Yesterday I briefly mentioned the basic issue of Heidegger and Plato. Now it seems odd to some to tie together Heidegger (or Derrida) and Plato given that for both Heidegger and Derrida the point at which philosophy goes wrong is Plato. Thus the terms "logocentrism," "onto-theology," and even "totalitarianism" in Heidegger and those who follow after him like Derrida. There are two problems with this. For one Heidegger isn't especially known as a particularly "accurate" or "fair" reader of other philosophers. Why should Plato be considered differently?
We recognize for example that Heidegger's picture of Nietzsche is largely guided by what one might term writing in the margins of Nietzsche's main works: the collected notes of sometimes questionable accuracy collected by his sister who had her own projects to push. Reading Heidegger's Nietzsche and then the Nietzsche of his main works is sometimes jarring. Likewise Heidegger's Kant is unlike the historic Kant. I've long thought that the ultimate example of unintentional irony in philosophy was Heidegger and Cassier debating the interpretation of Kant when both appropriated Kant in significantly creative ways. With Heraclitus Heidegger manages to build an extensive and particular philosophy out of what are at best seen as a handful of enigmatic aphorisms. None of this is that surprising given the place of The Question for Heidegger. To be true to a philosopher is to be true to their question rather than necessarily true to what they said. Thus Heidegger's readings of past philosophers are immensely creative and are more a way of rethinking their questions down new paths in the context of the philosopher.
As Nietzsche put it,
The philosopher believes that the value of his philosophy lies in hte whole, in the building: posterity discovers it in the bricks with which he built and which are then often used again for better building: in the fact, that is to say, that the building can be destroyed an nonetheless possess value as material. (Assorted Opinions and Maxims, 31 as quoted in A Nietzsche Reader, 33, R. J. Hollingdale tr.)
That "destruction" Nietzsche speaks of is a kind of re-valuation. Or perhaps put an other way a re-collect-ing. It is the sense of Destruction in Heidegger and Deconstruction in Derrida.
The implication within Heidegger and best manifest in Derrida is the idea that there never is a single reading of Plato (or any other philosopher). As Nietzsche put it, the bricks of past philosophers can be "used again for better building." Perhaps, as a point of emphasis and to emphasize the point being made we might better say, "posterirty discovers in the bricks value that can be used again and again for better building. While Heidegger doesn't necessarily give us the example of this with respect to Plato, Derrida definitely does in such works as "Plato's Pharmacy."
How then ought this inform our consideration of Heidegger and Plato? At best, it means that we must consider that there are many Platos. The Plato Heidegger engages with arises less as a way of presenting Plato than presenting a question found in Plato.
One should also consider that the Plato Nietzsche, Heidegger, and Derrida "received" and reacted against was a particular social creation about Plato. It was not just the accumulation nof over 800 years of direct pagan Platonic thought in the ancient world. It was the accumulation of thought about Plato by various Christians ranging from Augustine to the pseudo-Dionysus to Aquinas, Scotus and the medievals. It was the accumulation of the Berkeley Platonists and the German idealists. This is why Nietzsche was able to tie the death of God to the Christian God. Because Plato and philosophical Christianity had become so intwined.
But just as one can see Nietzsche as clearing out the rubble of accumulated (false) belief about Christianity, one can perhaps fruitfully see the same with respect to Plato.
Put simply is the Platonism Heidegger, Derrida, and Nietzsche attack the only useful Platonism?
I've closed comments in order to avoid spam since I don't check this older blog as much anymore.
and Theology
Number of unique visitors:
Blogged by Clark Goble