Page 79 [79]
OCR
whether or not they fled, because they were not human. This was proven by them having a number and not a name. It was there on their arms, on the side of the railway carriage, and on the lists. However, there are examples of times that communication made it possible to dissolve the problem of namelessness even in this situation, because communication returns names to people. This is because we always communicate with someone. And through communication, the thing which enables us to hate is lost. The slightest chance of communication creates the opportunity for cooperation, which is henceforth important, although the opportunity is constantly there: in principle, in any case. The freedom of the group is limited by its nature. If I define freedom the way the average person does, that is, if freedom for me is “I can do what I want and when I want,” I fail to understand anything about either freedom or my own life. For if it were true, if I were absolutely free in this way, I would become a quasi-god, but at the same time I would deny the freedom of everyone else, or at least restrict it, which would permanently endanger the existence of freedom. For if Ican do what I want when I want, no one else can do what they want, either now or ever, at least not if it conflicts with my will. There is no point in talking about freedom after that. Schelling describes it very precisely: “in struggle, freedom always” becomes real. It is always born in struggle. Freedom, then, in the Schellingian or Hegelian conception, is not an acquired and eternal gift, nor is it a “forbidden fruit” that we steal a taste of; freedom is what one wins for oneself through struggle*> And not necessarily by destroying the other. 35 When I was translating Philosophische Untersuchungen über das Wesen der menschlichen Freiheit (1809), I saw that this small book which had such an enormous influence on Heidegger is also hugely beneficial to people today.
