Nature is not something to be conquered but something to be loved. We should apply the precautionary principle instead. The same with the genetical engineering of crops, which again carried unknown and unquantifiable risks. Thomas explained he had founded the Global Green University for exactly this purpose. However we wondered if Europe could draw more cleverly on the spiritual wisdom of indigenous European cultures, and perhaps convene a possible Council of Spiritual Elders to comment or suggest amendments to its legislative programmes?
Founded in , in it had issued the Declaration for European Indigenous Religious Traditions, as follows: We, the delegates from twelve different countries convened at the European Congress of Ethnic Religions in Vilnius, Lithuania, on this 9th day of July , join our voices together to make the following declaration: We are members of diverse European indigenous ethnic cultures who seek to revitalize and reclaim our ancestral religious and spiritual traditions.
We honor those who went before us, who gave us our life and our heritage. We are bound to the lands of our ancestors, to the soil that holds their bones, to the waters from which they drank, to the roads that they once walked. And we seek to pass that heritage to those who come after us, whose ancestors we are in the process of becoming — our children, our grandchildren, and the many generations yet to be born. We send solidarity and support to those other indigenous nations, races and religions who are also engaged in the struggle to preserve their own ancestral heritages.
Our ethnic religions are the product of the history of this continent; they are the living expressions, in the present, of our most ancient traditions and identities. At a time when the world is precariously balanced on the edge of environmental and economic upheaval, largely as the result of imbalanced individualism and rampant greed, our religions promote very different models of spiritual and social values: living in harmony, balance and moderation with the Earth; the importance of family and cooperative community; and respect and honour for all forms of life.
Yet, in many countries of Europe, the practice of our religions is impeded, restricted, and sometimes forbidden. The European Council A had stated that it underlines the importance of addressing discrimination and inequalities based on indigenous origin or identity as well as the importance of actions taken to address the threats to and violence against indigenous peoples.
Medienimpulse by Alessandro Barberi - Issuu
The Council also highlights the crucial importance of further enhancing opportunities for dialogue with indigenous peoples at all levels of EU cooperation. Basically it is an institutionalized summit meeting where general political strategies are discussed. It is this body which has endorsed the rights of indigenous peoples.
Also known informally, confusingly and inaccurately as the EU Council, it is where national ministers from each EU country meet to adopt laws and coordinate policies. It meets more often than the European Council A. So this recognition by the European Union of indigenous rights gives the Druid peoples of Europe an important role to bring these rights to the attention of both the learned and general public. Was this because the religious traditions of Europe had often clashed in the past?
Perhaps Druidry could help heal these ancient splits and conflicts? The Swedish parliament had also, for a time, a similar officer appointed. Thomas suggested that perhaps the European Parliament should appoint a similar Future Intelligence Officer to consider all EU legislation. Shlomo Soham, had been appointed to consider the legislation from the perspective of future generations, as head of the Commission for Future Generations which started its work in and has now been shut down. We also discussed whether any space had been made available inside the European Union buildings for prayer and meditation as there was in the UN Headquarters building in New York, and recently a small interfaith prayer space had been opened for this purpose, which the Council commended.
Thomas reported that among his Druid colleagues some had supported Brexit and others had opposed it and instead wanted to reform the European Union from within his own position. Did the more populous state of England have a moral right to impose Brexit on the whole of the UK against their democratic wishes? Other Druids had felt however that the European Union had too many shortcomings to be reformed successfully and that the UK had better leave sooner rather than later. We agreed it was not the business of the Council to interfere in complex political matters, but rather to represent the common interests of all Druid Orders and individual Druids from across Europe as a whole, including countries which were both part of the European Union and those which were not.
Europe as a whole seemed to be going through many complex troubles and we felt that the voice of its ancient Druid elders might well be useful to be heard at this late stage of our evolution as a continent. The meeting ended after much vigorous discussion in which all participants freely expressed their views and opinions with good cheer and common courtesy. We agreed that the next meeting of the European Council of Druids would be in Austria and hosted by the Austrian Druid order.
Invitations would be circulated in due course. Afterwards, we repaired to the nearby sacred site of Les Pierre Jaumatres and performed a Druid ritual for peace, to celebrate the Autumn Equinox. Thomas Daffern B. Webseiten: www. Datum: Herbst-Tagundnachtgleiche, September Sie hatte mehrere Jahre bei einem koreanischen Schamanen studiert, dann bei einem sibirischen Schamanen der einen Russlandbesuch mitgemacht hatte und dann bei einem buddhistischen Schamanen aus Nepal im Himalaya, zu dem sie auch Besuch hatte.
