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

Abstract

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. Response to Reviewers:No response.

Dialogue

“…Here Heidegger sketches out his take on intersubjectivity, but many critics have pointed to the fact that Heidegger's Mitsein is only briefly described in Being and Time. Therefore, it is often said that Heidegger's philosophy is unable to account for the Other, for the social elements of Dasein's being in the world (Theunissen, 1977(Theunissen, /1984Olesh, 2008;Herskowitz, 2019). In section 26 of Being and Time, called 'The Dasein of others and Everyday Being-with', Heidegger explains that Dasein is in the world and in that world, there are things that Dasein relates to, either as ready-to-hand or as present-at-hand.…”

“…There is no account of these conversations during their long walks together. But in later interviews, according to Buber, they never reached any agreement on the subject matter: that is for later generations to figure out (Olesh, 2008;Mendes-Flohr, Journal of Pragmatic Constructivism 13 (2023) 3 -8 2014Herskowitz, 2019). The meeting in 1957 between Heidegger and Buber was viewed at the time as controversialthe Jewish mystic and the Nazi-professor (Mendes-Flohr, 2014).…”