Israeli settlers seize Palestinian water source in occupied West Bank to create recreational pool


Israeli settlers have taken control of a freshwater spring that Palestinian farmers in the occupied West Bank have relied on for generations, diverting its water to create a pool at an archaeological site advertised as a tourist attraction and leaving crops to wither. It is estimated that Israeli settlers have now seized control of 95 percent of the northern Jordan Valley's springs, pushing Palestinian communities off their land.


Issued on: 14/08/2026
By: FRANCE 24

A drone view shows Israelis visiting an ancient water reservoir in the Jordan Valley in the Israeli-occupied West Bank. © Ilan Rosenberg, Reuters


On a searing summer day, Israeli settlers splashed in a West Bank pool created ​by siphoning off water that had irrigated Palestinian crops, one of many seizures of water resources across the occupied territory.

The spring served as a lifeline for the nearby village of Fasayil in the fertile Jordan Valley, where Palestinians have relied on it for generations for food, employment and to supplement irregular Israeli supplies to their domestic taps.

“Our water supply remains cut off to this day, depriving us of the water we depend on for our homes, our livelihoods, ​and our agricultural land,” said Saad ‌Nemer, who farms the land.

Saad Nemer, a Palestinian landowner who says that Israeli settlers diverted water from his land making it impossible to plant crops, visits his arid farm in Fasayil, a village in the Israeli-occupied West Bank. © Mohamad Torokman, Reuters

Israeli settlers seized his irrigation pipeline in June, channeling the water to an ancient pool in an archaeological site. Soon after, settlers advertised it as ⁠an Israeli tourist attraction and Israel’s far-right finance minister pledged financial support.

“They are now in the process of developing a recreational park around the pool,” Nemer said.
Settlers stop Palestinian villagers approaching

The seizure of the spring at Fasayil is part of a pattern that Palestinians say is designed to make their lives in the West Bank ‌untenable. Israeli settlers have attacked at least 160 water and sanitation sites across the Palestinian territory this year, United Nations data shows.

Nemer’s greenhouses and fields would normally be full ⁠of eggplant, zucchini and watermelons, but without water he has not been able to plant in the scorched land.

“The settlers cutting off our water has caused us losses and has meant that many families will lose their work and their livelihoods,” he said.

Nemer said that an employee had been beaten up by settlers and he himself had faced threats for attempting to approach the spring as far ​back as two years ago.

Yishai Shreiber, 21, an Israeli settler who had come to swim in the pool near Fasayil on an August afternoon, said Palestinians would not now ‌dare approach.

“Now that they see this entire mass of people, all these large groups of Jews coming here to bathe, they are afraid to come here,” said Shreiber.

Israelis visit an ancient water reservoir in the Jordan Valley in the Israeli-occupied West Bank. © Ronen Zvulun, Reuters

Shreiber said the West Bank belonged to the Jewish people, and that if Palestinians don’t want to accept Jewish authority, they should leave.

Nemer showed Reuters a 2025 land ownership document from COGAT, the Israeli military agency which enforces civilian policy in the occupied territories. He also presented a map drawn for the pre-occupation 1957 registration of his ‌title deeds showing that his land included both the spring and the pool.

COGAT and Finance Minister Bezalel Smotrich did not respond to requests for comment.
'Water war' is part of Israeli West Bank takeover, Palestinians say

Israel’s far-right coalition government has overseen massive settlement construction that Smotrich says is aimed at burying the idea of a Palestinian ​state, which has been recognised by more than 150 of 193 UN member states as encompassing the Gaza Strip and West Bank, including East Jerusalem.

The United Nations and most governments consider the settlements to be illegal under international law related to military occupation. Israel seized the West Bank in the 1967 war, but argues the territory is disputed rather than occupied.

Water flows from a hose in the Palestinian village Fasayil, where residents say that Israeli settlers diverted water from its natural spring causing crops to die. © Mohamad Torokman, Reuters

Palestinians have experienced a sharp rise in settler violence, and Palestinian field researcher ​Fares Foqahaa estimated that settlers had now seized control of 95 percent of the springs in the northern Jordan Valley, displacing communities

In another West Bank village, Qusra, settlers still besieging three homes on Thursday had also cut off their water and ​electricity.

Adel Yassin, an official with the Palestinian Authority’s water authority, said that settlers target water resources as part of a systematic campaign to force Palestinians off ​their land.

“I see this as a water war. It is the silent bullet that kills Palestinians without a sound,” he said, referring to the process of making their livelihoods unsustainable.

Israeli archaeologist says settlers are damaging the site

In early June, Eliav Libi, a settler leader targeted with sanctions by Canada and other countries, posted a video ​showing the pool beginning to fill with water.

He and other settlers say the pool belonged to the biblical-era Jewish king Herod. Alon Arad, an archaeologist with the Israeli rights group Emek Shaveh, said the pool’s provenance is unclear.

“We see in many cases the use of archaeology ... to create this feeling that the West Bank is exclusively Jewish,” Arad said, adding that the settlers were damaging an archaeological site by filling it with water.

A drone view of Israelis visiting an ancient water reservoir in the Jordan Valley, in the Israeli-occupied West Bank. © Ilan Rosenberg, Reuters

Outside the pool, a billboard advertised a 3 million shekel ($1 million) investment from Smotrich, an architect of settler expansion, who said in a Telegram post the money was for the restoration and development of “Herod’s Pools”.

The pool and the nearby spring were packed with Israeli families swimming and wading in ⁠the water. No Palestinians were present.

One of the few natural springs still available to Palestinians is near the city of Nablus at Wadi al-Badhan. In July, families sat at plastic tables placed in shallow streams picnicking with their feet in the running water.

The springs are located close ⁠to Nablus’s urban centre and had until this ​year rarely faced incursions from settlers.

Palestinian children play in a natural spring in Wadi al-Badhan, near Nablus, in the Israeli-occupied West Bank. © Ammar Awad, Reuters

Hundreds of settlers descended into the springs earlier this summer, sitting at the plastic tables and walking through the pools, five Palestinians said.

