有關海德格政治思想的議題向來是個眾說紛紜且充滿激情反應的 研究領域。以往不時有海德格的批評者力圖將其哲學思想與納粹主義給 掛勾起來，但總會立即激起另一些研究者指責其批評牽強附會或不夠嚴 謹。主要的原因正是在於其缺乏充份的文獻資料可供佐證。 德希達係在1987 年的《論精神》一書中以一迂迴的方式處理此一 難題。他抽絲剝繭地追蹤海德格宣稱應當避用、卻又仍在其文本中不 時使用的“Geist”（精神）概念，從而揭露出海德格如何試圖透過區分 “geistlich”（屬靈的）與“geistig”（精神的）這兩個德語形容詞來自圓其說， 以及海德格在其思想發展過程中如何曾一度與納粹主義之精神有合拍 處。本文試圖闡明德希達對海德格的詮釋，並指出其政治性的解構策略 不但能揭露出海德格在晚期迴避公開談及的政治態度，更還能在一政治 性脈絡中揭露出海德格的哲學「轉折」。故德希達傑出的海德格詮釋實可 作為一例以令吾人重新思考一經典的詮釋難題。

Issues surrounding Heidegger’s political thought have generated a research field rife with different opinions and passionate reactions. Formerly, Heidegger’s critics occasionally tried to link his philosophical thought with Nazism, but this aroused almost the same level of attacks from other researchers who declared such criticisms to be far-fetched or not rigorous enough. The main reason for this ongoing disagreement lay in the lack of adequate evidentiary documentation. Derrida deals with this problem in a roundabout way in his book Of Spirit (1987). He makes a painstaking investigation to pursue Heidegger’s usage of the concept “Geist” (spirit), which, according to Heidegger, should be avoided yet which still appears in his texts from time to time. Derrida thus reveals how Heidegger tries to justify himself by distinguishing two German adjectives—i.e. “geistlich” and “geistig”—and how Heidegger’s thought had once been in tune with the Nazi spirit in its developmental process. The present article article attempts to explain Derrida’s interpretation of Heidegger and point out that his political strategy of deconstruction can not only reveal Heidegger’s political attitude, which the later Heidegger avoided to mention in public, but also Heidegger’s philosophical “turn” within a political context. Therefore, Derrida’s outstanding Heidegger-interpretation could be an example that prompts us to rethink this classical hermeneutical problem.