Sie war in einer Familie aufgewachsen, die Druiden als ihre Lebensweise praktizierte, und so empfand sie auch ihren eigenen Weg. Tagesordnungspunkt 1. Helmut Birkhan. Juli und der Dieses wissenschaftliche Gremium wurde am 7. Thomas wies darauf hin, dass wir uns in dem Raum namens Apollo im Museum der Musen trafen, also trafen wir uns als wahre Akademiker und Druiden, sozusagen "Sub-Musae".
Russland seit hat Religionsunterricht in allen russischen Schulen obligatorisch gemacht. Eliteschulen wie Eton oder Winchester unterrichten alle Klassiker - alle Schulen sollten jedoch Klassiker unterrichten, aber auch zumindest einige Aspekte des authentischen Druidentums. Verhindert oder verhindert die geltende EU-Gesetzgebung ein ganzheitliches Denken rund um Naturheilmittel?
Thomas teilte einige seiner Vermittlungsarbeit mit der buddhistischen Gemeinschaft. Die Situation in Burma war jedoch besorgniserregend. Egidio, die vom Wir waren uns einig, dass die Medien Druidry normalerweise nicht ernst nehmen und Bilder von Asterix und Obelix die Vorstellungen dominieren, wie Druiden sein sollen.
Wertorientierte umweltfreundliche Lebensweisen. Dies scheint seinen Ursprung teilweise in uralten Rechtsbegriffen von Druid und Brehon zu haben. Er habe in verschiedenen Ausbildungsgremien in Kalifornien und London als Mediator ausgebildet und dann Pionierarbeit bei der Einrichtung von Mediationssystemen in Schulen geleistet, die zu oft Konflikte und Mobbing zeugen.
Die Natur ist nicht etwas, das erobert werden muss, sondern etwas, das geliebt werden muss. Wir sollten stattdessen das Vorsorgeprinzip anwenden. Wir ehren diejenigen, die vor uns gegangen sind, die uns unser Leben und unser Erbe gegeben haben. Auch informell, verwirrend und ungenau wie der EU-Rat bekannt, treffen sich die nationalen Minister aus jedem EU-Land, um Gesetze anzunehmen und zu koordinieren. Its study agendas include advancing research into all aspects of the Druid philosophical tradition, and its worldwide significance and impact: The history and nature of Druid thought and the life and times of Taliesin, Amergin, Fenius Farsaidh, Bladud, Abaris, Myrddin Merlin , Ossian, and other famous Druids, and their philosophies.
The influence of Druid philosophical thinking on evolution of Scottish thought and philosophy and the Scottish enlightenment and in contemporary Scottish philosophy. The development of ideas of peace in Druid thought, from proto-Druid through to contemporary Druid thought, and the search for a metaphysical basis for a peaceful dialogue of civilizations, as seen through a Druid philosophical lens; the history and philosophy of the role of Druids as peacemakers and mediators and the extent to which this function needs reviving in the contemporary world situation The philosophy and teachings of Druidry on relationships, love, sexuality, gender and marriage; the relative power and status of women in Celtic and Druid society, the valuing of women as equal in Druid status to men; the role of Druid Queens and female tribal rulers in Celtic civilizations, the nature of female and male deities and Goddesses in Celtic Druidry the linkages between druidry and other pagan forms of indigenous philosophy, including Wiccan traditions and the evolution of Witchcraft in the British Isles and other Druidic realms.
Druid teachings on the right use of drugs and the psychoactive and hallucinogenic properties of indigenous plants and their shamanic use within Druidic tradition and their philosophical implications Druid contributions to the philosophy and practice of the Arts; the historical evidence for Druid and Bardic artistic creativity, as well as the work of contemporary practitioners of the arts in Celtic and British culture, including music, fine art, architecture and design, poetry, dance, theatre, fashion, pottery, metalwork etc.
Studies of the philosophy of art and the Druidical approach of art as a means of wisdom-transmission. The use of symbols in Druid work and in Celtic art and the linkages between Druid art and other artistic traditions worldwide, including those of prehistory. Developments in archaeology and the uncovering and reinterpretation of archaeological evidence for Druid culture and philosophical and spiritual ideas, including the interpretation of stone circles, megaliths, ancient artifacts, dwellings, religious objects etc.
Druid teachings on children, parenting, family life, education and pedagogy; the custom of sending children to be raised and taught by Druids; the tradition of fostering in Celtic society; the philosophical implications of fostering in society, and the value of other Celtic and Druid educational ideas for the contemporary world.
