In relation to Feyerabend, I also think we should be careful here. There
is a tendency to dismiss for example the work of Joseph Beuys on the same
ground, and I find, frankly, the attacks a while ago (in RL not on any
list) on Paul deMan equally suspect - I too wrote things at 20 I wouldn't
want to see in print now. There is a difference between naive and/or
coerced behavior when very young and mature work, and it's never a
straight-forward situation of cause and effect. These sorts of attacks
can only lead to a relatively right-wing closure on, say, post-structural
thought in general.
Issues of anti-semitism, by the way, are equally difficult to deal with -
what do we "do" with Blanchot, Bataille, Sartre's misguided book on anti-
semitism, Lacan - not to mention Pound, Eliot, H.G.Wells, Dostoevsky? For
me, Heidegger _does_ seem damaged, but cleaning the slate (which should
be on some level) would also mean wiping out a lot of 19th-20th century
thinkers.
This is troubling no matter how you cut it.
Alan