This research explores the tension between Martin Heidegger's philosophical ideas in Being and Time and Faye’s main thesis in Nazi Foundations in Heidegger's Work, to understand if existentialism can be a tool used by Heidegger to spread Nazi propaganda.

Did Heidegger use his ideas in section 74 of being and Time to spread Nazi Propaganda?

"The problem that I am attending to here, is that it was at this ascendant moment in his career that Heidegger joined the Nazi Party and was elected Rector of Freiburg University, subsequently signing a Loyalty Oath of German Professors to Adolf Hitler and the National Socialist State. (In 1966, he was interviewed by the German magazine Der Spiegel, whereupon he sought to excuse his alignment with the Nazis during that pre-war period)."

1.    Exigence—The Matter and Motivation of the Discourse

In your own words:

the exigence of this article is to examine the ethics of a professor using Heidegger's example.

Examples from text:

 "In this article I examine the opposing ethical forces that animated Heidegger’s brief foray into Nazism, to ask whether the same forces continue to be found in the technocratized university described by Bill Readings. I address Heidegger’s own philosophy as a context in which these conflicting ethical forces are confronted, using metaphorical references to Pollyanna and Cujo."

a.    What is the discourse about?

 The discourse is about ethics within the university and the relation between what is proper and what is essential and the relationship between self and others.

b.    Why is the discourse needed?

 The text questions Heideggers ethics within the university.

c.    What is the discourse trying to accomplish?

 The text is trying to "deconstruct the idea of the university, with Heidegger’s political opportunism as symptomatic of current patterns of self-marketing, self-promotion, and entrepreneurialism amongst academics.

2.    Rhetor(s)—Those People, Real or Imagined, Responsible for the Discourse and Its Authorial Voice

In your own words:

The rhetor (or author) of this article is Chris Peers, from the Faculty of Education at Monash University, Melbourne, Australia. Chris Peers has an academic, analytical, philosophical and neutral tone.

Examples from text:

In the quote below I see how the author is mostly pointing out facts and using other scholars as backup. In other texts I see that the authors may add their opinions even when stating simple facts. In this case I do not see that. In cases like this is where I see that the author is very neutral and academic.

 "In 1933, Heidegger was an up-and-coming member of the German intellectual elite, who had published a major philosophical work on the history of the concept of Being. He claimed that Western philosophy in general had “forgotten” the question of Being, by which he meant, in part, that philosophy had become absorbed by theories of consciousness (Heidegger, 1962, p. 2).Heidegger described this tendency to approach ontology as a phenomenological thinking of consciousness, as “a covering-over or a dissimulation of the authentic question of Being, under not ontological but ontic sedimentations” (Derrida, 2016, p. 1)."

3.    Audience—Those People, Real or Imagined, with Whom Rhetors Negotiate through Discourse to Achieve the Rhetorical Objectives

In your own words:

 I would like to say that this essay is written to other scholars in the university. I think this because he explains that in the focus of his research he will "deconstruct the idea of the university" However, I am unsure of this.

Examples from text:

 "I amusing the work of Jacques Derrida to deconstruct the idea of the university, with Heidegger’s political opportunism as symptomatic of current patterns of self-marketing, self-promotion, and entrepreneurialism amongst academics."

4.    Constraints—Factors in the Situation’s Context That May Affect the Achievement of the Rhetorical Objectives

In your own words:

 This text focuses mostly on ethics of education within the academy, this is why it may or may not be useful for my research. In some sections it focuses on Heidegger and his background within the regime, keeping a philosophical tone.

Examples from text:

 This article has a few sections that focus on Heidegger Specifically:

1. Questioning Heidegger’s ethics

2. Was Heidegger naïve?

3. Pollyanna and the Nazis

4. An ironic Heidegger

5. Naivete and opportunism

1.    Exigence—The Matter and Motivation of the Discourse

In your own words:

The books purpose is to give a complete guide to Heidegger and to explain the complexities of Heidegger's philosophy.

Examples from text:

In the section I am currently reading, "Heidegger and National Socialism," the text provides a brief overview of the controversy surrounding Heidegger's involvement with the Nazi Party. The author effectively summarizes the key aspects of the issue in just three pages, drawing on the work of at least 20 different scholars to highlight the complexity of the situation.

a.    What is the discourse about?

 The discourse is about stablishing the relationship between Heidegger's philosophy and Nazism.

b.    Why is the discourse needed?

 Because the author claims that for Heidegger's readers, it is difficult to come to terms with the fact that he was a Nazi, and clearing out the reasons why this happens is crucial to give his philosophy a proper approach.

c.    What is the discourse trying to accomplish?

 It is trying to give an overview of the issue.

2.    Rhetor(s)—Those People, Real or Imagined, Responsible for the Discourse and Its Authorial Voice

In your own words:

 Even though the authors of the book are Humbert L. Dreyfus and Mark A. Wrathall, in this particular section the author is Iain Thomson. Many scholars contributed to the information that is within the book. This particular author also uses a neutral tone while also raising profound questions to the reader.

Examples from text:

  "I will thus take a narrower approach, addressing the following two questions. Q1, Did Heldegger's politics stem directly from his philosophy? 02, Did Heidegger learn anything philosophically from his terrible political "mistake"? In this limited space, we cannot investigate many of the proposed connections between Heldegger's philosophy and politics, nor the lessons he might have learned subsequently from those connections (see Derrida 1989; Dallmayr 1993; Young 1997: Thomson 1999: Rickey 2002; Bambach 2003)."