Nizam Fares, the owner of a natural spring park in al-Badhan, said people could no longer enjoy visiting the area.

“People have become scared and jumpy. They come and ask if the settlers are coming or not,” he said.

(FRANCE 24 with Reuters)

Israeli troops fail to oust settlers blockading Palestinian homes in the West Bank


The Israeli military failed to evict settlers blockading Palestinian homes in the occupied West Bank on Wednesday in a ⁠rare confrontation between settlers and the military. The settlers have been blocking essential supplies from entering the Palestinian village of Qusra since the weekend.


Issued on 13/08/2026 
By: FRANCE 24

Israeli settler violence against Palestinians in the West Bank is soaring. © Zain Jaafar, AFP


The Israeli military failed in an attempt on Wednesday to remove occupied West Bank settlers who for days have blockaded Palestinian homes, an eyewitness and an AFP photographer reported.

The siege began on Sunday, when a group of settlers set up a makeshift tent near houses in the Palestinian village of Qusra, just south of Nablus, blocking essential supplies from entering.

'She was haemorrhaging': In the West Bank, the checkpoint ordeal for pregnant women

"We have received no food and no medicine," Qusai Abu Rida, a Palestinian trapped inside one of the houses, told AFP by telephone, adding that he had only managed to secure electricity thanks to solar panels.

The Israeli military condemned the settlers' actions and declared the area a "closed military zone", before on Wednesday morning removing the tent where the settlers had been staying.

Security forces "are working to evacuate the civilians who were staying there", the military said in a statement.

By mid-afternoon, an AFP photographer at the scene said the military had left and the tent had been removed, but that the settlers were still at the site.

Abu Rida confirmed the situation remained unchanged, with the settlers still in possession of chairs and blankets.

West Bank: Settler violence hits 'all-time high'

Cover image: © France 24
01:26

"The army has withdrawn, and so far we are still besieged, with the settlers at our doorstep," he told AFP.

Violence by Israeli settlers towards Palestinians in the West Bank has persisted for years, often with little or no legal consequence, but recent months have seen a surge in attacks.

Israel has occupied the West Bank since 1967.

More than 500,000 Israelis live in settlements in the Palestinian territory, which are illegal under international law, among some 3 million Palestinians.

The Israeli military said Tuesday it had received several reports of settlers entering and taking control of Palestinian homes and land in the area.

"This is illegal, reprehensible and unacceptable activity that harms the residents of the areas and disrupts their daily lives," it said.

It also said that disciplinary action would be taken against security personnel who had been filmed at the site days earlier.

According to an AFP tally based on data from the Palestinian health ministry, Israeli soldiers or settlers have killed at least 1,097 Palestinians, including both militants and civilians, since the start of the Gaza war in October 2023.

Israeli figures show at least 48 Israelis, including civilians and security personnel, have been killed in Palestinian attacks or during Israeli military operations during the same period.

(FRANCE 24 with AFP)

US ambassador to Israel slams settler siege of West Bank Palestinians as ‘terror’


US Ambassador to Israel Mike Huckabee on Thursday denounced a siege by Israeli settlers against Palestinians in the West Bank village of Qusra as a "horrific act of terror". Huckabee, an evangelical Christian pastor who in the past has embraced Israeli settlements in the occupied West Bank, said the Israeli army intervened on Wednesday after a US request, but the soldiers failed to remove the settlers.


Issued on: 13/08/2026 
By:  FRANCE 24
Video by:  Noga TARNOPOLSKY

Cover image: Israeli settlers gather in front of Palestinian houses in the village of Qusra, south of Nablus, in the West Bank, August 12, 2026. © Zain Jaafar, AFP
05:05

The US ambassador to Israel, a staunch supporter of West Bank settlements, on Thursday denounced as "terror" a siege by settlers against Palestinians that drew an unsuccessful intervention by the army.

Settlers near Nablus since Sunday have blockaded Palestinian homes, including one owned by a US citizen, with residents saying they have been cut off from food and other supplies.

"Actions by those who carried out this horrific act of terror meant to intimidate and harass this family are disgusting," Mike Huckabee, the US ambassador in Jerusalem, wrote on X in response to criticism of the US response.

"No excuse for such thuggish behaviour," he wrote.

Huckabee said Israel had intervened at the request of the United States, its crucial ally.

The remarks are especially striking from Huckabee, an evangelical Christian pastor who in the past has embraced Jewish settlement in the West Bank, which Israel has occupied since 1967, and rejected the idea of a Palestinian state.

The Israeli military on Wednesday sent in forces who took away a tent, but witnesses said settlers defiantly remained at the site with blankets.

READ MOREIsraeli troops fail to remove settlers besieging Palestinian homes in West Bank village

The army announced later Wednesday that it would send a new battalion to try to impose order.

Violence against Palestinians by Israeli settlers in the West Bank has increased dramatically since the October 7, 2023 attack on Israel by Hamas from the Gaza Strip.

Cover image: © France 24
02:30

More than 500,000 Israelis live in settlements in the West Bank, which are illegal under international law, among some three million Palestinians in the territory.

(FRANCE 24 with AFP)

Palestinians still trapped as Israeli settlers besiege West Bank homes

14.08.2026, DPA

Photo: Salman Mohsen Alkhatib/JNA via ZUMA Press Wire/dpa

Radical Israeli settlers continued to besiege Palestinian homes in the northern West Bank village of Qusra on Friday, despite the presence of Israeli soldiers, village head Abdul Asim al-Wadi told dpa.

According to the Palestinian news agency WAFA, some 15 Palestinians, including two children aged 4 and 10, remain trapped inside their homes.

Israeli soldiers were deployed to the village on Thursday "to protect the residents and maintain security," the military said. The settlers have been besieging the Palestinian homes since Sunday.

Israeli media reported that the settlers returned to the area on Friday morning.

