2016 Volume 2016 Issue 67 Pages 9-24
Heidegger and the Kyoto school proposed to conquer the crises they saw in
their respective states by appealing to tradition.
Heidegger advocated a return to the fundamental task of European philosophy, endeavoring to grasp the totality of being as what is. He expected that this task could be fulfilled by the German people under Nazism. His political commitment is derived from his philosophy of existence: its authentic decisions are devoid of norms. Likewise, in his later thought, no such norm affects what call of being man should obey. In this politics of being, only being is respected, not human beings, which would be respected under the idea of human dignity. Importing that ontic evaluation of the Germans and Judaism into its ontological creed might constitute a threat to human lives.
Nishida conceived the idea of contradictory self-identity: by denying itself, the self becomes integrated into its environment and transforms the whole, consequently restoring its identity. He and his disciples thought that this idea had guided Japan throughout history and would justify Japan’s invasion of East Asia. This imaginary solidarity might constitute a threat to other peoples' independence.
Both parties can be accused of confusing philosophical (ontological) thinking with positive or mundane (ontic) thinking.
At present, the idea of human dignity has a central place in the German identity. Japanese philosophers should work to explain the concept of identity in presentday Japanese society.
