1. For an account, see Pöggeler, Der Denkweg Martin Heideggers (see chap. 2, n. 69), chap. 9, "Die Befreiung zum Eigenen," pp. 236-267. For a more recent series of papers, see Walter Biemel and Friedrich-Wilhelm von Herr-mann, Kunst und Technik.' Gediichtnisschrift zum 100. Geburtstag yon Martin Heidegger (Frankfurt a.M.' Vittorio Klostermann, 1989). For studies of technology influenced by Heidegger's view, see Albert Borgmann, Technology and the Character of Contemporary Life.' A Philosophical Inquiry (Chicago and London: University of Chicago Press, 1984), and Wolfgang Schirmacher, Technik und Gelassenheit, Zeitkritik nach Heidegger (Freiburg and Munich, 1983). For an analysis of Heidegger's view of technology in the context of a discussion of twentieth-century views of progress, see G. M. Tavrizian, Tekhnika, kul'tura, chelovek: Kriticheskij analiz kontseptsij tekhnicheskovo progressa v burzhyanznoj filosofij xx veka (Moscow: Nauka, 1986), esp. "Ontologicheskoe obosnovanie syshchnosti tekhniki M. Xajdeggerom," pp. 115-131. For an account of the relation of Heidegger's view of technology to modernity, see Zimmerman, Heidegger's Confrontation with Modernity , (see chap. 1, n. 23). For a study of Heidegger's view of technology and nihilism, see Phillip R. Fandozzi, Nihilism and Technology.' A Heideggerian Investigation (Washington, D.C.' University Press of America, 1982). For a recent survey of literature on Heidegger's view of technology, see Albert Borgmann and Carl Mitcham, "The Question of Heidegger and Technology: A Review of the Literature," Philosophy Today 31, no. 2 (Summer 1987).

2. See Otto Pöggeler, "Heideggers politisches Selbstverständnis," in Heidegger und die praktische Philosophie (see chap. 2, n. 104), and Silvio Vietta, Heideggers Kritik am Nationalsozialismus und an der Technik (see chap. 1, n. 31). The claim for an intrinsic link between Heidegger's critique of Nazism and technology is the main thesis of Vietta's book.

3. See "Only a God Can Save Us" (see chap. 1, n. 30), p. 276.

4. See ibid.

5. See ibid. For an analysis of the relation between Heidegger's views of technology and democracy, see my paper, "Heidegger on Technology and Democracy," forthcoming.

3. See "Only a God Can Save Us" (see chap. 1, n. 30), p. 276.

4. See ibid.

5. See ibid. For an analysis of the relation between Heidegger's views of technology and democracy, see my paper, "Heidegger on Technology and Democracy," forthcoming.

3. See "Only a God Can Save Us" (see chap. 1, n. 30), p. 276.

4. See ibid.

5. See ibid. For an analysis of the relation between Heidegger's views of technology and democracy, see my paper, "Heidegger on Technology and Democracy," forthcoming.

6. See "Only a God Can Save Us," p. 276.

7. See ibid., p. 277.

6. See "Only a God Can Save Us," p. 276.

7. See ibid., p. 277.

8. For a statement of this side of his thought, see "Building Dwelling Thinking," in Martin Heidegger, Poetry, Language, Thought , trans. Albert Hofstadter (New York: Harper and Row, 1975).

9. See "Only a God Can Save Us," p. 279.

10. See ibid., p. 278.

11. See ibid.

12. See ibid., p. 280.

13. See ibid., p. 281. Heidegger's view that Nazism can be understood as a failed attempt to confront technology is easily challenged on the basis of the texts. Consider the following passage by Joseph Goebbels, written in 1939: "While bourgeois reaction was alien to and filled with incomprehension, if not outright hostility to technology, and while modern skeptics believed the deepest roots of the collapse of European culture lay in it, National Socialism undertood how to take the soulless framework of technology and fill it with the rhythm and hot impulses of our time." Joseph Goebbels, Deutsche Technik , March 1939, pp. 105-106 (speech at the opening of the Berlin Auto Show, 17 February 1939), cited in Herr, Reactionary Modernism (see chap. 2, n. 12), p. 196.

9. See "Only a God Can Save Us," p. 279.

10. See ibid., p. 278.

11. See ibid.

12. See ibid., p. 280.

13. See ibid., p. 281. Heidegger's view that Nazism can be understood as a failed attempt to confront technology is easily challenged on the basis of the texts. Consider the following passage by Joseph Goebbels, written in 1939: "While bourgeois reaction was alien to and filled with incomprehension, if not outright hostility to technology, and while modern skeptics believed the deepest roots of the collapse of European culture lay in it, National Socialism undertood how to take the soulless framework of technology and fill it with the rhythm and hot impulses of our time." Joseph Goebbels, Deutsche Technik , March 1939, pp. 105-106 (speech at the opening of the Berlin Auto Show, 17 February 1939), cited in Herr, Reactionary Modernism (see chap. 2, n. 12), p. 196.

