Is Heidegger an Orientalist or an Occidentalist European Philosopher? Disclosing the Political Factor behind Heidegger’s Representation of Chinese Thinking

• Published in: Frontiers of philosophy in China Vol. 14; no. 4; pp. 523 - 551
• Main Author: Heurtebise, Jean-Yves
• Format: Journal Article
• Language: English
• Published: Beijing Higher Education Press 2019; Higher Education Press Limited Company
• Subjects: Belief & doubt; Daoism; Heidegger; Heidegger, Martin (1889-1976); Ideology; National Socialism; Occidentalism; Orientalism; Philosophers; Theology; China
• ISSN: 1673-3436; 1673-355X
• DOI: 10.3868/s030-008-019-0032-4

Though Heidegger became a kind of conceptual companion of comparative philosophers, and a methodological example for interpreters of Daoist philosophy claiming that Zhuangzi or Laozi embodied the overcoming of Western “onto-theology,” Heidegger himself not only stressed his disbelief in the notion that Asian thinking could save the West from its “civilizational crisis” but also clearly claimed that Western thinking could emerge only through its distinction from the “mythical East.” However, at the same time, Heidegger criticized the decadence of the West, claimed the necessity of cultural rejuvenation, and then, with the failure of Germany to perform this task, seemed to turn to Chinese sources to find alternative solutions. How to understand Heidegger’s complex relationship with China? Is Heidegger an Orientalist or an Occidentalist European philosopher? Moreover, how to understand the subtle and troubling connections between Heidegger’s complex relationship with China and Heidegger’s highly “problematic” (to say the least) intellectual engagement with Nazi ideology? To what extent are Orientalism and Occidentalism are linked to Heidegger’s belief in the Nationalist-Socialists’ claims about “saving” the “European spirit”?