3.    Audience—Those People, Real or Imagined, with Whom Rhetors Negotiate through Discourse to Achieve the Rhetorical Objectives

In your own words:

This book is made for students

Examples from text:

"This outstanding student reference series offers a comprehensive and authoritative survey of philosophy as a whole. Written by today's leading philosophers, each volume provides lucid and engaging coverage of the key figures, terms, topics, and problems of the field. Taken together, the volumes provide the ideal basis for course use, representing an unparalleled work of reference for students and specialists alike."

4.    Constraints—Factors in the Situation’s Context That May Affect the Achievement of the Rhetorical Objectives

In your own words:

 This book is a summarized version of Heidegger's philosophy and the events relevant to his life and the publication of his books. It is a guide.

Examples from text:

"The volume opens by focusing on the most important elements of Heidegger's intellectual biography, including his notorious involvement with National Socialism. The book then goes on to provide a systematic and comprehensive exploration of Heidegger's work. The contributions proceed chronologically, starting with discussions of his magnum opus Being and Time, moving on to the period of his 'Kehre' or 'turn', and concluding with his neglected later work. A final section contains key critical responses to Heidegger's philosophy, including consideration of his relation to pragmatism, religion, and ecology.

Contributors include many of the leading interpreters of, and commentators on, the work of Heidegger."

1.    Exigence—The Matter and Motivation of the Discourse

In your own words:

The motivation of the discourse is to clarify the relationship that should be made with Heidegger's philosophy and Nazism.

Examples from text:

"They assumed that pointing out Heidegger’s Völkisch affinities would be sufficient to read Nazism into his philosophy. I will claim that such identification is wrong for several reasons."

a.    What is the discourse about?

 The motivation of the discourse is to point out that Heidegger's philosophy should not align with Nazism.

b.    Why is the discourse needed?

 It is needed because that is the only thing that would make us understand the subliminal messages in Heidegger's philosophy.

c.    What is the discourse trying to accomplish?

 It is trying to accomplish showing why it is wrong to question the relationship between Heidegger’s philosophy and the National Socialist ideology through identifying Völkisch conservatism with the Nazi worldview.

2.    Rhetor(s)—Those People, Real or Imagined, Responsible for the Discourse and Its Authorial Voice

In your own words:

 The rethor is Aret Karademir, an associate professor in the Department of Philosophy at Middle East Technical University who received his Ph.D. from the University of South Florida. 2013 The Philosophical Forum, Inc. Published in the University of South Florida.

Examples from text:

 There is no background about the researcher on the text, however, the University of South Florida appears in the conclusion of the essay and on the top of the page there is the signature of The Philosophical Forum.

3.    Audience—Those People, Real or Imagined, with Whom Rhetors Negotiate through Discourse to Achieve the Rhetorical Objectives

In your own words:

 It was written to other scholars, specifically philosophers.

Examples from text:

 In this example, he talks about how he will review other scholars work and give a different perspective to the issue.

 "Accordingly, since the publication of Victor Farias’ book in 1987,Heidegger and Nazism, Heidegger’s Nazism has become a point of attention for Heidegger scholars. In this paper, I will claim that those scholars—for example, Karl Löwith, Victor Farias, Richard Wolin, Tom Rockmore, Emnanuel Faye—who thought there was a close connection between Heidegger’s philosophy and Nazism, mostly assumed that it is warranted to identify the Nazi ideology with nineteenth- and twentieth-century German conservatism, more precisely, with what we might call the Völkisch ideology"

4.    Constraints—Factors in the Situation’s Context That May Affect the Achievement of the Rhetorical Objectives

In your own words:

 Again, this article is philosophical, and uses difficult philosophical definitions. It also gives some historical background.

Examples from text:

 "The Heideggerian critique of modernity, especially in the late 1930s, amounts to the critique of Will. For in the world of modernity, Heidegger believes, Being reveals itself as Will. That is, “in nature, art, history, politics, in science and in knowledge,” beings are interpreted as objects of willful manipulation at the disposal of thewillfulsubject.16Thus, Will refers to the willful way humans approach, experience, and conceptualize human and non-human beings. In Heidegger’s words, 'It is the way we find ourselves particularly attuned to beings which we are not and to the being we ourselves are.' Heidegger conceptualizes Will as 'Being master out beyond oneself.' "

"In the case of Heidegger it is probably a safe bet that

some of his philosophical assumptions are contaminated."

“in the late 1930s, the basis of Nazi ideology was [...] 'reactionary modernism' more than it was the Völkisch ideology”

“for Heidegger, the Volk never is, but becomes and constantly transforms itself thanks to the genuine works, whereas the Nazi version of the Volk, together with its racism, is static. And since it is static, it is a stumbling block on the way to becoming, creating, and transforming”

"The publication of Heidegger’s Black Notebooks (Schwarze Hefte) demonstrates how deeply embedded his philosophy was in the anti-democratic, proto-fascist idiolect of the interwar period."

"Heidegger’s perception of National Socialism as athaumaturgical forcethatpresaged the‘redemption . . . of Europe and Western Culture’discloses anaspect of hisDenkenthat became increasingly prominent with hisKehre(turn), circa 1930, from‘existential ontology’to the‘history of Being’:his attribu-tion of a salvificroleto‘German Dasein’."

"These texts exceed in their radicalism what one had been able to read up until then in the earlier editions of Guido Schneeberger. As a result, I began reexamining the essence of Heidegger's work."

"There we discover that under apparently philosophical titles - "The Fundamental Question of Philosophy," "Of the Essence of Truth," "Logic" - Heidegger taught his philosophy students the very doctrine of Hitlerism, with its racist concepts and Volkisch supremacy of the "German essence," its praise of the Weltanschauung (or world vision) of the Fuhrer, and its reference to the "blood voice" and

the blood heredity (das Geblui)."