this post was submitted on 10 Jun 2025
1504 points (99.0% liked)

Bluesky

1275 readers
87 users here now

People skeeting stuff.

Bluesky Social is a microblogging social platform being developed in conjunction with the decentralized AT Protocol. Previously invite-only, the flagship Beta app went public in February 2024. All are welcome!

founded 6 months ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] JacksonLamb@lemmy.world 4 points 1 day ago (1 children)

"The sad truth is that most evil is done by people who never make up their minds to be good or evil." ~ Hannah Arendt

[–] WhatsTheHoldup@lemmy.ml 3 points 1 day ago (1 children)

I still don't know what to make of her views on nazis given the fact she had a lifelong romantic relationship with the one who ejected her and other Jews from her university.

Did Heidegger not also possess this "banality of evil"? Or was he somehow an acception?

[–] JacksonLamb@lemmy.world 1 points 13 hours ago (1 children)

The romantic choices of many of us between the ages of 18-21 (her age during their actual affair) probably don't bear scrutiny.

An ex who later became a nazi (and then recanted) is probably an excellent example of how quotidian these kinds of evils can be.

She was only human and some of her views are problematic, but I don't think it's a case of contagion.

[–] WhatsTheHoldup@lemmy.ml 1 points 4 hours ago (1 children)

The romantic choices of many of us between the ages of 18-21 (her age during their actual affair) probably don't bear scrutiny.

I'm not scrutinizing her for any choices between 18 and 21.

This was a lifelong relationship, Hannah herself reached out and continued writing letters in his defense from the 1950s to her death.

An ex who later became a nazi (and then recanted) is probably an excellent example of how quotidian these kinds of evils can be.

Ex? No.

Recanted? They denied he had any nazi sympathy and claimed it was all a mistake

Later, in a 1969 birthday tribute essay “Martin Heidegger at Eighty,” Arendt penned what has generally been taken as an exoneration of Heidegger. In it, she “compared Heidegger to Thales,” writes Gordon, “the ancient philosopher who grew so absorbed in contemplating the heavens that he stumbled into the well at his feet.”

This was the accepted view of Heidegger until 2014 when the black notebooks came out

But major Heidegger scholars have responded in a variety of ways—including resigning a chairship of the Martin Heidegger Society—that suggest the worst. According to Daily Nous, a website about the philosophy profession, when Günter Figal resigned his position in January as chair of the Martin Heidegger Society, he said:

As chairman of a society, which is named after a person, one is in certain way a representative of that person. After reading the Schwarze Hefte [Black Notebooks], especially the antisemitic passages, I do not wish to be such a representative any longer. These statements have not only shocked me, but have turned me around to such an extent that it has become difficult to be a co-representative of this.

Hannah defends him as just so focused on high philosophy he never noticed the antisemitism

Recalls Adam Kirsch in the Times:

The seal was set on his absolution by Hannah Arendt, in a birthday address broadcast on West German radio. Heidegger’s Nazism, she explained, was an “escapade,” a mistake, which happened only because the thinker naïvely “succumbed to the temptation … to ‘intervene’ in the world of human affairs.” The moral to be drawn from the Heidegger case was that “the thinking ‘I’ is entirely different from the self of consciousness,” so that Heidegger’s thought cannot be contaminated by the actions of the mere man.

https://www.openculture.com/2015/03/martin-heideggers-black-notebooks-reveal-the-depth-of-anti-semitism.html

but I don't think it's a case of contagion.

Modern scholars seem to say otherwise

In a long, carefully documented essay, Wasserstein (who’s now at the University of Chicago), cites Arendt’s scandalous use of quotes from anti-Semitic and Nazi “authorities” on Jews in her Totalitarianism book.

Wasserstein concludes that her use of these sources was “more than a methodological error: it was symptomatic of a perverse world-view contaminated by over-exposure to the discourse of collective contempt and stigmatization that formed the object of her study”—that object being anti-Semitism. In other words, he contends, Arendt internalized the values of the anti-Semitic literature she read in her study of anti-Semitism, at least to a certain extent

https://slate.com/human-interest/2009/10/troubling-new-revelations-about-arendt-and-heidegger.html

[–] JacksonLamb@lemmy.world 1 points 1 hour ago* (last edited 10 minutes ago) (1 children)

And are these your own views too? I thought you said you didn't know what to make of her.

I have to admit I'm not particularly invested in this issue, but I do think it's a gross mischaracterisation to say the letters post relationship somehow constitute an ongoing affair. They quite obviously don't.

Heidegger was an antisemitic Nazi and the black notebooks prove there was a lot more to that than he pretended after he publicly recanted. As far as I'm aware historians have not found any evidence that Arendt was any more aware of the content of the notebooks than anyone else was.

I agree Arendt's work is flawed as I noted above.

When I quoted her, my intention was simply to communicate that specific idea, with which I agree - not to evoke her as if she were some kind of infallible god.

I'm not in favour of abandoning the concepts of ideology and interpellation because Althusser murdered his wife, similarly I'm not going to abandon the concept of the banality of evil because Arendt was deluded about a creepy professor she had an affair with.

[–] WhatsTheHoldup@lemmy.ml 1 points 27 minutes ago

And are these your own views too? I thought you said you didn't know what to make of her.

Oh I get that comes across weird, I'm looking all this stuff up as you're challenging me on it and what I'm finding is starting to solidify my views a bit more.

I have to admit I'm not particularly invested in this issue, but I do think it's a gross mischaracterisation to say the letters post relationship somehow constitute an ongoing affair. They quite obviously don't.

That doesn't seem as obvious to the New Yorker

In 1950, seventeen years after they had last communicated, Arendt and Heidegger met again, when she went to Germany to help track down stolen Jewish cultural treasures. At times, she had been publicly critical of Heidegger’s behavior during his rectorship and afterward, but the renewal of their ties banished all her suspicions. “This evening and this morning are the confirmation of an entire life,” she wrote to him after their meeting. For the next two years, their love enjoyed a brief afterlife, as Heidegger wrote poems about her and told her things like “I wish I could run the five-fingered comb through your frizzy hair.”

https://www.newyorker.com/magazine/2009/01/12/beware-of-pity-Hannah-Arendt

(The author betrays a very obvious bias about what we're supposed to take away to be fair)

When I quoted her, my intention was simply to communicate that specific idea, with which I agree - not to evoke her as if she were some kind of infallible god.

Yeah I'm with you there.

As far as I'm aware historians have not found any evidence that Arendt was any more aware of the content of the notebooks than anyone else was.

That I'm not sure.

I don't think I really know enough to have a right to that strong a view when the historical record seems to be changing so recently and most of her letters are lost whole she kept all of Heideggers, but what I'm finding is a bit troubling tbh.

For over half a century she was considered the best source of insight into Eichmann and Nazi psychology.

With new knowledge about her conflict of interest and defence of Heidegger I'm left wondering how much of an expert she should be considered.

It seems from the evidence, Heidegger was a willing and complicit Nazi who wrote about genuinely antisemetic views. In that light, Hannah's defence of him is surprising.

I'm unsure of what go make of her psychological evaluation capabilities if she had such a glaring blindspot here.

I'm not in favour of abandoning the concepts of ideology and interpretation because Althusser murdered his wife, similarly I'm not going to abandon the concept of the banality of evil because Arendt was deluded about a creepy professor she had an affair with.

Right, neither am I.

That's why I didn't abandon it and instead said I am unsure what to make of it.

I'm not trying to come to a black or white conclusion, I think this is a complicated subject.