The potential contributions of Druid philosophy to interfaith work and the philosophical study of Druid contributions to the evolution of a mature dialogue of religions, cultures and civilizations on the planet The contributions of Druid thought to the evolution of theology, in both Christian and other forms, including the idea of the Holy Trinity as an outgrowth of Druid formulations of the three-foldness of reality; the linkages of Druid theology to other ancient theological systems, including Egyptian, Sumerian, Iranian, Greek, Germanic and Scandinavian, Amerindian etc.
The tabulation of the chronology, history and philosophy of Druid teachers and sages and seers from ancient to Modern times; researching and publishing a complete list of all known Druids from all epochs of Irish and British history, together with their achievements and intellectual accomplishments, drawing on the ancient manuscripts still preserved as well as published secondary sources. The development of a Druid Education Committee in connection with the Council of British Druid Orders The Centre for Druid Philosophy has come into being to advance thinking, study and research into all the above areas of scholarship and knowledge, not only in the formal academic sense, but also in the intuitive and mystical sense of inner knowing or direct intuitive cognition.
I myself have sinned against him by not raising my voice against the wicked. How can we German Catholics ask for a just peace? If we were given a just peace, then we would all be hanged — that would be justice. In a declaration made in Stuttgart in October of , a number of prominent German Protestant theologians asserted their unity with the rest of the German people not only in suffering but also in guilt. The German people will not escape this guilt.
It is pointless, Jung suggested, to criticize the concept of collective guilt because of its irrationality; that irrationality is precisely what is at stake in the concept, and given the fact that irrationality is widespread throughout Europe and the rest of the world, one must address and not deny it.
Neither Germans themselves nor other Europeans can make the psychological fact of collective guilt disappear. There is, he claimed, an objective psychological correlation between the collective German psyche and National Socialist psychopathology. Jung suggested that Hitler himself could be chosen by Germans as their leader only because the psychopathology of his own psyche corresponded to the psychopathology in the collective German psyche. Germans suffer from a profound inferiority complex, Jung suggested, which leads them to ascribe all the negative characteristics that they fear and hate in themselves to other peoples; they therefore live in the illusion of being surrounded by hostile and inferior human beings.
It cannot simply be a coincidence, the psychiatrist claimed, that Germans chose precisely the hysterical Hitler as their leader.
Paul K. Feyerabend
Unlike Jung, Karl Jaspers set out to establish an objective and differentiated approach to the problem; he was only secondarily interested in the psychological truth of accusations of collective guilt. His exploration of the question of guilt was the most systematic German analysis of the immediate postwar years. The sense of political liability lets no man dodge.
In contrast to many ordinary Germans, who viewed the Nuremberg trials as an affront to the entire German people, Jaspers argues that because the Nuremberg tribunal clearly limits the concept of criminal guilt to a relatively small number of criminals, it actually relieves the German people of the accusation of criminal guilt — while simultaneously making their political guilt even clearer.
In their persons the people are also condemned. Thus the indignity and mortification experienced by the leaders of the state are felt by the people as their own indignity and mortification. Hence their instinctive, initially unthinking rejec79 tion of the trial. It is the duty of every German to examine his or her own conscience with respect to moral guilt, and to understand that even a subjective feeling of innocence is no guarantee of guiltlessness. However, ultimately everyone in the world is responsible for everyone else in the world, because there is a necessary metaphysical solidarity among all human beings.
Metaphysical guilt can be judged only by God, not by legal or political institutions, and not even by the individual human conscience. Rather, he is interested in what Germans feel about themselves. Every one, in his real being, is the German people. For all Germans, therefore, guilt and the consciousness that comes from it are inescapable. As Arendt saw it, Nazi totalitarianism had transformed the German bourgeois into an instrument of political murder, using the appearance of respectability for its own ends.
After all, he was only doing his job. Therefore German declarations of innocence have a perverse kind of credibility, Arendt believes, because they are founded on the very separation of public and private life that made possible the commission of German crimes in the first place.
His own recognition of the problem of guilt, he wrote, had come during a visit that he and his wife made to Dachau shortly after the end of the war. Man, where have you been? Paradoxically, he wrote, it was during his four years outside the concentration camp, prior to his incarceration in , that he had truly been unfree. The unfree person seeks to escape responsibility, hiding under the shadow of a higher authority. But God grants human beings freedom, and that freedom entails a responsibility which they cannot evade by delegating it to others.
For twelve years we were told about it. Therefore if Germans now seek to evade their responsibility for other human beings, they are merely fleeing once again from the consciousness of freedom which they had so successfully avoided during the Third Reich. And by refusing to be made responsible we are depriving ourselves of the possibility of becoming free again.
And the German evasion of guilt was really an evasion of freedom. With respect to the question of whether the German nation as a whole was primarily a victim or a perpetrator, many writers were understandably ambivalent. The Communist writer Johannes R. Becher, later to be Minister of Culture in the German Democratic Republic, was a good example of that ambivalence. Invoking the millions of German soldiers who had become casualties of war, Becher implied that such soldiers were primarily victims of the Nazis, not perpetrators of a criminal war.