The Israeli army did not immediately respond to a request for comment, confirming only that soldiers had been deployed in the area since Thursday to maintain security.  

The Times of Israel reported on Thursday that the soldiers intended to persuade the settlers to leave the area.

Al-Wadi and several media outlets said Israeli and international activists arrived in the area with food and drink for the Palestinians but were prevented by Israeli security forces from reaching the besieged homes. 

Asked about the reports, the military said all Israeli citizens were prohibited from entering Qusra. It also released a video showing a Palestinian resident collecting some of the supplies left in the area.

On Thursday, Palestinian sources said Israeli soldiers had forced the residents to evacuate. The military later issued a statement saying the Palestinian residents should remain in their homes. 

Citing residents, Israeli and Palestinian media reported that the soldiers had meanwhile damaged the houses and taken money from people living there. When asked about the allegations, the Israeli army said it was looking into the matter.

• Times of Israel report
• WAFA report
• Haaretz report

(c) 2026 dpa Deutsche Presse Agentur GmbH

What Did Heidegger Mean By ‘Only A God Can Save Us’? – OpEd



August 14, 2026
By Bert Olivier

Key Takeaways

Heidegger’s 1966 remark “Only a god can save us” refers to the need for a fundamental shift beyond the dominant framework of modern “technicity,” which he saw as a planetary force that uproots humans from the earth and reduces all relationships to technical functioning, rather than a mere collection of tools under human control.

The essay argues that this diagnosis remains valid and has intensified: technology’s essence has evolved from Heidegger’s “enframing” (Gestell) into a more pervasive, saturating form of transhuman agency, especially through AI systems that increasingly shape social reality.

Philosophy and ordinary human action cannot directly master or reverse this condition; at best they can prepare a readiness for a new, transformative “god” or epochal shift, making Heidegger’s warning more relevant than ever in the current age of digital and AI saturation.

When Martin Heidegger gave an interview to the German news magazine, Der Spiegel (The Mirror) in 1966, on condition that it would only be published after his death, no one could anticipate the sentence he uttered in the course of this event, which would become the title by which the interview has been known, namely, ‘Only a god can save us.’

Save us from what? And why ‘a god’ instead of ‘God?’ The answers to these questions would shock some readers and puzzle others. In the case of the first question, it would be a shock of confirmation for some, because they never fully trusted this ‘thing,’ and their suspicions seemed to be confirmed by Heidegger’s remark in the context of the interview. On the part of others it elicited puzzlement, because they had already virtually deified this ‘thing.’ What was it, then? In a word, technology.

The second question is more complex, given the emergence of technology as a world-shaping power in the early 20th century – recall the colossal world ExhibitionUniverselle (of technology and engineering) in Paris in 1889, to commemorate the centenary of the French Revolution, which adumbrated the veritable apotheosis of technology to come, and where all the wondrous new inventions of the time were celebrated.

By the time Heidegger wrote his famous essay, ‘The question concerning technology’ around 1949 (published in 1954; English translation in Heidegger, M. The Question Concerning Technology and Other Essays, Harper Torchbooks, 1977, pp. 3-35), it was more than three decades after the end of World War I, and four years after the more advanced military technology that was used in World War II.

Apart from that, technologies such as trains, motor cars, aeroplanes, telephones, and hydroelectric power were already familiar to people, and it did not take a genius to grasp that the post-industrial world, with its roots in the 18th century, had developed into one where new inventions were transforming society apace. In other words, technology was, visibly and audially, a force that was bringing about a metamorphosis on a grand scale. Needless to say, today we are witnessing another technological metamorphosis, arguably even more far-reaching than the one that Heidegger perceived with concern.

At the same time, religious faith had taken a knock in the previous two centuries; in the course of the 18th century, historically known as the Enlightenment or ‘Age of Reason,’ the latter faculty had started overshadowing faith, and the 19th century, which witnessed the further growth of reason, also saw the emergence of Darwinand Wallace’s theory of evolution, which dealt faith a more severe blow than Newtonian mechanics. Hence, with mechanical technology raising its head, it could no longer be taken for granted that the belief in the God of Christendom would remain steadfast.


Back to the question, then. Heidegger was well aware of this historical backdrop to his own work, and that of his contemporaries, and knew that there could be other world-transforming powers comparable to technology in the future. Therefore, ‘a god’ who could potentially ‘save us’ from technology is probably a reference to such an as-yet unknown phenomenon. One should note, in this regard, that the German for ‘Only a god can save us’ is ‘Nur noch ein Gott kann uns retten,’ and if he had omitted the indefinite article, ‘ein,’ it would have made all the difference, because then ‘Gott’ (which, as noun, is capitalised in German) would have meant ‘God, instead of ‘a god.’

To the vast majority of Heidegger’s contemporaries, including his interviewers (as will become apparent below), with the exception of a mere handful, the notion that we need to be rescued from technology must have seemed insane. Today this attitude is probably exacerbated to the nth degree. What, do without our beloved cellphones? (Appropriately named as such, I would think: these cellular devices, the ‘smart’ ones more than their quaint predecessors, are indeed ‘cells’ in which contemporary peoples’ souls are imprisoned.) Not to mention our chatbot chum(s) – whichever one among the growing number it might be; they have become indispensable ‘conversation partners,’ after all. To individuals who think along this avenue, I would recommend Sherry Turkle’s Alone Together (2011) as essential reading in the interest of their sanity.

But back to Heidegger’s Der Spiegel interview, an internet-accessible version of which I have linked here – the text of the William Richardson translation (which first appeared in Heidegger: The Man and the Thinker, edited by Thomas Sheehan and published by Transaction in 1981; the page numbers refer to this publication). I have decided to write about it because it remains as relevant today as when it was finally published in 1976, a few days after Heidegger’s death.


