Hij werd als Josef Dünner geboren in een joods gezin in Fürth. studeerde aan de universiteiten van Berlijn, Frankfurt am Main en Basel. Hij uitte zich in artikelen kritisch over het Hitler-fascisme, riep op tot verzet ertegen, deed mee aan studentenprotest en moest na de machtsovername van de nazi’s in 1933 het land verlaten. Hij promoveerde in 1934 in Basel en nam daarna een uitnodiging aan van het Brooking Institution of Washington D.C. in de VS. Hij werd vervolgens lector aan de universiteiten van New York en Harvard, waarna hij hoogleraar werd aan het "Grinnel College" in Iowa. Na WO II werkte hij als Press officer mee aan de opbouw van een democratische pers in Beieren. Vanaf tweede helft vijftiger jaren was hij vervolgens vele jaren professor in de Politieke wetenschappen aan de Yeshiva University in New York, noemde zich voortaan Joseph Dunner. Intussen had hij gasthoogleraarschappen aan de universiteiten van Freiburg, Köln en aan de Hebrew University Jerusalem. [cf. Fuerthwiki] Hij werd auteur van meerdere boeken, w.o.
• Joseph Dunner, The
Republic of Israel: Its History and Its Promise, 1950 cf. KIRKUS REVIEW. En waar het
in dit blog uiteraard vooral om gaat:
Hierna kom ik uiteraard terug op dit boek.
• Joseph Dunner (Ed.), Dictionary of Political Science. New York: Vision [Philosophical
Library], 1965
• Joseph Dunner, Handbook
of World History. Concepts and Issues. New York, Philosophical Library,
1967
• Joseph Dunner, Zu
Protokoll gegeben. Mein Leben als Deutscher und Jude. München/Wien/Basel: Kurt
Desch, 1971 - 255 Seiten [cover van hier]
Dan nu terug naar:
• Joseph Dunner, Baruch Spinoza and Western Democracy. An interpretation of his philosophical, religious and political thought. New York: Philosophical Library, [1955]. XII, 142 pp. [Cover van hier Het boek is in te zien bij Hathitrust]
Uit een brief van David Ben Goerion, die zoals bekend groot fan was van Spinoza, kwam in het boek deze passage [gezien in questia]
Grepen
uit de recensies [de Duitse Spinoza Bibliografie heeft er één, maar ik vond er
acht}:
De eerste was een korte van Max Selinger die het een zeer leesbare introductie op Spinoza vond en de zoektocht van Spinoza de cruciale naar de menselijke samenleving een onbetaalbaar erfgoed. [i] Glenn Tinder vond dat Dunner’s main thesis is contained in the statement that Spinoza is "most outstanding and most logical advocate of political democracy, of religious toleration, and of freedom of thought." Punt van kritiek: Professor Dunner hardly gives due weight to the contributions of other thinkers. While there is no tempt systematically to analyze those thinkers, they are referred to in a way which almost creates the impression that the author considers all of them but Spinoza to have been completely misled. […] Altogether, they tend to create an undertone of disrespect for most thinkers except Spinoza, and hardly help to promote a rational acceptance of the author's point of view. […]. [ii]
Martin ten Hoor kan zich in de opzet vinden, maar is minder tevreden over de uitwerking: As the title suggests, this is a study of Spinoza with a special purpose, in fact, with several special purposes. Its intent is (a) to point out the contribution which Spinoza made to the philosophy of democracy; (b) to emphasize the essentially Jewish character of his thinking and his place in the succession of Jewish thinkers; (c) to expose, by contrast, the inadequacies of the contributions of other philosophers to democratic thought, Hobbes and Locke for ex- ample; (d) to condemn sharply and uncompromisingly the dogmatism in theory and brutality in practice of totalitarian governments, particularly, of National Socialism and (Communism. These are all good and sufficient purposes, though too much insistence on them may explain some of the faults of the book. De democratie-ideeën vindt hij goed verhelderd, maar het betoogde vooral joodse karakter van Spinoza vindt hij minder overtuigend: the author in his desire to glorify Spinoza has overstated his case. [iii] William Ebenstein begint aldus: “Since Sir Frederick Pollack's little book about two decades ago there have been few additions of a semi-popular type to the literature on Spinoza. Professor Dunner has performed a valuable serviceing Spinoza in the light of the present scene. Although his book is much too short for so fascinating a subject, the author manages to convey the inner meaning of Spinoza's life and thought.” En eindigt zijn bespreking met: “The last two chapters analyze Spinoza's political thought and his legacy for the twentieth century. The author first compares Spinoza's political ideas with those of Hobbes and Machiavelli and then shows to what extent he may aptly be called one of the forerunners of modern liberal thinking. In a world of growing conformity the message of Spinoza is particularly timely.” [iv] William H. Reither meent: “It is not likely that there will be sharp dissent