Everything is under control: Buber’s critique of Heidegger’s magic

As part of a religiously-oriented analysis, Martin Buber associates Martin Heidegger’s later philosophy with magic. The present article is dedicated to explicating and evaluating this association. It does so, first, by fleshing out how Buber comes to depict Heidegger as an advocate of magic. Then, b...

Full description

Bibliographic Details
Main Author: Herskowitz, D. (Author)
Format: Article
Language:English
Published: Springer Netherlands 2019
Subjects:
Online Access:View Fulltext in Publisher
LEADER 01932nam a2200193Ia 4500
001 10.1007-s11153-019-09706-1
008 220511s2019 CNT 000 0 und d
020 |a 00207047 (ISSN) 
245 1 0 |a Everything is under control: Buber’s critique of Heidegger’s magic 
260 0 |b Springer Netherlands  |c 2019 
856 |z View Fulltext in Publisher  |u https://doi.org/10.1007/s11153-019-09706-1 
520 3 |a As part of a religiously-oriented analysis, Martin Buber associates Martin Heidegger’s later philosophy with magic. The present article is dedicated to explicating and evaluating this association. It does so, first, by fleshing out how Buber comes to depict Heidegger as an advocate of magic. Then, by examining other appearances of the category of magic in the wider context of Buber’s dialogical oeuvre, it demonstrates that what he has in mind when he invokes this category is a specific manner of human appeal to the divine marked by manipulation, utility and control. Finally, it evaluates the affiliation of Heidegger with magic: first, by comparing the metaphysical presuppositions undergirding the logic of magic—specifically the conceptions of, and interrelations between, ‘language’ and ‘being’—with Heidegger’s views, and second, by judging whether the claim that Heidegger promotes manipulative, utilitarian, and power-laden attitudes can be justified in light of his analysis of ‘technology’. The article ultimately argues that Buber misattributes magic to Heidegger, and that this misattribution better reflects the theoretical framework through which Buber justifies his dialogical position than an apt assessment of Heidegger’s thought. © 2019, Springer Nature B.V. 
650 0 4 |a Magic 
650 0 4 |a Martin Buber 
650 0 4 |a Martin Heidegger 
650 0 4 |a Philosophy 
650 0 4 |a Technology 
700 1 |a Herskowitz, D.  |e author 
773 |t International Journal for Philosophy of Religion