From the beginning of the interview, one notices that the interviewers are primarily interested in the events surrounding Heidegger’s appointment as Rector of Freiburg University in the early 1930s, when the Nazis were going out of their way to infiltrate universities and to make it clear – through notices being posted on university campuses, among other things – that Jews were not welcome there. Heidegger makes it explicit that he was never interested in becoming Rector, but that he was pressurised by colleagues to accept the nomination because, like his predecessor – who refused to have such notices being put up on campus, and was forced to resign – he was also against it. His mentor – the founder of phenomenology, Edmund Husserl – was a Jew, and Heidegger’s famous book, Being and Time (1927), was dedicated to Husserl.

As the to-and-fro of question and answer continues, the interviewers home in on what they really want to uncover; namely, the truth about Heidegger’s alleged complicity with the Nazis, and they acknowledge the new information they are receiving from him. One of the things that Heidegger tells them in the context of his inaugural rectoral address is that, during the ten months of his rectorship, he only once articulated a positive appraisal of the role of Hitler in relation to Germany, stressing that it was not in a prominent journal or other such forum, but in a student newspaper.


Furthermore, he states that it was done for practical reasons pertaining to his relationship with the students at Freiburg University. It seems clear, from Heidegger’s elaboration on his short-lived involvement with German politics, that despite this concession to student sentiments, he was not a supporter of the Nazi movement. Yet, as William J. Richardson, the original translator of the Der Spiegelinterview, notes on the first page:


Although Heidegger was one of the seminal thinkers of the twentieth century, few such men of his time were criticized more severely or resented more bitterly than he. Much of this criticism arose because of an association with the Nazis while Rector of the University of Freiburg, 1933-34, one that publicly he neither repudiated, justified, nor explained. In 1966 the editors of the German news weekly, Der Spiegel, requested of Heidegger an interview to discuss these issues. In granting the interview, which took place on September 23, 1966, Heidegger insisted that it remain unpublished during his lifetime. (It appeared in Der Spiegel on May 31, 1976, five days after his death.) Its substance goes far beyond the personal issues involved and rephrases his entire philosophical experience. He saw this as an opportunity to meditate upon the meaning of Being, particularly under the guise that most profoundly characterizes contemporary culture— labeled by him ‘Technicity’ (die Technik). In these terms the interview takes on the quality of a last will and testament.

Der Spiegel continues pressing Heidegger on his possible Nazi ties in the 1930s, questioning his intentions with his rectoral address titled, ‘The self-assertion of the German university.’ His answers highlight an important tension between the ‘political science’ demanded by the Nazis and its affiliated organisation, the National Socialist Student Organisation, on the one hand, and his own understanding of ‘science’ (including political science) as articulated in his address. For the former, it simply meant political ‘science’ insofar as it had ‘practical utility for the people’ (p. 48), while Heidegger’s rectoral discourse expressed direct opposition to such a misunderstanding of the true meaning of ‘science.’


When his interviewers ask him whether this meant that he ‘could bring about the restitution of the University in conjunction with the National Socialists,’ he corrects them by stating: ‘That is the wrong way to put it. Not “in conjunction with the National Socialists,” but the University ought to renew itself through a reflection all its own and thereby gain a firm position against the danger of the politicizing of science’ (p. 49) – something today’s university authorities might learn from, I daresay. The next exchange must be quoted in full, because of its importance regarding the topic of this essay (p. 49):


Spiegel: And for that reason you proclaimed in your rectoral discourse these three supporting columns: ‘service by labor,’ ‘service under arms,’ ‘service through knowledge.’ Accordingly, ‘service through knowledge,’ or so you thought anyway, was to be raised to a position equal [to the others] that the National Socialists had not conceded to it? [sic]

Heidegger: It is not a matter of ‘supporting columns.’ If you read [the text] carefully, service through knowledge stands in third place numerically, to be sure, but in terms of its meaning it is placed first. The task remains to consider how labor and the bearing of arms, like every human activity, are grounded in knowledge and illumined by it.

Questions concerning Heidegger’s position on book burnings organised by the Hitler Youth – which he forbade as Rector – and his relations with Jewish students (which were cordial) also crop up, together with that of his position on books by Jewish authors, including those by Husserl, his mentor. On all of these Heidegger’s responses are adequate to exculpate him, particularly the calumnious claim that as Rector, he forbade Husserl access to the University‘s libraries. After ten months as Rector of the University, Heidegger resigned, when he was summoned by the Minister (of Education, presumably), who demanded that he replace two deans, recently appointed by him, with others who are acceptable to the Party, and he refused.

In response to questions by Der Spiegel’s interviewers, it becomes apparent that, subsequent to his resignation as Rector, Heidegger was under constant surveillance by the Party, including by one of his doctoral students (who played open cards with him in the end), and that there were several modes of discrimination against him, such as his publications not being reviewed in Germany, and not being included in the German delegation to important conferences. Furthermore, the new rector declared Heidegger to be among the faculty members who were ‘completely expendable,’ and when he commenced teaching a course which was a continuation of the theme of his previous Nietzsche lectures, namely, his ‘confrontation with National Socialism,’ he was promptly conscripted in the Civil Defense Forces, thus becoming the oldest member of the teaching staff at the University to be called up for such service.

The issue of technology is introduced when his interviewers draw Heidegger’s attention to a sentence in his book, Introduction to Metaphysics (based on a course he gave in 1935), reminding him that (p. 55):



…you said: ‘What today’— this was, therefore, 1935— ‘is bandied about as the philosophy of National Socialism but has absolutely nothing to do with the inner truth and greatness of this movement (namely, with the encounter between technicity on the planetary level and modern man) casts its net in these troubled waters of “values” and “totalities”…’

To the question, whether the words in parenthesis were already there in his 1935 manuscript, or were added later, Heidegger replies that it was indeed in his original manuscript and was in accordance with his idea of ‘technicity’ at the time, but that it was not yet his later conception ‘of the essence of technicity as “pos-ure” (Ge-Stell).’ He admits that this ‘form of planetary technicity’ is encountered in communist countries as well as in America. Moreover, he argues (p. 55),


…the planet-wide movement of modern technicity is a power whose magnitude in determining [our] history can hardly be overestimated. For me today it is a decisive question as to how any political system— and which one— can be adapted to an epoch of technicity. I know of no answer to this question. I am not convinced that it is democracy.