from Professor Dunner's assertion, "Few have understood him as the most radical reformer in Judaism, as the most outstanding modern Jewish philosopher" (39). It is very probable, though, that considerable controversy will be set off by the declaration, "Had he lived longer, it would have become quite clear that Spinoza's major interest was not at all in metaphysics, but rather in the development of a modern political science" (90). The metaphysician will not easily surrender Spinoza to the political scientist. Professor Dunner's thesis requires more substantial support than the limitations of the volume permit, certainly more than he offers, although the inadequacy on this point should in no degree obscure the discriminating attempt to give Spinoza his rightful place in political thought, and in particular to consider his "legacy" for contemporary society.” [v] Frank M. Vanderhoof: “The book's chief emphases are upon Spinoza's Jewish background and his contribution to liberal democratic philosophy. As a long-time and sympathetic student of Spinoza, the author has made his work an occasion for the expression of his own beliefs and opinions while presenting the ideas of Spinoza on metaphysics, religion, and politics. This method has the merit of making the narrative personal and contemporary and the drawback of dulling the edge of Spinoza’s views […].The main significance of this book lies in designating Spinoza as the founder of the modern philosophy of free democracy. "While the great Dutch jurist Hugo Grotius ... developed the modern principles of international law, it was Spinoza, who, aiming to secure freedom of thought and expression for all the members of the state, established the doctrines of the common or general will of the people, of human equality, and of popular sovereignty." […] As an "interpretation," however, the book does not elaborate Spinoza's doctrines in the history of political and religious thought. It points out, instead, the present-day value of Spinoza's thought for countering "Stalinism" and all other autocratic and totalitarian ideologies of tyrannical government, both at home and abroad, and in the individual personality as well as in society at large.” [vi] Mason W. Gross: “Every student of Spinoza, from the merest beginner to the most learned scholar, knows only too well that he is extremely difficult both to understand and to expound. As a consequence, most of the books on Spinoza are also difficult, and Spinoza, therefore, although now high in prestige, is probably less widely read than his reputation would indicate. For this reason one may welcome Professor Dunner's book, which is obviously designed for the general reader rather than the scholar and which undertakes to rouse interest in Spinoza by indicating not only his importance in the establishment of Western democracy but also his relevance to the critical problems which the democracies face today. Dunner tries so far as possible to avoid technical language, and his enthusiasm for his subject is apparent on every page. […] Unfortunately, Dunner has chosen to be polemical rather than philosophical in building up his hero.” […] As the title of the book suggests, he is most interested in the political aspects of Spinoza's thought, for he finds this of primary importance in Spinoza. While the great Dutch jurist Hugo Grotius . . . developed the modern principles of international law, it was Spinoza, who, aiming to secure freedom of thought and of expression for all the members of the state, established the doctrines of the common or general will of the people, of human equality, and of popular sovereignty. Had he lived longer, it would have become quite clear that Spinoza's major interest was not at all in metaphysics, but rather in the development of a modern political science. [vii] Jack Bemporad tenslotte eindigt na enige kleinere kritische puntjes, met “In general, however, Dr. Dunner's book has much in it that is worthwhile and stimulating. It is important that he has undertaken to interpret Spinoza in the light of contemporary problems, but it is regrettable that his interpretation is so limited by his own personal predilections. [viii]
De eerste was een korte van Max Selinger die het een zeer leesbare introductie op Spinoza vond en de zoektocht van Spinoza de cruciale naar de menselijke samenleving een onbetaalbaar erfgoed. [i] Glenn Tinder vond dat Dunner’s main thesis is contained in the statement that Spinoza is "most outstanding and most logical advocate of political democracy, of religious toleration, and of freedom of thought." Punt van kritiek: Professor Dunner hardly gives due weight to the contributions of other thinkers. While there is no tempt systematically to analyze those thinkers, they are referred to in a way which almost creates the impression that the author considers all of them but Spinoza to have been completely misled. […] Altogether, they tend to create an undertone of disrespect for most thinkers except Spinoza, and hardly help to promote a rational acceptance of the author's point of view. […]. [ii]