9. See "Only a God Can Save Us," p. 279.

10. See ibid., p. 278.

11. See ibid.

12. See ibid., p. 280.

13. See ibid., p. 281. Heidegger's view that Nazism can be understood as a failed attempt to confront technology is easily challenged on the basis of the texts. Consider the following passage by Joseph Goebbels, written in 1939: "While bourgeois reaction was alien to and filled with incomprehension, if not outright hostility to technology, and while modern skeptics believed the deepest roots of the collapse of European culture lay in it, National Socialism undertood how to take the soulless framework of technology and fill it with the rhythm and hot impulses of our time." Joseph Goebbels, Deutsche Technik , March 1939, pp. 105-106 (speech at the opening of the Berlin Auto Show, 17 February 1939), cited in Herr, Reactionary Modernism (see chap. 2, n. 12), p. 196.

9. See "Only a God Can Save Us," p. 279.

10. See ibid., p. 278.

11. See ibid.

12. See ibid., p. 280.

13. See ibid., p. 281. Heidegger's view that Nazism can be understood as a failed attempt to confront technology is easily challenged on the basis of the texts. Consider the following passage by Joseph Goebbels, written in 1939: "While bourgeois reaction was alien to and filled with incomprehension, if not outright hostility to technology, and while modern skeptics believed the deepest roots of the collapse of European culture lay in it, National Socialism undertood how to take the soulless framework of technology and fill it with the rhythm and hot impulses of our time." Joseph Goebbels, Deutsche Technik , March 1939, pp. 105-106 (speech at the opening of the Berlin Auto Show, 17 February 1939), cited in Herr, Reactionary Modernism (see chap. 2, n. 12), p. 196.

9. See "Only a God Can Save Us," p. 279.

10. See ibid., p. 278.

11. See ibid.

12. See ibid., p. 280.

13. See ibid., p. 281. Heidegger's view that Nazism can be understood as a failed attempt to confront technology is easily challenged on the basis of the texts. Consider the following passage by Joseph Goebbels, written in 1939: "While bourgeois reaction was alien to and filled with incomprehension, if not outright hostility to technology, and while modern skeptics believed the deepest roots of the collapse of European culture lay in it, National Socialism undertood how to take the soulless framework of technology and fill it with the rhythm and hot impulses of our time." Joseph Goebbels, Deutsche Technik , March 1939, pp. 105-106 (speech at the opening of the Berlin Auto Show, 17 February 1939), cited in Herr, Reactionary Modernism (see chap. 2, n. 12), p. 196.

14. Some commentators have seen Heidegger's Nazism as following out of his concern to respond, in Moehling's words, to "the spiritual crisis engendered by modern, post-industrial man's encounter with the meaning of his own tehnological devices." See Moehling, "Heidegger and the Nazis" (see chap. 4, n. 166), p. 40.

15. For an example, see Steven T. Katz, "Technology and Genocide: Techology as a 'Form of Life,' in Echoes from the Holocaust (see Introd., n. 7), pp. 262-291. Katz suggests that many writers fail to given sufficient weight to the role of techology in Nazism since they overemphasize the reactionary, romantic aspects of National Socialism. For a list of such writers, see ibid., p. 285 n. 6. For an extensive analysis of the way that Nazism combined technology and bureaucracy in the service of genocide, see Hilberg, The Destruction of the European Jews (see chap. 3, n. 116).

14. Some commentators have seen Heidegger's Nazism as following out of his concern to respond, in Moehling's words, to "the spiritual crisis engendered by modern, post-industrial man's encounter with the meaning of his own tehnological devices." See Moehling, "Heidegger and the Nazis" (see chap. 4, n. 166), p. 40.

15. For an example, see Steven T. Katz, "Technology and Genocide: Techology as a 'Form of Life,' in Echoes from the Holocaust (see Introd., n. 7), pp. 262-291. Katz suggests that many writers fail to given sufficient weight to the role of techology in Nazism since they overemphasize the reactionary, romantic aspects of National Socialism. For a list of such writers, see ibid., p. 285 n. 6. For an extensive analysis of the way that Nazism combined technology and bureaucracy in the service of genocide, see Hilberg, The Destruction of the European Jews (see chap. 3, n. 116).

16. If Katz is correct that technology functioned as a main cog in Nazi genocide, then Heidegger's reading of Nazism as directly opposed to technology is related to his inability to comprehend the event of the Holocaust. For Katz's claim, see Echoes from the Holocaust , p. 262.

17. "Only a God Can Save Us," p. 280.

18. Ibid., p. 281.

17. "Only a God Can Save Us," p. 280.

18. Ibid., p. 281.

19. Heidegger, Being and Time , p. 409.

20. Ibid., § 15, p. 100.

21. Ibid., p. 101.

19. Heidegger, Being and Time , p. 409.

20. Ibid., § 15, p. 100.

21. Ibid., p. 101.

19. Heidegger, Being and Time , p. 409.

20. Ibid., § 15, p. 100.

21. Ibid., p. 101.

22. Heidegger, An Introduction to Metaphysics , trans. Mannheim (see chap. 1, n. 32), p. 16.

23. Ibid., p. 158. Machenshaft is a persistent theme in the Beiträge zur Philosophie , where Heidegger insists on the relation between Weltanschauung and Machenschaft . See Beiträge zur Philosophie (Vom Ereignis ) (see chap. 1, n. 26), p. 38 and passim.