This is one of the most important insights on Heidegger’s part in the course of this interview, and determines the direction taken by everything that comes afterwards. Der Spiegel takes issue with his reference to democracy, objecting that it is a ‘collective term’ that may be understood in many diverse ways, and observes that Heidegger has called it, as well as the continuing Christian Weltanschauung and the human rights ‘system’ ‘half-way measures’ as far as technicity is concerned. Heidegger agrees that this is how he would characterise these things, because they show no serious ‘confrontation’ with technicity, because they are all undergirded by ‘the conception that technicity in its essence is something that man holds within his own hands.’

Heidegger is uncompromising. He insists that this commonly held belief is not possible. Instead, he says, ‘Technicity in its essence is something that man does not master by his own power’ (p. 56). From the exchange that follows this remark it is increasingly clear that Der Spiegel’s representatives, however intelligent and informed they might be, do not understand Heidegger’s thinking. For instance, citing the story of The Sorcerer’s Apprentice, they agree that humans are never complete masters of their own tools (already a fundamental misunderstanding of Heidegger’s position, which explicitly warns against confusing modern technology – or its essence, at least – with a set of tools), but suggest that it may be too ‘pessimistic’ to claim that humans are ‘…not gaining mastery over this surely much greater tool [that is] modern technicity…’ (p. 56). The German thinker emphasises that positions like pessimism and optimism do not go far enough, and when his interlocutors wonder why humanity should be ‘overwhelmed by technicity,’ he patiently points out that this is not what he is arguing, but merely that modern people ‘have not yet found a way to respond to the essence of technicity.’


From the interviewers’ reaction it is clear that they do not have an inkling of what he meant by this, for which one cannot really blame them, because for decades people have been conditioned to regarding technology – and not only technical devices – as a set of ‘tools.’ Their response to Heidegger actually confirms their own naivety (p. 56):


But someone might object very naively: what must be mastered in this case? Everything is functioning. More and more electric power companies are being built. Production is up. In highly technologized parts of the earth, people are well cared for. We are living in a state of prosperity. What really is lacking to us?

Heidegger’s answer is a perfect summary of his position, which can only be understood by someone who is prepared to ‘bracket’ (to use a phenomenological term) their own, understandable, everyday biases; that is, to set them aside for the moment (p.56):


Everything is functioning. That is precisely what is awesome, that everything functions, that the functioning propels everything more and more toward further functioning, and that technicity increasingly dislodges man and uproots him from the earth. I don’t know if you were shocked, but [certainly] I was shocked when a short time ago I saw the pictures of the earth taken from the moon. We do not need atomic bombs at all [to uproot us] —the uprooting of man is already here. All our relationships have become merely technical ones. It is no longer upon an earth that man lives today. Recently I had a long…dialogue in Provence with Réné Char—a [French] poet and resistance fighter, as you know. In Provence now, launch pads are being built and the countryside laid waste in unimaginable fashion. This poet, who certainly is open to no suspicion of sentimentality or of glorifying the idyllic, said to me that the uprooting of man that is now taking place is the end [of everything human], unless thinking and poetizing once again regain [their] nonviolent power.

This paves the way for Heidegger’s ‘Only a god can save us’ remark. But what does it all mean? Consider that, as he points out elsewhere in the context of worldviews, every distinctive epoch is marked by a dominant, fundamental, all-encompassing assumption. This is what these days, following Thomas Kuhn’s use of the term in his book, The Structure of Scientific Revolutions (1962), is called a paradigm, and what Foucault termed an epistemé, underpinning identifiable periods in his 1966 book, The Order of Things: An Archaeology of the Human Sciences. For instance, the Christian Middle Ages were governed by the virtually unquestioned assumption that God created the world, and all important questions or problems were addressed within this frame of reference, such as ‘What is the relationship between humans and the Creator?’ or ‘What should the relationship between Church and State be?’ Or ‘What is more fundamental – faith or reason?’

Considering Heidegger’s work on technology, by the mid-20th century, such a framework has definitively been replaced by a technocentric one, which means – as his remark, above demonstrates – that all important questions are approached without questioning the primacy of technology, or what he calls ‘technicity.’ Hence the interviewers’ emphasis on things ‘functioning’ well. As long as everything is ‘functioning,’ all is well with the world, apparently. But Heidegger questions this as only a true philosopher can, for the simple reason that there are other ways of ‘framing’ the world, such as art and religion, for example, or by who knows what could emerge in the future as a new epistemé, as Foucault might say.


His interlocutors observe that they would rather be ‘there,’ in that age (of technicity) – by implication, than in a world represented by Heidegger and Char – and that, in fact, they do not think that humans need to be confined to the earth, but could possibly ‘reach out from this earth toward other planets’ (p. 57). This goes against everything that Heidegger believes, as he proceeds to argue, when he says that according to his ‘orientation,’ everything worthwhile has arisen only from humans having a home and being ‘rooted’ in traditions on the earth. Clearly at loggerheads with Heidegger on this issue, Der Spiegel asks whether, in the face of the ‘absolutely technical state’ that Heidegger perceives as having arisen, an individual or group, or philosophy, insofar as the latter may ‘guide’ people, could still ‘influence’ this state of affairs ‘to a determined action.’

Needless to say, what this question shows is the understandable – and today still widespread – belief that all it takes for people to change a course of events is to intervene through action of some sort (including technical intervention), which is, as far as Heidegger is concerned, a misguided notion, as his uncannily enigmatic answer reveals (p. 57):


If I may answer briefly, and perhaps clumsily, but after long reflection: philosophy will be unable to effect any immediate change in the current state of the world. This is true not only of philosophy but of all purely human reflection and endeavor. Only a god can save us [My italics; B.O.]. The only possibility available to us is that by thinking and poetizing we prepare a readiness for the appearance of a god, or for the absence of a god in [our] decline, insofar as in view of the absent god we are in a state of decline.