Martin ten Hoor kan zich in de opzet vinden, maar is minder tevreden over de uitwerking: As the title suggests, this is a study of Spinoza with a special purpose, in fact, with several special purposes. Its intent is (a) to point out the contribution which Spinoza made to the philosophy of democracy; (b) to emphasize the essentially Jewish character of his thinking and his place in the succession of Jewish thinkers; (c) to expose, by contrast, the inadequacies of the contributions of other philosophers to democratic thought, Hobbes and Locke for ex- ample; (d) to condemn sharply and uncompromisingly the dogmatism in theory and brutality in practice of totalitarian governments, particularly, of National Socialism and (Communism. These are all good and sufficient purposes, though too much insistence on them may explain some of the faults of the book. De democratie-ideeën vindt hij goed verhelderd, maar het betoogde vooral joodse karakter van Spinoza vindt hij minder overtuigend: the author in his desire to glorify Spinoza has overstated his case. [iii] William Ebenstein begint aldus: “Since Sir Frederick Pollack's little book about two decades ago there have been few additions of a semi-popular type to the literature on Spinoza. Professor Dunner has performed a valuable serviceing Spinoza in the light of the present scene. Although his book is much too short for so fascinating a subject, the author manages to convey the inner meaning of Spinoza's life and thought.” En eindigt zijn bespreking met: “The last two chapters analyze Spinoza's political thought and his legacy for the twentieth century. The author first compares Spinoza's political ideas with those of Hobbes and Machiavelli and then shows to what extent he may aptly be called one of the forerunners of modern liberal thinking. In a world of growing conformity the message of Spinoza is particularly timely.” [iv] William H. Reither meent: “It is not likely that there will be sharp dissent from Professor Dunner's assertion, "Few have understood him as the most radical reformer in Judaism, as the most outstanding modern Jewish philosopher" (39). It is very probable, though, that considerable controversy will be set off by the declaration, "Had he lived longer, it would have become quite clear that Spinoza's major interest was not at all in metaphysics, but rather in the development of a modern political science" (90). The metaphysician will not easily surrender Spinoza to the political scientist. Professor Dunner's thesis requires more substantial support than the limitations of the volume permit, certainly more than he offers, although the inadequacy on this point should in no degree obscure the discriminating attempt to give Spinoza his rightful place in political thought, and in particular to consider his "legacy" for contemporary society.” [v] Frank M. Vanderhoof: “The book's chief emphases are upon Spinoza's Jewish background and his contribution to liberal democratic philosophy. As a long-time and sympathetic student of Spinoza, the author has made his work an occasion for the expression of his own beliefs and opinions while presenting the ideas of Spinoza on metaphysics, religion, and politics. This method has the merit of making the narrative personal and contemporary and the drawback of dulling the edge of Spinoza’s views […].The main significance of this book lies in designating Spinoza as the founder of the modern philosophy of free democracy. "While the great Dutch jurist Hugo Grotius ... developed the modern principles of international law, it was Spinoza, who, aiming to secure freedom of thought and expression for all the members of the state, established the doctrines of the common or general will of the people, of human equality, and of popular sovereignty." […] As an "interpretation," however, the book does not elaborate Spinoza's doctrines in the history of political and religious thought. It points out, instead, the present-day value of Spinoza's thought for countering "Stalinism" and all other autocratic and totalitarian ideologies of tyrannical government, both at home and abroad, and in the individual personality as well as in society at large.” [vi] Mason W. Gross: “Every student of Spinoza, from the merest beginner to the most learned scholar, knows only too well that he is extremely difficult both to understand and to expound. As a consequence, most of the books on Spinoza are also difficult, and Spinoza, therefore, although now high in prestige, is probably less widely read than his reputation would indicate. For this reason one may welcome Professor Dunner's book, which is obviously designed for the general reader rather than the scholar and which undertakes to rouse interest in Spinoza by indicating