22. Heidegger, An Introduction to Metaphysics , trans. Mannheim (see chap. 1, n. 32), p. 16.

23. Ibid., p. 158. Machenshaft is a persistent theme in the Beiträge zur Philosophie , where Heidegger insists on the relation between Weltanschauung and Machenschaft . See Beiträge zur Philosophie (Vom Ereignis ) (see chap. 1, n. 26), p. 38 and passim.

24. Heidegger, Introduction to Metaphysics , p. 159; translation modified.

25. Heidegger further calls attention to the relation of understanding of art and technology in his essay on art. See "The Origin of the Work of Art," in Heidegger, Poetry, Language, Thought , pp. 15-87, esp. "Addendum," pp. 82-87.

26. See Heidegger, Beiträge , pp. 120, 274. Heidegger's view closely resem-

Page 356

bles Husserl's explanation of the rise of modern science through Galileo's mathematization of nature. See Husserl, The Crisis of European Sciences and Transcendental Phenomenology (see chap. 2, n. 30), part 2, §§ 8 and 9, pp. 21-60. Heidegger stresses the turn away from being whereas Husserl emphasizes the failure to appreciate the life-world as the precondition of modern science.

27. See Beiträge , p. 392.

28. See ibid., p. 336. Heidegger makes this point elsewhere as well, for instance in his analysis of the concept of representation.

27. See Beiträge , p. 392.

28. See ibid., p. 336. Heidegger makes this point elsewhere as well, for instance in his analysis of the concept of representation.

29. Heidegger, ''The Age of the World Picture'' (see chap. 3, n. 138), p. 116.

30. See Heidegger, Basic Writings , p. 219.

31. See ibid., p. 220.

30. See Heidegger, Basic Writings , p. 219.

31. See ibid., p. 220.

32. The official aim of Sartre's later, Marxist phase is to dialogue with Marxism understood as a theory of history. See Sartre, Critique de la raison dialectique (see chap. 2, n. 160).

33. For this argument, see George L. Kline, "The Myth of Marx's Materialism," in Philosophical Sovietology: The Pursuit of a Science , ed. Helmut Dahm, Thomas J. Blakeley, and George L. Kline (Dordrecht: D. Reidel Publishing Co., 1988), pp. 158-203.

34. Heidegger, Basic Writings , pp. 220-221.

35. Aubenque, for instance, situates the turning in Heidegger's thought in 1935-1936 in order to make it coincide with the Introduction to Metaphysics and the beginning of the Nietzsche lectures. See Aubenque, "Encore Heidegger et le nazisme" (see chap. 2, n. 59), p. 123.

36. For an account of the discussion of technology during this period, see Friedrich Dessauer, Streit um die Technik (Frankfurt a.M.:J. Knecht, 1956).

37. See Rudolph Haym, Hegel und seine Zeit: Vorlesungen über Entstehung und Entwickelung, Wesen und Werth der Hegel'schen Philosophie (Berlin, 1857; reprint, Hildesheim: Georg Olms, 1962), p. 5.

38. Karl Jaspers, "Spannung yon technischer Massenordnung und menschlicher Daseinswelt," in Die geistige Situation der Zeit (Berlin: de Gruyter, 1965). pp. 32ff., cited in Barnouw, Weimar Intellectuals and the Threat of Modernity (see chap. 2, n. 20), p. 13.

39. See "Rectoral Address—Facts and Thoughts" (see chap. 2, n. 115), p. 474.

40. See ibid., p. 473.

39. See "Rectoral Address—Facts and Thoughts" (see chap. 2, n. 115), p. 474.

40. See ibid., p. 473.

41. Heidegger, Nietzsche , vol. 4, Nihilism , trans. Capuzzi (see chap. 4, n. 205), p. 196; translation modified.

42. The topic of the Jünger-Heidegger link has received extensive attention, particularly among politically conservative Heideggerians. Among the writings concerning the Heidegger-Jünger relation, see Christian Graf von Krockow, Die Entscheidung: Eine Unterscheidung über Ernst Jünger, Carl Schmitt, Martin Heidegger (Stuttgart: Felke, 1958); Jean-Michel Palmier, Les écrits politiques de Heidegger (Paris: L'Herne, 1968); Frederic de Towarnicki, "Le travailleur planétaire: Entretien avec Ernst Jünger," in Martin Heidegger , ed. Michel Haar, L'Herne , no. 45 (Paris: L'Herne, 1983), pp. 145-150. See also Krell's remarks in Heidegger, Nietzsche (see chap. 4, n. 143), vol. 3, The Will to Power as Knowl-

edge and Metaphysics , pp. 263-268, and Nietzsche , vol. 4, Nihilism , pp. 286-291. For an extensive recent reading of Jünger's relation to Heidegger, see Zimmerman, Heidegger's Confrontation with Modernity ' (see chap. 1, n. 23). Following Herr, Zimmerman sees the convergence between Heidegger and Jünger in the effort, characteristic of other reactionary conservatives, to understand technology in particular and modernity in general in categories that transcended the so-called causal-material realm. See Zimmerman, Heidegger's Confrontation with Modernity , p. 46. Zimmerham holds, however, that Heidegger finally rejects Jünger's vision of technological nihilism. See ibid., p. 67.

