Tag: Heidegger

Knut Hamsun The Nazi

Hamar WilliamsLeave a comment

I questioned a few days ago about whether there is credibility in someones words despite them not being able to live by them themselves. This was in relation to Heidegger the career driven Nazi compared to someone like The Buddha. Yesterday I talked about how hard it can be to find sources of information and opinion that are contrary to yours but are credible, well researched and not based upon bias. In the end I decided against buying the book on Nietzsche and his take on contemporary society, not because of the topic but because I don’t know if I can trust the author not to waste my time. I haven’t given up on it and I may still one day but instead I stumped for Knut Hamsun’s Growth Of The Soil. I have only read one of his books before and that is Hunger, which is about the struggles of an impoverished writer trying to survive in late nineteenth century Oslo, Norway. It is a psychological journey through the irrational mind of someone enduring existence and I suspect there are certain autobiographical elements to it. It is an incredible story and I enjoyed it so much I decided not to rush into another of his books, instead spread them out and enjoy them as I felt right. Knut Hamsun won the Nobel Prize for Literature in 1920 and from that one book alone I can see why.

Knut Hamsun though is an incredibly divisive figure. At the turn of the century influenced by what he saw as British aggression and Imperialism he developed a strong support for Germany and Germanic culture, supporting them in both the First and Second World Wars. Despite being eighty years old at the outbreak of the Second World War he managed to get an audience with Hitler and thoroughly pissed him off through his obstinate old man behaviour, and in attempting to get him to release imprisoned Norwegians. He did through write a eulogy for Hitler after his death and was going to be tried for treason after the war but it was decided his behaviour had been down to the mentally debilitating affects of age. Understandably he has been a divisive figure in Norway ever since and I directly quote from a Norwegian biographer on Wikipedia; “We can’t help loving him, though we have hated him all these years … That’s our Hamsun trauma. He’s a ghost that won’t stay in the grave”. This then is the next level of the dilemma, to read and love an author despite him being a total Nazi. Well seeing as I bought his book this morning it’s pretty clear how I feel about it. Sometimes it’s all about the literature. When it suits me at least.

Is There As Much Value In The Dream As The Achievement?

Hamar WilliamsLeave a comment

I was reading an article about death and how if we accept it’s inevitability we’re more likely to lead fulfilling and ultimately happier lives. It is with acceptance on this inevitable that will apparently help us to do more, fear less and live closer to whatever our true desires for a full life are. It highlights the differing approach between western and eastern philosophy and is an interesting piece all told. I want to discuss an idea that came into my mind while reading it more than the actual article itself.

The author highlights the example of Heidegger, who “lamented that too many people wasted their lives running with the ‘herd’ rather than being true to themselves”, but who later went on to join the Nazi party in the hope it would advance his career, amongst other reasons. Now then Heidegger was a great philosopher and influenced many in his lifetime and subsequently but he was in this example unable to live by his own ideals. This is opposite to another person the author discusses, The Buddha, who managed to live by his beliefs until the end. Do we then need to give more credibility to the ideals of someone who manages to live by what they say than someone who is unable to. Does their inability to follow their own beliefs discredit them as fanciful or unachievable or do we take them as things to one day achieve. If we only ever professed what we were capable of would we as a species have evolved our thinking at a far slower rate because we never made any so called implausible leaps.

It is important to understand where ideas come from. We are undoubtedly inspired by those around us of course, our peers and family, by modern culture, and what we observe in our daily life. There is ourselves too though. Who do we get to spend more time with, experience the deepest thoughts of and understandings than ourselves. I know without an argument I don’t live up to all my protestations and ideals but if I did I would probably be enlightened like The Buddha or I would potentially be leading a very simple life.

Some of what I believe is what I know I am lacking in my own life. I’ve observed something in myself and see how a life with or without it would be ‘better’ were I capable of living or thinking like that. I understand it because I aspire to it and see it’s value through the lack of it in my own life. Does my inability to follow through devalue the idea. Evidently I’m arguing no and as such think we would be wise not to be too dismissive of such failures in follow through. We shouldn’t be too quick to dismiss ideas because they seem incomprehensible and unachievable. Everything is unachievable until it is achieved and there are no time limits from the inception of an idea to it’s completion as common thought. Heidegger’s ideas, like our own fanciful ones, are no less credible just because he wasn’t able to master them himself. The ability of others later who could proves this. Perhaps there’s some value in our wildest dreams after all.