If Germans perceived themselves as victims of the Nazis, they would be less likely to identify themselves with the Nazis. All too many Germans, Wolf wrote, were seeking to exculpate themselves, claiming never to have committed any crimes nor to have been even partially responsible for injustice. All too many Germans were turning away from the question of guilt and sticking their heads in the sand, Wolf argued. Instead of looking to others and blaming them for crimes, the playwright suggested, Germans ought to begin by examining their own consciences.
In the course of such an examination they might come to realize that the ruined city of Berlin and many other ruined European cities were concrete reminders of German guilt. Bertolt Brecht was similarly ambivalent in his judgment of the German people. And yet in private Brecht was far more critical and suspicious of ordinary Germans, acknowledging the existence of widespread popular support for the Nazis.
During the winter of —3, as his regiment is decimated at Stalingrad, Vilshofen begins to question not only the leadership of the German high command but also the morality of the war itself. It is not the proud German eagle that should be the symbol of Nazi Germany, Vilshofen recognizes, but rather the crow, feeding on weakness, disease, and death.
How does the dead Stalingrad army weigh in the balance, how much does this ghostly procession of prisoners weigh? What else must be laid upon the scales? Can guilt be weighed? How can it be weighed? It was not the bad officers. No, it was he, who had possessed credibility. As Vilshofen sees it, Gnotke: had retraced his steps to the source of the German disease.
At the end of the novel Gnotke and Vilshofen are seen marching through the frozen Volga landscape; their path toward each other is a path toward understanding and recognition of guilt. In sabotaging German planes, Oderbruch is betraying the trust of his friends and comrades; but at the same time he is fighting against the larger evil of Nazi tyranny and making it more difficult for his Luftwaffe comrades to carry out Nazi military policy. You looked on and did nothing to save him.
That is the guilt for which there can be no forgiveness. In his last meeting with Oderbruch, the latter acknowledges to Harras his own role in the sabotage and explains his motivation. Then the world is lost. You were right in everything. But such superiority, far from exculpating Harras, actually makes him doubly guilty. Precisely because he is an effective, charismatic military leader, his failure to oppose the Nazis bears particular weight.
As a revolutionary conservative brought up in the tradition of Prussian elitism, von Salomon despised the plebeian Nazis and kept his distance from them throughout the years of the Third Reich. Der Fragebogen was based on the questionnaires distributed by American occupation authorities to German civilians in the immediate postwar years for the purpose of determining the extent of their complicity with the Nazi regime.
By taking the questionnaire to such an absurd extreme, von Salomon sought to demonstrate the absurdity of the American questionnaires themselves. His book was essentially an autobiography covering the span of German history in the first half of the twentieth century, in which von Salomon had been born and lived most of his life. It would be impossible to understand his own individual life and actions, von Salomon seemed to be saying, without also understanding the entire complex history of the German nation.
The individual, he believed, is caught up in a collective which he did not necessarily choose, but from which he cannot escape. Far from being a criminal, the helpless individual is in fact a victim. This chapter begins with a description of the so-called Night of Broken Glass Reichskristallnacht , the officially organized pogrom against German Jews that occurred on November 9, Von Salomon and his female companion Ille experience the pogrom while strolling around their bourgeois neighborhood of Charlottenburg in Berlin, where they see SA thugs breaking the windows of stores owned by Jews.
The people means you, and me. But, God damn it all! I never gave them any mandate! When I thought a thing ought to be done I did it myself. In the first three sentences of this passage, von Salomon is a member of the German people in whose name crimes are committed; in the last three sentences, von Salomon is an individualist insisting on his own autonomy. For von Salomon, the rise of the Nazis is the result not of specific political and moral failures but rather part of a much larger modern catastrophe involving the loss of religious faith and the rise of large-scale, impersonal collectives that render the individual powerless.
It is not so much that upright people are few in number. Everything that is happening about us is not the product of the internal life of those who are doing it; it is the product of a collective. And a man who will not accept and believe in that collective is dead. The collective always acts unconditionally. It also demands our unconditional faith and acceptance.
But this collective has not gathered us up into itself, it has atomised us. Atomised frag ments cannot constitute a community, but only an explosive mass. Such individualists have become mere atoms without a connection to the German whole, he believes. Even individualist Germans who are excluded from the Nazi collective are incapable of resisting the onslaught of barbarism. They are, von Salomon argues, also zombies, because they do not participate in the life of the all-powerful collective. In their lifelessness and impotence, they are even more victimized than the actual victims.