41. Heidegger, Nietzsche , vol. 4, Nihilism , trans. Capuzzi (see chap. 4, n. 205), p. 196; translation modified.

42. The topic of the Jünger-Heidegger link has received extensive attention, particularly among politically conservative Heideggerians. Among the writings concerning the Heidegger-Jünger relation, see Christian Graf von Krockow, Die Entscheidung: Eine Unterscheidung über Ernst Jünger, Carl Schmitt, Martin Heidegger (Stuttgart: Felke, 1958); Jean-Michel Palmier, Les écrits politiques de Heidegger (Paris: L'Herne, 1968); Frederic de Towarnicki, "Le travailleur planétaire: Entretien avec Ernst Jünger," in Martin Heidegger , ed. Michel Haar, L'Herne , no. 45 (Paris: L'Herne, 1983), pp. 145-150. See also Krell's remarks in Heidegger, Nietzsche (see chap. 4, n. 143), vol. 3, The Will to Power as Knowl-

Page 357

edge and Metaphysics , pp. 263-268, and Nietzsche , vol. 4, Nihilism , pp. 286-291. For an extensive recent reading of Jünger's relation to Heidegger, see Zimmerman, Heidegger's Confrontation with Modernity ' (see chap. 1, n. 23). Following Herr, Zimmerman sees the convergence between Heidegger and Jünger in the effort, characteristic of other reactionary conservatives, to understand technology in particular and modernity in general in categories that transcended the so-called causal-material realm. See Zimmerman, Heidegger's Confrontation with Modernity , p. 46. Zimmerham holds, however, that Heidegger finally rejects Jünger's vision of technological nihilism. See ibid., p. 67.

43. See "Rectoral Address—Facts and Thoughts," pp. 484-485.

44. See Martin Heidegger, "Zur Seinsfrage," in Heidegger, Wegmarken (see chap. 3, n. 33), pp. 217-219.

45. See ibid., p. 219.

44. See Martin Heidegger, "Zur Seinsfrage," in Heidegger, Wegmarken (see chap. 3, n. 33), pp. 217-219.

45. See ibid., p. 219.

46. See Ernst Jünger, Der Arbeiter. Herrschaft und Gestalt (Stuttgart: Ernst Klett, 1981). The attraction of the thought of this rather weak thinker for Heidegger is unclear. Thomä, relying on Schneeberger, cites a list of passages on Arbeit in Heidegger's writings on Arbeit and Arbeiter from 1933. See Thomä, Die Zeit des Selbst und die Zeit danach , pp. 595-596. He also cites a passsage from a radio talk by Hitler given on 10 May 1933, ending with the words: "In diesem Sinne ist das Deutsche Reich das Reich des deutschen Sozialismus, ein Staat der Arbeit und der Arbeiter." Cited in Thomä, Die Zeit des Selbst und die Zeit danach , p. 595. In view of the fact that Heidegger's interest in Jünger began as early as 1932, when he formed the first group to study Jünger's thought, it is difficult to accept Thomä's suggestion that Heidegger's concern with Jünger's Arbeiter represents a turn away from Nazism. See Thomä, Die Zeit des Selbst und die Zeit danach , p. 600.

47. See Jünger, Der Arbeiter, p. 9 .

48. See ibid., p. 7.

49. See ibid.

47. See Jünger, Der Arbeiter, p. 9 .

48. See ibid., p. 7.

49. See ibid.

47. See Jünger, Der Arbeiter, p. 9 .

48. See ibid., p. 7.

49. See ibid.

50. In several letters written many years later, he denied any anti-Marxist motivation, claiming to go further than Marx down the same road. See Jünger, Der Arbeiter , pp. 316, 317.

51. See ibid., p. 15.

52. See ibid., p. 16.

53. See ibid., p. 27.

54. See ibid., p. 31.

55. See ibid., p. 45.

56. See ibid., p. 68.

50. In several letters written many years later, he denied any anti-Marxist motivation, claiming to go further than Marx down the same road. See Jünger, Der Arbeiter , pp. 316, 317.

51. See ibid., p. 15.

52. See ibid., p. 16.

53. See ibid., p. 27.

54. See ibid., p. 31.

55. See ibid., p. 45.

56. See ibid., p. 68.

50. In several letters written many years later, he denied any anti-Marxist motivation, claiming to go further than Marx down the same road. See Jünger, Der Arbeiter , pp. 316, 317.