This is the crux of the matter which, not surprisingly, gives rise to great puzzlement on the part of his interlocutors, who inquire whether we can bring this ‘god forth by our thinking.’ His answer, instead of clarifying the matter, is even more perplexing – ‘We can not bring him forth by our thinking. At best we can awaken a readiness to wait [for him].’ He continues (p. 57-58):


It is not through man that the world can be what it is and how it is— but also not without man. In my view, this goes together with the fact that what I call ‘Being’ (that long traditional, highly ambiguous, now worn-out word) has need of man in order that its revelation, its appearance as truth, and its [various] forms may come to pass. The essence of technicity I see in what I call ‘pos-ure’ (Ge-Stell) [Usually translated as ‘Enframing’; B.O.], an often ridiculed and perhaps awkward expression. To say that pos-ure holds sway means that man is posed, enjoined and challenged by a power that becomes manifest in the essence of technicity— a power that man himself does not control. Thought asks no more than this: that it help us achieve this insight. Philosophy is at an end.

This is highly perplexing, but not incomprehensible. Behind Heidegger’s remark stands his grasp of the hubris committed by humankind, to believe that through the essence of technology everything can become what he calls a ‘standing-reserve’ (Bestand) which can be commanded by humans through technology, to do virtually anything, from constructive to destructive, and the apogee of which may be discerned in the WEF’s claim, that they have become like ‘gods’ – although certainly not the liberating kind that Heidegger alludes to in the interview.


After all, even if it seems as if humans ‘control’ this enframing force, this is not at all the case. There is always what the French thinker, Jean Baudrillard (see for example Baudrillard, J. The Intelligence of Evil, or the Lucidity Pact, Oxford: Berg 2005, p. 185-189), calls ‘blowback,’ which takes many forms to restore ‘duality’ – which any totalising strategy (including what Heidegger calls Gestell) attempts to replace with ‘oneness’ or total identity) – such as the radiation that lingers long after the explosion of a nuclear device or catastrophe, like Hiroshima and Chernobyl. Or the techno-industrial production of plastic, initially regarded as a wonder material, given its many uses, but which has today become a nature-destroying pollutant.

Rather than elaborating further on the rest of the Der Spiegel interview – which covers the terrain already uncovered above, from various other angles – I shall ask the question, whether Heidegger’s ‘diagnosis’ of the state of the world in terms of technicity is still valid today, and if not, what has changed. In brief, I believe that it is still valid, but that, since the last decade of the 20th century, the hold of technicity has tightened on the world, and moreover, that it has transmogrified itself according to the inner ontological logic of technicity, which no longer assumes the form of ‘pos-ure’ (Enframing) or Gestell, but of something by which such essential enframing has been exacerbated – as may be gathered by the allusion to the WEF’s hubristic pronouncement, above).

The essence of technicity today has ‘morphed’ – like the eponymous T-1000 terminator in Cameron’s second Terminator film – into something that surpasses a frame or ‘posure’ of sorts, because it no longer merely frames; it pervades and saturates everything on the planet, somewhat like the digitalisation of everything in the film, Transcendence, which becomes so pervasive that leaves on trees mutate into entities no longer evincing biological life, but resembling lifeless, quasi-metallic appendages.

I therefore propose to call this the Age of Pervasive Transhuman Agency (PTA), or alternatively, Transhuman Agentic Saturation (TAS), Optimal Digital Transformation(ODT), or Transformative Digital Protocol (TDP). What these amount to will be clarified in a future post; suffice to say that the idea of saturation is fundamental to it, but also that of the transhuman, and importantly, of agency, because technicity, in the guise of Artificial Intelligence (AI), has reached the stage of development where it is no longer confined to the internet without the ability to effect changes in social reality; it can do so, even if is via mediating, non-AI agents – sometimes to their own detriment. This means that Heidegger’s cryptic saying, ‘Only a god can save us,’ has become more relevant than ever. What this ‘god’ could mean, or whether it is at all meaningful to speculate about it, still has to be addressed.

This article was published by Browstone Institute

About Bert Olivier

Bert Olivier works at the Department of Philosophy, University of the Free State. Bert does research in Psychoanalysis, poststructuralism, ecological philosophy and the philosophy of technology, Literature, cinema, architecture and Aesthetics. His current project is 'Understanding the subject in relation to the hegemony of neoliberalism.'
View all posts by Bert Olivier →

 

Immune 'reprogramming' could protect poultry from deadly diseases without antibiotics, study finds

University of Bristol

A naturally occurring gut molecule that could strengthen chickens’ immune response against a wide range of bacterial infections, has been identified by University of Bristol-led research.  This new breakthrough, published in The Journal of Immunology today [12 August], offers a major step forward in sustainable farming and the global fight against antibiotic resistance.

It has long been a challenge in agriculture to protect livestock from widespread pathogens like Salmonella and Avian Pathogenic E. coli (APEC) without relying heavily on antibiotics. Overuse of these drugs in farming contributes directly to the global crisis of antimicrobial resistance (AMR), which threatens both animal and human medicine.

Working with primary chicken immune cells and cell lines, the research team traced how sodium butyrate, a short-chain fatty acid naturally produced by gut bacteria, acts as an immune system programmer. By exposing developing immune cells, called macrophages, to this compound, the researchers successfully trained the chickens' natural immune defences to fight future infections.

The study found that these reprogrammed chicken immune cells showed a dramatic increase in their ability to kill a wide range of dangerous bacteria, including multiple strains of E. coli, Salmonella, Pseudomonas aeruginosa, and Staphylococcus aureus.

Crucially, the research found a time frame within which the immune reprogramming takes place.  The immune system upgrade only occurs if the molecule is introduced during the early, plastic stages of the immune cells' development. When applied to fully mature cells, the treatment failed to improve their disease-fighting capabilities, providing vital clues for how this method must be timed in real-world farming.