Non-Jewish German individualists are far more to be pitied than Jews, he insists, blatantly minimizing the persecution of the Jews while maximizing the description of his own purported victimization. He must therefore endure the hatred of the very woman whom he has tried to help. In her eyes — he believes — he is simply drawing unwanted attention to her, therefore making her even more vulnerable to her tormentors.
Von Salomon draws the conclusion — logical only if one accepts his premise of an all-powerful Nazi collective — that any demonstration of civil courage is necessarily counterproductive, resulting only in further degradation. It is at any rate the only decent course. And it is also the most difficult thing in the world, a sort of Gandhi-ism without Gandhi. The helpless individual withdraws into heroic but impotent paralysis, observing with melancholy scorn the degradation of the world around him. There seemed to be something to the methods of the psychoanalysts after all.
Like himself and Frau Imming, most Germans during the Third Reich were caught up in political developments which they were helpless to resist. Das Beil von Wandsbek is the story of Albert Teetjen, a butcher in Hamburg who is facing severe competition from large department stores. For 2, marks, Teetjen — covered in a black mask to preserve his anonymity — chops off the heads of the condemned men. Initially, the butcher and his pretty wife Stine seem to have regained their financial stability as a result of this unconventional execution; but it is not long before word gets out in the neighborhood that their newfound prosperity is based on blood money.
In the end, Teetjen loses almost all of his customers and is forced to give up his butcher shop; he and his wife commit suicide. They have betrayed their fellow working men and women and must therefore die. Their fate is that of Judas Iscariot in the Bible. Albert Teetjen is an ordinary man, a petit-bourgeois shopkeeper afraid of social decline. The guilt with which he covers himself has its origin in economic desperation.
- The Foundation?
- Militia rolls--1783-1790. [Bedford county to York county] Pennsylvania.
- 20th Century Religious Thought.
- The Works of.
- Subscriber Login!
Those with money can easily afford the luxury of being without Schuld — in both senses of the word — but the poor have a far more difficult time. Albert Teetjen is faced with financial ruin — a mountain of debt — and he therefore also takes upon himself moral ruin — a mountain of guilt. The thoughtful prison warden Heinrich Koldewey, a traditional German conservative, detests Hitler and the Nazis, and he is convinced of the innocence of his four prisoners; but he does nothing to save the men in his care, and any efforts he makes against Hitler are too little, too late.
But it is the socially weak and impecunious butcher Teetjen who becomes the embodiment of German guilt. Poor people have little or no influence over the course of political affairs; it is the wealthy members of the educated bourgeoisie who organize and profit from politics throughout most of the world; when things go wrong, however, they do not want to pay the price. If Marx had viewed the capitalist system as the organized expropriation of surplus value for the benefit of the wealthy, then Zweig views the discourse of collective guilt as the organized foisting-off of responsibility onto the poor and powerless.
The ruling classes steal not only money but also innocence; the lower classes are not just poor but also — therefore — guilty. If Teetjen is Judas, then Koldewey and his kind are Pontius Pilate, seeking to wash their hands of guilt by implicating the common people. They had underwritten his wanderings with their lives. Because art for the Philistine Friedrich Wilhelm had always been a compensation and cosmetic disguise for an inadequate social reality — in other words: a lie — Siegfried subjects his art to the most severe of aesthetic and moral criteria.
The thought of causing a life that could be subjected to unforeseeable encounters, coincidences, actions, and reactions and which through deed, thought, or further reproduction of its own could once again have consequences throughout the future, the idea of being the father of a child, this provocation to the world, truly appalled him and spoiled any contact with girls for him, even if they were using contraceptives, which were in and of themselves already humiliating and disgusting, and which humiliatingly and disgustingly pointed out the very thing which was to be prevented.
His refusal of sexual intercourse is a logical refusal to propagate the family itself. As the Nazi regime collapsed, Adolf and his comrades were packed into a train and shipped off; but the train was stopped by enemy bombers. As Adolf and his fellow schoolboys make their way by foot along the railroad tracks after leaving the train, they suddenly encounter a group of inmates from a concentration camp who have themselves escaped from a train.
The children trembled in their Party school uniforms.
The Works of
And Adolf thought that his father was probably dead, that he must be dead; but the fact that his father was dead said nothing to him. If he was crying, then he was crying for himself, or maybe not even for himself, he did not know why he was crying, maybe he was crying for the world, but he was not crying because of his father. Had he not loved him? Had he hated him? While Adolf feels a profound sense of guilt when confronted with the Jewish boy — it is this sense of guilt that makes him and the other boys afraid of punishment — he is simultaneously unable to separate himself from his father, a Nazi criminal.