51. See ibid., p. 15.

52. See ibid., p. 16.

53. See ibid., p. 27.

54. See ibid., p. 31.

55. See ibid., p. 45.

56. See ibid., p. 68.

50. In several letters written many years later, he denied any anti-Marxist motivation, claiming to go further than Marx down the same road. See Jünger, Der Arbeiter , pp. 316, 317.

51. See ibid., p. 15.

52. See ibid., p. 16.

53. See ibid., p. 27.

54. See ibid., p. 31.

55. See ibid., p. 45.

56. See ibid., p. 68.

50. In several letters written many years later, he denied any anti-Marxist motivation, claiming to go further than Marx down the same road. See Jünger, Der Arbeiter , pp. 316, 317.

51. See ibid., p. 15.

52. See ibid., p. 16.

53. See ibid., p. 27.

54. See ibid., p. 31.

55. See ibid., p. 45.

56. See ibid., p. 68.

50. In several letters written many years later, he denied any anti-Marxist motivation, claiming to go further than Marx down the same road. See Jünger, Der Arbeiter , pp. 316, 317.

51. See ibid., p. 15.

52. See ibid., p. 16.

53. See ibid., p. 27.

54. See ibid., p. 31.

55. See ibid., p. 45.

56. See ibid., p. 68.

50. In several letters written many years later, he denied any anti-Marxist motivation, claiming to go further than Marx down the same road. See Jünger, Der Arbeiter , pp. 316, 317.

51. See ibid., p. 15.

52. See ibid., p. 16.

53. See ibid., p. 27.

54. See ibid., p. 31.

55. See ibid., p. 45.

56. See ibid., p. 68.

57. Heidegger, Wegmarken , p. 215.

58. See ibid., p. 224.

59. See ibid., p. 228.

60. See ibid., p. 242. For further discussion of Verwindung , see his essay "Überwindung der Metaphysik," in Heidegger, Vorträge und Aufsätze (see chap. 4, n. 80), pp. 67-95.

57. Heidegger, Wegmarken , p. 215.

58. See ibid., p. 224.

59. See ibid., p. 228.

60. See ibid., p. 242. For further discussion of Verwindung , see his essay "Überwindung der Metaphysik," in Heidegger, Vorträge und Aufsätze (see chap. 4, n. 80), pp. 67-95.

57. Heidegger, Wegmarken , p. 215.

58. See ibid., p. 224.

59. See ibid., p. 228.

60. See ibid., p. 242. For further discussion of Verwindung , see his essay "Überwindung der Metaphysik," in Heidegger, Vorträge und Aufsätze (see chap. 4, n. 80), pp. 67-95.

57. Heidegger, Wegmarken , p. 215.

58. See ibid., p. 224.

59. See ibid., p. 228.

60. See ibid., p. 242. For further discussion of Verwindung , see his essay "Überwindung der Metaphysik," in Heidegger, Vorträge und Aufsätze (see chap. 4, n. 80), pp. 67-95.

61. See Heidegger, Wegmarken , p. 244.

62. For a recent account of Spengler's influence on Heidegger's view of

technology, see Zimmerman, "Heidegger's Critical Appropriation of Spengler in the Fight against Modern Technology," in Heidegger's Confrontation with Modernity , pp. 26-33. Zimmerman points to Heidegger's lectures in order to maintain that Heidegger's account of the history of being is an attempt to provide the authentic philosophy of history allegedly missing in Spengler. See ibid., p. 27.

61. See Heidegger, Wegmarken , p. 244.

62. For a recent account of Spengler's influence on Heidegger's view of

Page 358

technology, see Zimmerman, "Heidegger's Critical Appropriation of Spengler in the Fight against Modern Technology," in Heidegger's Confrontation with Modernity , pp. 26-33. Zimmerman points to Heidegger's lectures in order to maintain that Heidegger's account of the history of being is an attempt to provide the authentic philosophy of history allegedly missing in Spengler. See ibid., p. 27.

63. For Heidegger's reference to his Spengler lectures, see his letter to Karl Jaspers, 21 April 1920, in Briefwechsel 1920-1963 (see chap. 2, n. 27), p. 15.

64. See Otto Pöggeler, "Heideggers politisches Selbstverständnis," in Heidegger und die praktische Philosophie (see chap. 2, n. 104), p. 26.

65. See Oswald Spengler, Der Mensch und die Technik: Beitrag zu einer Philosophie des Lebens (Münich: C. H. Beck'sche Verlagsbuchhandlung, 1931). This book was rapidly made available in translation. See Oswald Spengler, Man and Technics: A Contribution to a Philosophy of Life , trans. Charles Francis Atkinson (New York: Alfred A. Knopf, 1932).

66. For such themes, see Spengler, Jahre der Entscheidung (see chap. 2, n. 135).

67. See Spengler, Man and Technics , preface.

68. For details, see Martin Heidegger, Die Technik und die Kehre (Neske: Pfullingen, 1962), Vorbernerkung , p. 3. According to Zimmerman, nearly all the basic aspects of Heidegger's view of technology are found in his lecture notes and writings between 1934 and 1944. See Zimmerman, Heidegger's Confrontation with Modernity , p. 35. But this lecture series in which Heidegger expounded the main features of his view occurs later, and the essay entitled "Die Frage nach der Technik," which is Heidegger's major text on technology, occurs still later.

