there are degrees to human’s frailties, and Heidegger wins the great lot! Though revered for his work, I find it hard to see how one could disassociate a man’s evilness from the work of his hands no matter how glorious that work might have seem otherwise.
To me what actually happens was that this man had a moment of consciousness and ran with it. However, that consciousness does not define him. He sought power and fame and position with highly ranked wingnuts, but came up empty. If he were indeed a very thoughtful man, he would not have wandered in the path he chose to travel. As such to me Heidegger is nothing but a fake!
I don’t think this forum is the correct place to debate Heidegger since most of us only saw the BBC film. It certainly is not enough to make an informed judgment.
I have to say that the BBC does a fairly decent job on most subjects, but I want to read the man himself.
@Olu (why wasn’t he jailed?) Maybe because in a democracy, ideally one shouldn’t be jailed for their political beliefs. If you were alive as a citizen in Nazi Germany, you (assuming you were German) would probably have been a member of the party too. Human beings are like that, you have to consider the historical context.
I sorry but I would have to add, JPT, that I find it very perplexing why the philosopher wasn’t jailed and/or arrested either. OLU’s question is a valid one. He did more than express an opinion. The people he went after ended up in labor and concentration camps. Many of them ended up dead. He was a lot more than just a member of the Nazi Party. He was an active participant.
I want to hear more about his philosophy and not more about the evil Nazis.