gwern comments on Rationality Quotes January 2014 - Less Wrong

7 Post author: Mestroyer 04 January 2014 07:39PM

You are viewing a comment permalink. View the original post to see all comments and the full post content.

Comments (186)

You are viewing a single comment's thread.

Comment author: gwern 04 January 2014 11:04:16PM *  5 points [-]

In the fall of 1939, Martin Heidegger and his young Freiburg student and friend Günther Anders were walking along the river when they saw a newspaper vendor's sign announcing that the English had accused the German government of instigating a recent attempt to assassinate Churchill. When Heidegger remarked that it wouldn't surprise him at all if it were true, Anders retorted that it was impossible because "the Germans were too civilized and decent to attempt anything so underhand, and such an act was incompatible with the German 'national character'." Heidegger was furious. Some five years later after the war, he wrote to Anders:

"Whenever I thought of you I couldn't help thinking of a particular incident which seemed to me very important, you made a remark about 'national character' that shocked me by its primitiveness. I then thought: what is the use of studying philosophy if all that it does for you is to enable you to talk with some plausibility about some abstruse questions of logic, etc., & if it does not improve your thinking about the important questions of everyday life, if it does not make you more conscientious than any journalist in the use of the dangerous phrases such people use for their own ends."

(Hans Sluga, Heidegger's Crisis: Philosophy and Politics in Nazi Germany)

Comment author: Vaniver 05 January 2014 03:46:08PM *  12 points [-]

Hmmm. This looks almost identical to an anecdote involving Wittgenstein and Malcolm (among other places, repeated here), with the names and nationalities changed. Any idea which is the original?

Comment author: Vulture 05 January 2014 04:39:21PM 2 points [-]

There was a whole comment thread to this effect, which was subsequently deleted for some reason. Just a heads up.

Comment author: garethrees 05 January 2014 04:39:10PM *  22 points [-]

I think gwern is teasing us: there is no such quotation in Sluga's Heidegger's Crisis, or at least I cannot find it in the Google Books version. Perhaps gwern has taken the Wittgenstein/Malcolm story and swapped Britain for Germany to make a point about the universal applicability of the philosopher's rebuke.

But for what it's worth:

  • The date in the Heidegger version of the story is very suspicious: in 1939 Churchill was First Lord of the Admiralty; he did not become Prime Minister until May 1940 and it is only with hindsight that we see his significance (even in 1940 most political actors seem to have thought that Lord Halifax would be a better choice for Prime Minister than Churchill).

  • The version of the anecdote featuring Wittgenstein and Malcolm is backed up by a citation to Malcolm's Ludwig Wittgenstein: A Memoir where Malcolm quotes the letter from Wittgenstein at length. Also, the 1939 date for the original quarrel about "national character" is a better fit to this story, because in 1939 no-one could doubt the significance of Hitler, and assassination attempts on Hitler were by that point a fairly regular occurrence.

Comment author: ChristianKl 05 January 2014 10:54:55PM 1 point [-]

The whole story is also much more fitting to the "character" that Wittgenstein is supposed to have as opposed to the one of Heidegger.

Comment author: ArisKatsaris 05 January 2014 05:22:18PM *  8 points [-]

Yeah, this seems like one of the occasional tests/experiments Gwern does.

Comment author: gwern 02 February 2014 12:50:17AM 0 points [-]

Yes; I was curious what would happen when I reversed the nationalities. I really thought waiting 2 years would be enough for people to forget the original discussion, since it wasn't a popular quote, but Vaniver and another proved me wrong and destroyed the value of the test, so now I'll never know.

I am a little embarrassed by the Churchill mistake, though.