not only his importance in the establishment of Western democracy but also his relevance to the critical problems which the democracies face today. Dunner tries so far as possible to avoid technical language, and his enthusiasm for his subject is apparent on every page. […] Unfortunately, Dunner has chosen to be polemical rather than philosophical in building up his hero.” […] As the title of the book suggests, he is most interested in the political aspects of Spinoza's thought, for he finds this of primary importance in Spinoza. While the great Dutch jurist Hugo Grotius . . . developed the modern principles of international law, it was Spinoza, who, aiming to secure freedom of thought and of expression for all the members of the state, established the doctrines of the common or general will of the people, of human equality, and of popular sovereignty. Had he lived longer, it would have become quite clear that Spinoza's major interest was not at all in metaphysics, but rather in the development of a modern political science. [vii] Jack Bemporad tenslotte eindigt na enige kleinere kritische puntjes, met “In general, however, Dr. Dunner's book has much in it that is worthwhile and stimulating. It is important that he has undertaken to interpret Spinoza in the light of contemporary problems, but it is regrettable that his interpretation is so limited by his own personal predilections. [viii]
[i]
Review Max Selinger (Hebrew Union College), In: Books Abroad,
Vol. 29, No. 4 (Autumn 1955), p. 474
[ii]
Review Glenn Tinder (University of Massachusetts) in: The Western Political
Quarterly, Vol. 9, No. 1 (Mar., 1956), pp. 207-209
[iii]
Review Martin ten Hoor (The University of Alabama) in: The Journal of
Politics, Vol. 18, No. 2 (May, 1956), pp. 366-367
[iv]
Review William Ebenstein (Princeton University) in: The Historian,
Vol. 18, No. 2 (Spring, 1956), pp. 242-243
[v]
Review William H. Reither (Ohio State University) in: Philosophy and
Phenomenological Research, Vol. 17, No. 1 (Sep., 1956), pp. 133-134
[vi]
Review Frank M. Vanderhoof in: The Journal of
Religion, Vol. 37, No. 1 (Jan., 1957), p. 67
[vii]
Review Mason W. Gross (Rutgers University) in: The Philosophical
Review, Vol. 66, No. 2 (Apr., 1957), pp. 281-283
[viii]
Review Jack Bemporad (Hebrew Union College—Jewish Institute of Religion) in: Jewish Social Studies,
Vol. 20, No. 4 (Oct., 1958), pp. 238-239
Enfin, hiermee heeft Joseph Dunner (foto uit ca. 1970)
iets meer de erkenning verkregen die hij verdient.
______________________________
Méér over Joseph Dunner - zijn bio op Prabook
Meer over zijn deelname aan het studentenverzet in Frankfurt in
Meer over zijn deelname aan het studentenverzet in Frankfurt in
Michael Maaser “Die Frankfurter Studenten im »Dritten
Reich«”
In: Jörn Kobes & Jan-Otmar Hesse (Hrsg), Frankfurter Wissenschaftler zwischen 1933 und 1945. Wallstein
Verlag, 2008 - 257 pagina's
Begint meteen over Jozef Dünner met in voetnoot uitgebreide
biografische informatie – books.google
Gerhard Schreiber & Heiko Schulz (Hrsg), Kritische Theologie: Paul Tillich in Frankfurt
(1929-1933). Walter de Gruyter GmbH & Co KG, 2015 heeft uitvoerige
informatie over Joseph Dunner – books.google
Rebecca L. Boehling, A Question of Priorities: Democratic Reform and Economic Recovery in Postwar Germany. Berghahn Books, 1996 - books.google; heeft op p. 51: Joseph Dunner was the intelligence section chief of USFET's Office of War Information (OWI) and later an official in the Information Control Division [USFET staat voor: United States Forces, European Theater].
Zeev W. Mankowitz, Life between Memory and Hope: The Survivors of the Holocaust in Occupied Germany. Cambridge University Press, 2002 - books.google, heeft op de pagina's 48 en 57 info over Dunner, die na de oorlog en tijdens de geallieerde bezetting als Joods officier toezicht had op de nieuwsbladen in München.
En er is de Rebecca L. Boehling, A Question of Priorities: Democratic Reform and Economic Recovery in Postwar Germany. Berghahn Books, 1996 - books.google; heeft op p. 51: Joseph Dunner was the intelligence section chief of USFET's Office of War Information (OWI) and later an official in the Information Control Division [USFET staat voor: United States Forces, European Theater].
Zeev W. Mankowitz, Life between Memory and Hope: The Survivors of the Holocaust in Occupied Germany. Cambridge University Press, 2002 - books.google, heeft op de pagina's 48 en 57 info over Dunner, die na de oorlog en tijdens de geallieerde bezetting als Joods officier toezicht had op de nieuwsbladen in München.
YU J. Dunner Political Science Society [cf. Facebook], maar de Yeshiva University heeft niets over Dunner zelf en ook niet over de YU J. Dunner Political Science Society
Dr. Joseph Dunner, a professor from Yeshiva University, testifies about Communism, in 1969, te zien en te horen door op deze foto van hem te klikken:
Geen opmerkingen:
Een reactie posten