Adolf is therefore pulled in conflicting directions. Perhaps his father, like the father of the Jewish boy, is dead; perhaps he even deserved to die. Whereas the atheist Siegfried has dedicated himself to music as a substitute father-figure and superego, Adolf dedicates himself to God. The greater power of God protects Adolf from his seemingly omnipotent biological father, but at the same time Adolf fears revenge from that real father, a human god of death and destruction. Eva mourns for the lost and betrayed German Reich and for the dead Hitler, and she feels guilty for having survived the death of her beloved hero.
To have survived Hitler is to have made oneself guilty, as if one had contributed to his death. Eva Judejahn is thus a fury seeking revenge. In the service of Hitler, Judejahn imagines himself magnificent and powerful, lord over life and death. The murder that he commits at the end of the novel comes at the very moment when he feels his own mortality, shortly before the heart attack that ends his life. Powerless to defend himself, Judejahn then receives extreme unction from none other than his son the priest, the representative of the very God whom he has spent his entire life trying to escape.
Because of the guilt that they have inherited, Adolf and Siegfried seek in their own different ways to atone for the sins of their fathers, but in the end they are unable to escape from the hell that the Nazis have created. They have become the executors of their own damnation. Ultimately this novel describes an inferno in which all of its major figures live in varying degrees of torment. Germans know the horrors from which they are trying to escape, but they have no idea where to find a possible refuge.
The furies they carry with them wherever they go will quickly seek them out and punish them. Originally in the Deutsche Rundschau, August Wer war an Hitler schuld? Die Debatte um die Schuldfrage — Munich: Minerva, , Knopf, , Vansittart, Lessons of My Life, Henry Morgenthau, Jr. Morgenthau, Germany is Our Problem, Saul K. In the subsequent pages Barnouw also explores some of the ambiguities and complexities of official U. Army anti-fraternization policies in Germany. Ashton New York: Dial Press, , Der Horizont ist eng geworden.
Der Horizont verengte sich. Man machte nicht mehr Weltgeschichte. Lowe-Porter London: Martin Secker, , Ron H. Feldman, —36; here, New York: Grove Press, Originally published in Jewish Frontier, January Originally published in The chapter from which this sentence is taken does not appear in the published English-language translation. This sentence does not appear in the English-language version.
Constantine Fitzgibbon London: Putnam, , — Das ist eine bittere Wahrheit. Padover, Experiment in Germany, Publications, , Sidney B. Beck, , In subsequent editions of the novel, this passage does not begin the chapter. Holz, Christliche Weltanschauung, Jean Steinberg New York: Praeger, , Eure Sucht, zu greifen, greift nun nach euch.
Ihr selbst habt die Materie zum Material gemacht. Wundert euch nicht! Oktober Munich: Kaiser, , Cited in Herf, Divided Memory, , note 8. Hull, —; here, New York: Pantheon, For a critique of Jung, see Dr. Translation slightly altered. Der Sinn politischer Haftung erlaubt es niemandem auszuweichen. In ihnen wird das Volk mit verurteilt. Jaspers, The Question of German Guilt, Jeder ist, wenn er eigentlich ist, das deutsche Volk.
Juli bis Mitte Mensch, wo bist du gewesen? Ich hatte mich damals bereits meiner wahren Verantwortung begeben. Wir werden heute verantwortlich gemacht und wollen doch nicht verantwortlich gemacht werden. Werner Hecht et al. Eric Bentley, in Brecht, Werke, vol. Translation modified. Richard and Clara Winston, Wieviel wiegt die tote Stalingradarmee, wieviel wiegt dieser gespenstische Gefangenenzug, und was ist noch auf die Schale zu legen?
Ist die Schuld aufzuwiegen, wie ist sie aufzuwiegen? For an alternative Englishlanguage translation: Plievier, Stalingrad, trans. Ursula Heukenkamp, vol. Sogar Weib und Kinder. Sie haben zugeschaut und ihn nicht gerettet. Dann ist die Welt verloren. Fallen Sie nicht um, Oderbruch. Sie hatten recht, mit allem. Influenced by the Eichmann and Auschwitz trials in the early s, and after further criticisms that the figure of Harras was not presented in a sufficiently negative light — and, conversely, that the figure of Oderbruch had failed to appear in a sufficiently positive light — Zuckmayer published a slightly revised version of Des Teufels General in ; in this version Zuckmayer made it even clearer that Harras ultimately accepts his own guilt.
Manfred Durzak Stuttgart: Reclam, , — Doch, ich auch! Wir alle! Sie haben immer nur einen Auftrag des Volkes vollstreckt. Volk, das bist auch du und bin auch ich.