Unlike traditional immune training agents that cause high levels of tissue-damaging inflammation, sodium butyrate works through an alternative, cleaner route.  It encourages cells to use a precise two-pronged internal attack: boosting the production of destructive oxygen molecules (reactive oxygen species) and accelerating ‘autophagy’, a cellular self-cleaning process that traps and digests invading germs.

Shahriar Behboudi, Professor of Immunology in the Bristol Veterinary School and senior author of the study, said: “Our findings suggest that trained immunity exists along a much wider spectrum of phenotypes than previously thought.

“By demonstrating that a natural gut metabolite can program immune cells through an alternative, non-inflammatory axis, we open up exciting new possibilities for enhancing animal health naturally, without the collateral damage of excessive inflammation.”

Dr James Adams, a Research Fellow in the School of Veterinary Medicine at the University of Surrey and the first author on the paper, added: “The increasing spread of diseases amongst chickens is of great concern. Bacterial diseases cause significant animal health and welfare issues in poultry, incurring devastating economic losses and potential disruption to our food chain. 

“Antimicrobial resistance is complicating the management of disease in poultry.  Therefore, it is crucial that we develop new ways of controlling bacterial infections in poultry.”

The study’s findings offer a vital framework to help the poultry industry and policymakers design nature-positive farming systems.

As poultry is a major global food source, protecting flocks from disease using natural metabolic compounds is essential for both food security and sustainable development.

The team hopes these findings will pave the way for new gut-health strategies in everyday agriculture, improving animal welfare and reducing the world's reliance on antibiotics.

The collaborative research, led by the University of Bristol, the University of Surrey, and The Pirbright Institute, was funded by the Biotechnology and Biological Sciences Research Council (BBSRC) and the British Egg Marketing Board Research and Education Trust.

---

Journal

The Journal of Immunology

DOI

10.1093/jimmun/vkag209 

Method of Research

Experimental study

Subject of Research

Cells

Article Title

‘Innate immune reprogramming of chicken macrophages by sodium butyrate enhances ROS-mediated antimicrobial responses in vitro

Article Publication Date

12-Aug-2026

 

An energy storage device that’s designed to be recycled

The compact, rechargeable supercapacitor can be taken apart and reused, offering a step toward more sustainable electronics

American Chemical Society

Facebook

WeChatBlueskyMessageWhatsAppEmail

 

image: 

This glider’s propeller was powered by prototype supercapacitors on its wings that can be disassembled and recycled into new energy storage devices. 

view more 

Credit: Tse Nga Ng

Smartwatches, phones, and even some drones rely on lightweight, rechargeable energy storage systems. Once those devices wear out, many end up as electronic waste. Now, researchers reporting in ACS Energy Letters have developed a compact supercapacitor that can be quickly disassembled into reusable components. They used the devices to power a glider's propeller and then took apart one supercapacitor and sequentially reused parts in two new ones that performed as well as the original device. 

“Sustainability and performance do not have to be competing goals.” — Nandu Koripally

Many rechargeable devices use lithium-ion technology and contain flammable electrolytes. Additionally, they are hard to recycle because the components don’t come apart easily. So, Tse Nga Ng, Nandu Koripally, and colleagues searched for a more sustainable approach for compact energy storage. Their work led them to develop a supercapacitor that used zinc ions in a water-based, non-flammable electrolyte, dissolvable adhesives, and reusable electrically conductive materials. 

“We built on our lab’s prior work, combining high-energy alternative zinc-ion chemistry and structural supercapacitors to make a recyclable version that enables second-life cells and outperforms prior state-of-the-art devices,” says Koripally, the lead author of the study. 

For the supercapacitor, the researchers created a zinc metal-copper-foil anode and an activated-carbon-fiber cathode. In between, they placed a solid electrolyte made from a porous resin coated onto a plastic film and soaked in a zinc(II) chloride salt solution. The resin formed strong bonds when heated but broke apart in a slightly acidic liquid. Finally, they fused the layers together with heat, forming a thin device with a 2-volt potential.  

As proof of concept, the researchers integrated four supercapacitors into the wings of a model glider. When tossed like a paper airplane, it went 12 feet (3.7 meters) when the propeller’s motor was powered by the supercapacitors, compared to 8 feet (3.4 meters) without an external power source. 

The researchers then placed one of the supercapacitors in a mildly acidic, water-based solution to disassemble it. Within 30 minutes, the layers separated. The recovered carbon-fiber cathode was reused twice more, each time with fresh solid electrolytes and zinc anodes. From initial fabrication through two rounds of recycling, the carbon fibers successfully completed more than 172,000 charge-discharge cycles and maintained similar electrical performance throughout their lifetime. 

These findings demonstrate a promising approach for lightweight energy storage that minimizes electronic waste, the team says. 

“Sustainability and performance do not have to be competing goals,” says Koripally. “By considering the full material life cycle, we can combine design requirements into one solution to make structural energy storage devices that maintain high performance and are simple to repair and reuse.” 

The authors acknowledge funding from a National Defense Science and Engineering Graduate Fellowship, the Naval Innovation Science Engineering Center, the National Science Foundation, and the UC San Diego Materials Research Science and Engineering Center. 

### 

The American Chemical Society (ACS) is one of the world's largest scientific organizations and a global leader in advancing scientific knowledge. Founded in 1876, ACS' mission is to advance scientific knowledge, empower a global community, and champion scientific integrity. Guided by its vision of a world built on science, ACS brings together people, ideas, and resources to drive discovery and innovation, support the professional growth of scientists and students, and advance scientific discussion. Through its trusted publications, scientific meetings, community networks, education and career resources, and scientific information solutions, ACS helps scientists, educators, and students make a lasting impact on their communities and the world at large. Together, these efforts support ACS' commitment to improve all lives through the transforming power of chemistry. 

Registered journalists can subscribe to the ACS journalist news portal on EurekAlert! to access embargoed and public science press releases. For media inquiries, contact newsroom@acs.org. 