69. Access to Heidegger's writings continues to pose a major interpretative problem. A recent request for a copy of the manuscript of Heidegger's unpublished lecture entitled "Die Gefahr" was denied in a letter from Prof. Friedrich-Wilhelm yon Herrmann, general editor of the edition of the collected works now under way, who said in part that no access could be permitted until the lecture is published in a future volume. See unpublished letter dated 28 March 1990. This denial is unfortunate since it is important to study the complete record. The refusal to grant access to this particular document is further curious, in fact inconsistent, since it has been already cited in the literature by others. See, e.g., Thomas Sheehan, "Heidegger and the Nazis," The New York Review of Books 35, no. 10 (16 June 1988): 42.

70. See "The Thing," in Heidegger, Poetry, Language, Thought , pp. 163-186.

71. "The Question concerning Technology" and "The Turning" in Heidegger, The Question concerning Technology , pp. 3-35 and 36-49.

72. An example, among many, is the term " Bestand, " an ordinary German word, modeled on the verb " bestehen, " which has the meanings of "existence, stock, inventory, cash on hand, inventory," etc., but which is rendered as ''standing-reserve." See Heidegger, The Question concerning Technology and Other Essays , p. 17. Although Heidegger uses the term, as he states, in his own way, it is not a neologism in German. But to introduce a neologism for it in

Page 359

English, when other words are apparently available, is to introduce a supplementary difficulty in the comprehension of the text.

73. See Heidegger, The Essence of Technology, p. 4 .

74. See ibid., p. 31.

73. See Heidegger, The Essence of Technology, p. 4 .

74. See ibid., p. 31.

75. For further discussion of this point, see his chapter entitled "Der Wandel der energeia zur actualitas," in Heidegger, Nietzsche (German ed.; see chap. 4, n. 85), 2:410-421.

76. See Heidegger, The Question concerning Technology, p. 5 .

77. For an example, see Spengler's analysis of technology as a vital tactic in Der Mensch und die Technik , chap. 1.

78. See Heidegger, The Question concerning Technology, p. 6 .

79. See ibid., p. 9.

80. Ibid., p. 12.

78. See Heidegger, The Question concerning Technology, p. 6 .

79. See ibid., p. 9.

80. Ibid., p. 12.

78. See Heidegger, The Question concerning Technology, p. 6 .

79. See ibid., p. 9.

80. Ibid., p. 12.

81. For Aristotle's influential attempt to sort out the differences between such terms as " episteme," "sophia," "poiesis," ''techne, " etc., see his Nicomachean Ethics , book 6.

82. See Heidegger, The Question concerning Technology , p. 13.

83. Ibid., p. 14.

84. Ibid., p. 15; translation modified.

82. See Heidegger, The Question concerning Technology , p. 13.

83. Ibid., p. 14.

84. Ibid., p. 15; translation modified.

82. See Heidegger, The Question concerning Technology , p. 13.

83. Ibid., p. 14.

84. Ibid., p. 15; translation modified.

85. Zimmerman regards Heidegger's thought as important for so-called deep, or nonanthropological, ecology. See Zimmerman, Heidegger's Confrontation with Technology , pp. 241-244.

86. See Heidegger, The Question concerning Technology , p. 17.

87. Ibid., p. 18.

88. Ibid., p. 19.

89. See ibid., p. 20.

90. Ibid.

91. Ibid., p. 23; translation modified.

92. Ibid., p. 24.

86. See Heidegger, The Question concerning Technology , p. 17.

87. Ibid., p. 18.

88. Ibid., p. 19.

89. See ibid., p. 20.

90. Ibid.

91. Ibid., p. 23; translation modified.

92. Ibid., p. 24.

86. See Heidegger, The Question concerning Technology , p. 17.

87. Ibid., p. 18.

88. Ibid., p. 19.

89. See ibid., p. 20.

90. Ibid.

91. Ibid., p. 23; translation modified.

92. Ibid., p. 24.

86. See Heidegger, The Question concerning Technology , p. 17.

87. Ibid., p. 18.

88. Ibid., p. 19.

89. See ibid., p. 20.

90. Ibid.

91. Ibid., p. 23; translation modified.

92. Ibid., p. 24.

86. See Heidegger, The Question concerning Technology , p. 17.

87. Ibid., p. 18.

88. Ibid., p. 19.

89. See ibid., p. 20.

90. Ibid.

91. Ibid., p. 23; translation modified.

92. Ibid., p. 24.

86. See Heidegger, The Question concerning Technology , p. 17.

87. Ibid., p. 18.

88. Ibid., p. 19.

89. See ibid., p. 20.

90. Ibid.

91. Ibid., p. 23; translation modified.

92. Ibid., p. 24.

86. See Heidegger, The Question concerning Technology , p. 17.

87. Ibid., p. 18.

88. Ibid., p. 19.

89. See ibid., p. 20.

90. Ibid.

91. Ibid., p. 23; translation modified.

92. Ibid., p. 24.

93. This claim is already formulated much earlier in his thought, for instance during the Hölderlin lectures: "Denn das Schickliche bestimmt das Geschick und dieses die Geschichte." Heidegger, Hölderlins Hymne "Der Ister " (see chap. 2, n. 146), p. 101.