Aber ich habe, verdammt nochmal, keinen Auftrag gegeben. Alles, was um uns herum geschieht, lebt nicht aus denen heraus, die es tun; es lebt aus einem Kollektiv heraus. Wer sich zu diesem Kollektiv nicht bekennen kann, der ist tot. Das Kollektiv handelt immer unbedingt. Es verlangt auch das unbedingte Bekenntnis. Aber dieses Kollektiv, es hat uns nicht aufgenommen, sondern atomisiert.
- La pratique de lECG (French Edition)?
- mira, Autor auf Milla ClubMilla Club.
- Full text of "A history of philosophy, from Thales to the present time".
- Integrationsarbeit mit eingewanderten Jugendlichen mit VaKE (Values and Knowledge Education).
Atomisierte Teilchen bilden keine Gemeinschaft, sondern eine Sprengmasse. My translation. For an alternative English translation, see von Salomon, The Answers, In German: von Salomon, Der Fragebogen, — Und es ist zugleich das Schwerste, was es gibt, eine Art Gandhismus ohne Gandhi. An den Methoden der Psychoanalyse schien doch etwas dran zu sein. Michael Hofmann London: Penguin, , I cite the Hofmann translation unless otherwise noted.
Er hatte nur zugesehen. Sie hatten sein Wandern mit dem Tod gebilligt. For alternative translations, see 49 in the Hofmann version and 50 in the Savill version. For an alternative translation, see in the Hofmann version. For alternatives, see in the Hofmann translation and in the Savill translation. Tote guckten sie an.
Hatte er ihn nicht geliebt? Er glaubte es nicht. For alternative translations, see 75—76 in the Hofmann version and 79—80 in the Savill version. Schmutzige Fliegen. For an alternative translation, see 68 in the Hofmann version. Koeppen, Death in Rome Savill translation , In both the original and the two published English-language translations, this phrase is part of a rhetorical question.
However Der Tod in Rom was not published until , well after the zero hour itself. In other words their response to what appeared to be an unprecedented event was in fact predetermined by tradition. All access to the past may have been broken off, but the inability to connect with the past does not yet imply the compensatory turn toward the future that was later to become part of the zero hour myth. In this context both survival and death seem little more than coincidences, without fundamental meaning.
The only thing we could do was not to be loud and not to have too much weight. All it would have taken would have been for someone to start shouting, and we 3 would all have been lost. The abyss over which the narrator floats is his present, and the present is all he has. Only small size and light weight offer the possibility of a grace that might blow him over the danger zone. Powerlessness is the fundamental fact of a zero hour in which human agency has been reduced to nothingness.
In this world of nullity, human response can take two possible routes. On the one hand people can acknowledge the fact of their powerlessness; on the other, they can seek, through frenetic activity, to hide their impotence from themselves and others. For those in the first group, the destruction of their world means the end of ordinary life; while the second group clings desperately to ordinary life in order to obscure a more profound reality.
Again and again he describes his alienation from the routine activities of life. The people on this side and on the 6 other side have begun to hate each other. And he dared not look behind, for behind him was noth7 ing but fire. The subject of the parable has no mother and therefore no connection to a reassuring past or to tradition. Nor has he willed his own coming into the world. Far from being a hero of the zero hour, the narrator of this parable is at an utter loss. No visions of a grand rebuilding or of a newer, better Germany make the loss of the past more bearable; instead, the narrator suggests that the destruction of Hamburg heralds the end of European history.
The city and the continent are both gone for good. What remain are the living dead and those who are already ghosts. Even those who have busied themselves with the ordinary tasks of daily life are not necessarily thinking up grand schemes for the future: like their counterparts, they are lost in a present from which there is no release.
In the midst of their frenetic activity they suddenly stop, forgetting any projects they may have, and gather together with other people to listen to the news. To an outsider it must have seemed as if we had a lot of time, and yet we were people without rest. Everything we did be10 came instantly meaningless in our own eyes. The dissociation from time renders meaning impossible.
For those outside time, any action taking place within time makes no sense. Hence ordinary life has become radically alienating for the narrator. It is only in the context of the disappearance of the past and the absence of the future that the narrator is able to find himself in a present that, precisely through the terrible alienation of everyday life, bears the seeds of transformation and transcendence. Civil and political authority have disappeared, along with all those aspects of life that bind human beings to routine.
Already the narrator is aware that this hour of a nothingness that gives access to the infinite will soon come to an end. The stage-set is missing, the appearance of reality. But now everyday life has become permanently alienated, and human beings know that it is nothing but a game, without deeper reality. The narrator now finds himself in an alliance with the divine — even if the divinity is death itself. Rather than playing with the attributes of an existence now recognized to be unreal, the narrator plays with his divine friend and ally. And time 18 sits sadly in a corner, feeling useless.