 

Note: ACS does not conduct research but publishes and publicizes peer-reviewed scientific studies. 

Follow us: Facebook | LinkedIn | Instagram 

---

Journal

ACS Energy Letters

DOI

10.1021/acsenergylett.6c01274 

Article Title

Recyclable Zinc Ion Structural Supercapacitor Enabled by Porous Vitrimer

Article Publication Date

11-Aug-2026

An energy storage device that’s designed to be recycled [VIDEO] 

 

Nature’s original bioplastic is food for animals

A new study provides unexpected insights into how biodegradable PHA plastics are broken down in nature

Max Planck Institute for Marine Microbiology

FacebookXLinkedInWeChatBlueskyMessageWhatsAppEmail

 

image: 

The little worm that changed the textbook: The gutless marine worm Olavius algarvensis (here lying next to some sand grains) is only about two centimetres long and has become so dependent on its bacterial symbionts for nutrition and waste recycling that it has lost both its digestive and excretory systems. Its white appearance comes from the dense layer of bacterial symbionts beneath its skin, which are packed with PHA, the microbial bioplastic at the center of this study. This inconspicuous worm helped scientists discover that animals can digest microbial bioplastics previously thought to be broken down only by microorganisms.

view more 

Credit: Alexander Gruhl / Max Planck Institute for Marine Microbiology

Long before humans discovered biodegradable plastics, microorganisms had already invented their own. Many bacteria and archaea produce natural bioplastics called polyhydroxyalkanoates (PHAs), storing them inside their cells as reserves of carbon and energy. 

Until now, scientists thought that only microorganisms themselves could break down these substances. Researchers at the Max Planck Institute for Marine Microbiology in Bremen, Germany, have now overturned that long-standing assumption. In a study published in Nature Ecology & Evolution, they show that animals ranging from marine worms and starfish to terrestrial species including earthworms have enzymes capable of degrading microbial PHAs.  The findings reveal a previously overlooked way in which microbial carbon can enter animal food webs.

The story began with an unusual marine worm called Olavius algarvensis. It has neither a mouth nor a gut. Instead, it farms symbiotic bacteria beneath its skin and digests them for food.“One of the worm’s bacterial symbionts stores enormous amounts of carbon as PHA,” says corresponding author Nicole Dubilier, Director at the Max Planck Institute for Marine Microbiology. “We wondered whether the worm had evolved a way to access this rich energy reserve.”

The answer was: Yes. The researchers discovered an enzyme in the worm that breaks down microbial PHAs into small molecules animals can use. High resolution images further showed that the enzyme is produced exactly where the worm digests its symbionts. This suggests that the worm can access the PHA stored by its bacterial partners. 

The team then searched genomes across the animal kingdom and found related enzymes surprisingly often – in more than 66 animal species representing nine different phyla. Laboratory experiments confirmed that enzymes from phylogenetically distant animals –including a sponge, an earthworm and a springtail – also degrade microbial PHAs. “This was the real surprise,” says first author Caroline Zeidler from the Max Planck Institute for Marine Microbiology. “What started as a discovery in a single marine worm turned out to be a widespread capability shared by animals from very different branches of the tree of life.”

Microbial PHAs occur naturally in soils, sediments and aquatic environments worldwide. They are produced whenever microorganisms store excess carbon for later use and are among the few naturally occurring plastics that are completely biodegradable. Because PHAs are increasingly manufactured as sustainable alternatives to conventional plastics, understanding how they are degraded in nature has become an important area of research.

The new findings by Dubilier and her team suggest that animals, together with microorganisms, may contribute to the breakdown of these natural bioplastics. More fundamentally, they reveal that animals can exploit a microbial carbon reserve that had previously been thought to be inaccessible to them.

“Our study changes our understanding of who can use these microbial carbon stores,” says co-corresponding author Maggie Sogin, who carried out much of the work at the Max Planck Institute for Marine Microbiology and is now Assistant Professor at the University of California, Merced. “Animals have probably been feeding on nature’s original bioplastic for hundreds of millions of years – we’re only discovering it now.”

The researchers emphasize that much remains to be learned about how widespread this process is in nature and how much it contributes to carbon cycling. Nevertheless, the discovery opens a new perspective on interactions between microorganisms and animals and highlights how studies of unusual organisms can reveal entirely unexpected biological processes.

Info box: PHA bioplastics

PHAs are not only microbial storage compounds; they are also used to produce biodegradable plastics. For industrial production, bacteria are grown in large fermentation tanks and supplied with carbon-rich substrates such as sugars, starch, or plant oils. Under suitable conditions, the bacteria accumulate PHAs, which can then be extracted and processed into plastic-like materials.

PHA-based plastics are moldable, relatively water-resistant, and stable enough for many everyday applications. For example, they are used in food packaging and hygiene products. In agriculture, fertilizers can be encapsulated in PHA beads that slowly release their contents as the plastic degrades. In medicine, PHAs are used in wound dressings, drug delivery systems, and resorbable implants or sutures that gradually break down in the body.

What makes PHAs especially interesting is their biological circularity: They are produced by microorganisms and can also be degraded by biological processes. Despite this, PHAs still represent only a small fraction of the bioplastics market. This may change, however, as demand for biodegradable, bio-based materials grows and global bioplastics production capacity is expected to increase substantially in the coming years.

The new study adds another perspective by showing that a wide range of aquatic and terrestrial animals also possess enzymes capable of degrading PHAs.

 

Hunting for gutless worms on Elba, Italy: Divers collect sediment from the seafloor, where Olavius algarvensis lives buried beneath Mediterranean seagrass meadows. 

Credit

Kristina Weinert / Max Planck Institute for Marine Microbiology

---

Journal

Nature Ecology & Evolution

DOI

10.1038/s41559-026-03153-8 

Method of Research

Experimental study

Subject of Research

Animals

Article Title

Animal degradation of microbial storage polyhydroxyalkanoates

Article Publication Date

13-Aug-2026