94. Heidegger, The Question concerning Technology , p. 25.

95. Ibid., p. 26.

96. Ibid.

97. Ibid., p. 28; translation modified.

98. Ibid., translation modified.

99. Ibid., p. 31, Heidegger's emphases; translation modified.

100. Ibid., p. 32.

101. Ibid., p. 34; translation modified.

94. Heidegger, The Question concerning Technology , p. 25.

95. Ibid., p. 26.

96. Ibid.

97. Ibid., p. 28; translation modified.

98. Ibid., translation modified.

99. Ibid., p. 31, Heidegger's emphases; translation modified.

100. Ibid., p. 32.

101. Ibid., p. 34; translation modified.

94. Heidegger, The Question concerning Technology , p. 25.

95. Ibid., p. 26.

96. Ibid.

97. Ibid., p. 28; translation modified.

98. Ibid., translation modified.

99. Ibid., p. 31, Heidegger's emphases; translation modified.

100. Ibid., p. 32.

101. Ibid., p. 34; translation modified.

94. Heidegger, The Question concerning Technology , p. 25.

95. Ibid., p. 26.

96. Ibid.

97. Ibid., p. 28; translation modified.

98. Ibid., translation modified.

99. Ibid., p. 31, Heidegger's emphases; translation modified.

100. Ibid., p. 32.

101. Ibid., p. 34; translation modified.

94. Heidegger, The Question concerning Technology , p. 25.

95. Ibid., p. 26.

96. Ibid.

97. Ibid., p. 28; translation modified.

98. Ibid., translation modified.

99. Ibid., p. 31, Heidegger's emphases; translation modified.

100. Ibid., p. 32.

101. Ibid., p. 34; translation modified.

94. Heidegger, The Question concerning Technology , p. 25.

95. Ibid., p. 26.

96. Ibid.

97. Ibid., p. 28; translation modified.

98. Ibid., translation modified.

99. Ibid., p. 31, Heidegger's emphases; translation modified.

100. Ibid., p. 32.

101. Ibid., p. 34; translation modified.

94. Heidegger, The Question concerning Technology , p. 25.

95. Ibid., p. 26.

96. Ibid.

97. Ibid., p. 28; translation modified.

98. Ibid., translation modified.

99. Ibid., p. 31, Heidegger's emphases; translation modified.

100. Ibid., p. 32.

101. Ibid., p. 34; translation modified.

94. Heidegger, The Question concerning Technology , p. 25.

95. Ibid., p. 26.

96. Ibid.

97. Ibid., p. 28; translation modified.

98. Ibid., translation modified.

99. Ibid., p. 31, Heidegger's emphases; translation modified.

100. Ibid., p. 32.

101. Ibid., p. 34; translation modified.

102. See Immanuel Kant, Critique of Practical Reason , trans. Lewis White Beck (Indianapolis and New York: Library of Liberal Arts, 1956), book 2, chaps. 5 and 6, pp. 126-136.

103. See Heidegger, The Question concerning Technology, p. 35 .

104. For an expression of this view, see John D. Caputo, "Demythologizing

Page 360

Heidegger: Aletheia and the History of Being," Review of Metaphysics 41 (March 1988): 542.

105. Theodore Kisiel called this to my attention.

106. We have noted Heidegger's discussion of Marx in "The Letter on Humanism" (see chap. 1, n. 29), pp. 219-220.

107. See the article on "technology," in A Dictionary of Marxist Thought , ed. Tom Bottomore et al. (Cambridge, Mass.: Harvard University Press, 1983), p. 478.

108. Marx's view of agency, which is influenced by Fichte's similar view, contains an unresolved tension. On this point, see my Fichte, Marx and the German Philosophical Tradition (Carbondale, Ill.: Southern Illinois University Press, 1980), pp. 91-94.

109. For a general statement of his awareness of this hermeneutical problem, see Heidegger, An Introduction to Metaphysics , p. 176.

110. For a well-known critique of Plato as an enemy of democracy, see Popper, The Open Society and Its Enemies (see chap. 2, n. 178), vol. 1, The Spell of Plato .

111. Kant argues that the concept of freedom grounds the autonomy of the will and must be presupposed. See Kant's discussion of freedom in Kant, Fundamental Principles of the Metaphysics of Morals (see chap. 2, n. 153), pp. 63-65

112. See H. Kimmerle, "Motiven in het denken van Heidegger als verklarende elementen voor zijn politieke houding," in Heidegger en het nazisme: Een symposium , ed. H. A. F. Oosterling and A. W. Prins (Rotterddam: Faculteit der Wijsbegeerte van de Erasmus Universiteit Rotterdam, n.d.), pp. 37-45. Kimmerle attributes Heidegger's difficulty to a mistakenly Hegelian reading of Hölderlin. See ibid., p. 45.