Because of his alliance with a divine presence outside of time, the narrator-writer is able to preserve an element of eternity in the midst of destruction. Although the narrator asks himself why he is writing, he leaves his question unanswered, as if it were purely rhetorical, since a narrator can do nothing but narrate.
Although the narrator claims to make himself infinitesimally small, his alliance with a divinity greater than himself enlarges him and makes possible precisely that rainbow bridge over the abyss that he had previously claimed was illusory. The narrator may have rejected the maternal power of time, of clocks, and of everyday life, but he has become an ally of an even greater masculine power in the face of which everything else seems negligible.
Every afternoon he comes through the old gateway. We always ask him 20 to take us home with him. Fierz, W. Gallie, E. Hutten, W. Kneale, P. Landsberg, U. Polanyi, L. Rosenfeld, M. Scriven, G. Thurston, J. Vigier, J. Bastin, D. Bohm, F. Bopp, P. Fierz, H. Groenewold, E. Hutten, S. Mackay, M. Polanyi, M. Pryce, L. Rosenfeld, J. Bohm, J. Cohen, P. Fierz, F. Frank, W. Gallie, H. Groenewold, N. Hush, E. Mackay, U. Rosenfeld, G. Bohm, P. Feyerabend, H.
Landsberg, D. Pryce, G. Ryle, "Predicting and Inferring" among P. Alexander, A. Ayer, E. Braithwaite, J. Cohen, R. Englman, P. Feyerabend, W. Gallie, M. Hesse, E. German translation revised by the author of: Karl R. Beyer tans. German translation revised by the author of Karl R. Francke: Munich and Bern Topitsch ed. II, M. Sciacca ed. Colodny ed. Review of [Ernest H. II, Bernard Baumrin ed. Newman ed. Review of The [Norwood R. Crombie ed. Popper , Mario Bunge ed. Cohen and Marx W.
Beckerath et al eds , Gustav Fischer: Stuttgart, J. Mohr: Tubingen, Vandenhoeck and Ruprecht: Gottingen , pp. Batuhan, H. Delius, H. Feigl, P. Feyerabend, R. Haller, J. Hintikka, B. Juhos, W. Leinfellner, P. Weingartner, A. Wilhelmy, R. Feyerabend, J. Leinfellner, B. Thum, P. Juhos, P. Acham, H. Leinfellner, E Weingartner, R. Essler, P. Leinfellner, W. Feyerabend, B. Leinfellner, A. Hintikka', W.
Feyerabend, G. Frey, R. Haller, B. Juhos, B. Weingartner, E. Weinzierl, R. Acham, P. Frey, B.
Lorenzen, P. Weingartner, R. Del-Negro, P. Juhos, C. Lejewski, P. Lorenzen, B. Lorenzen, H. Post, B. Geburtstag , Ernst Oldemeyer ed. III, Reidel: Dordrecht , pp. Butts and J. Davis eds , Basil Blackwell: Oxford and Toronto , pp. Radner and S. Winokur eds , University of Minnesota Press: Minneapolis , pp. Achinstein, I. Barbour, M. Brodbeck, R. Buek, J. Cornman, W. Craig, H. Feyerabend, A. Hanson, C. Hempel, M. Hill, E. McMullin, G. Maxwell, W. Rozeboom, W.
Salmon, C. Van Vliet and F. Stuewer ed. Kongress fur Philosophie, Kiel 8. German translation by Margot Dehne of c : Afterword pp. Zimmerli ed. Feyerabend and Walter Ch. Zimmerli ] in Wissenschafiskrise und Wissenschaftskritik , Philosophie aktuell, Bd. Bontempo and S. Cohen, Paul K. Feyerabend and M. Wartofsky eds , Reidel: Dordrecht and Boston , pp.
Essays in Memory of Imre Lakatos , R. Wartofsky eds , Reidel: Dordrecht and Boston , p. Kevles, Paul K. Syndikat: Frankfurt am Main , pp. II, Hans Peter Duerr ed. Good and P. Feyerabend eds , Suhrkamp: Frankfurt am Main Gardner: Science: Church or Instrument of Research? French, Theodore E. Uehling, Jr and Howard K. Wettstein eds , Midwest Studies in Philosophy, Vol. Feyerabend and P. Januar " [translated and summarized by the author] in Wissenschaft und Tradition , Paul Feyerabend and Christian Thomas eds , Verlag der Fachvereine: Zurich , pp.
Jung ed. V Cogne, M.
Related Platons Erziehung - Ihr Einfluss auf die heutige Pädagogik (German Edition)
Copyright 2019 - All Right Reserved