111. Kant argues that the concept of freedom grounds the autonomy of the will and must be presupposed. See Kant's discussion of freedom in Kant, Fundamental Principles of the Metaphysics of Morals (see chap. 2, n. 153), pp. 63-65

112. See H. Kimmerle, "Motiven in het denken van Heidegger als verklarende elementen voor zijn politieke houding," in Heidegger en het nazisme: Een symposium , ed. H. A. F. Oosterling and A. W. Prins (Rotterddam: Faculteit der Wijsbegeerte van de Erasmus Universiteit Rotterdam, n.d.), pp. 37-45. Kimmerle attributes Heidegger's difficulty to a mistakenly Hegelian reading of Hölderlin. See ibid., p. 45.

113. These views are expressed by Pöggeler. See Poggeler, "Heideggers politisches Selbstverständnis" (see n. 64), pp. 33 and 47.

114. Vietta argues strongly, but inconsistently, that Heidegger's critique of technology follows from his critique of National Socialism and that his critique of technology is also a critique of National Socialism. See Vietta, Heideggers Kritik am Nationalsozialismus und an der Technik .

115. For a summary, see Sheehan, "Heidegger and the Nazis," pp. 42-43.

116. Marten has described this incident. See Rainer Marten, "Ein rassistisches Konzept von Humanität," Badische Zeitung , 19-20 December 1987, p. 14. The relevant passage is cited in Farias, Heidegger and Nazism (see Introd., n. 4), pp. 227-228.

117. See "Mit Heidegger gegen Heideggers Denken: Zur Veröffentlichung von Vorlesungen aus dem Jahre 1935," Frankfürter Allgemeine Zeitung , 25 July 1953, reprinted as "Zur Veröffentlichung von Vorlesungen aus dem Jahre 1935 (1953)," in Jürgen Habermas, Philosophisch-politische Profile (Frankfurt a.M.: Suhrkamp Verlag, 1973), pp. 67-75.

118. See Christian E. Lewalter, "Wie liest man 1953 Sätze yon 19357" Die Zeit , 13 August 1953, p. 6.

119. See "Heidegger über Heidegger," Die Zeit , 24 September 1953, p. 18, reprinted in Martin Heidegger, Gesamtausgabe , vol. 40, Einführung in die

Page 361

Metaphysik , ed. Petra Jaeger (Frankfurt a.M.: Vittorio Klostermann, 1976), pp. 232-233.

120. Letter of 18 March 1968 to S. Zemach, cited in Heidegger, Einführung in die Metaphysik , p. 233.

121. See "Only a God Can Save Us," p. 276.

122. See the Nachwort by Petra Jaeger, in Heidegger, Einführung in die Metaphysik , p. 234.

123. See Pöggeler, "Heideggers politisches Selbstverständnis," p. 38.

124. Heidegger, An Introduction to Metaphysics , p. 199. This passage is susceptible of different interpretations. According to Zimmerman, it indicates Heidegger's belief that the Nazis would bring forth a new kind of human being endowed with the qualities favored by Jünger but devoid of the interest in production related to technology. See Zimmerman, Heidegger's Confrontation with Modernity , p. 190. The most detailed interpretation of which I am aware is due to Janicaud. See Janicaud, L'ombre de cette pensée (see Introd., n. 7), chap. 7, "La lettre volée," pp. 77-96.

125. Vietta here refers to a personal communication from Heribert Heinichs. See Vietta, Heideggers Kritik am Nationalsozialismus und an der Technik , pp. 46-47.

126. See Heidegger, Vorträge und Aufsätze (see chap. 4, n. 80), p. 18.

127. Heidegger, The Question concerning Technology , p 15.

128. This passage was first published by Schirmacher. See Wolfgang Schirmacher, Technik und Gelassenheit: Zeitkritik nach Heidegger (Freiburg and Munich, 1983), p. 25. The passage cited is given in Farias, Heidegger and Nazism , p. 287; translation modified.

129. For a closely Heideggerian claim that Heidegger's insensitivity is terrible but that the Holocaust reveals the essential nature of the West, see Philippe Lacoue-Labarthe, La fiction du politique (Paris: Christian Bourgois, 1987), pp. 57-63.

130. This passage is from the manuscript of a lecture entitled "Die Gefahr," p. 47, cited in Sheehan, "Heidegger and the Nazis" (see n. 69), p. 42; translation modified.

131. Cited in Farias, Heidegger and Nazism , p. 285. For Marcuse's astonished response, which rejects the implied comparison between forcible displacement and the annihilation of peoples, see ibid., pp. 285-287.

130. This passage is from the manuscript of a lecture entitled "Die Gefahr," p. 47, cited in Sheehan, "Heidegger and the Nazis" (see n. 69), p. 42; translation modified.

131. Cited in Farias, Heidegger and Nazism , p. 285. For Marcuse's astonished response, which rejects the implied comparison between forcible displacement and the annihilation of peoples, see ibid., pp. 285-287.