Index and Image

Qui Parle ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 30 (2) ◽  
pp. 293-335
Author(s):  
Ronald Mendoza–de Jesús

Abstract Although Walter Benjamin anticipated a confrontation with Martin Heidegger regarding the theory of historical knowledge, this confrontation was never fully elaborated. This essay contributes to filling out this lacuna by arguing that Benjamin’s concept of the dialectical image was conceived as a phenomenological corrective to Heidegger’s historicity. To clarify the phenomenological sources of Benjamin’s conception of the image, it reads the traces of Benjamin’s engagement with the early phenomenologist Jean Héring in the first sentences of entry “N3,1” in Das Passagen-Werk, where Benjamin presents his notion of the image in explicit opposition to Heidegger. The essay argues that Benjamin relied on Héring’s notion of phenomenological essences as indexically individuated to conceptualize the historical index of the image and to provide a better (i.e., more concrete) way of “saving history for phenomenology” than Heidegger’s historicity. By tracking Benjamin’s debts and departures from Héring, this essay prepares the ground for a reconstruction of Benjamin’s confrontation with Heidegger and argues for the relevance of Benjamin’s conception of history for contemporary critiques of historicism.

2018 ◽  
Vol 81 (2) ◽  
pp. 198-212
Author(s):  
Cornelia Zumbusch

Abstract Benjamin’s approach to the history of the nineteenth century as a prehistory (Vorgeschichte) of modernity relies on his concept of the dialectical image. Starting from Benjamin’s interpretation of Proust’s narrative endeavor as the evocation of images that have not been seen before, this essay tries to situate Benjamin’s dialektisches Bild in new contexts. Examining Benjamin’s interest in Goethe’s Urphänomen as well as implicit references to Lessing’s concept of fruchtbarer Augenblick or Cassirer’s idea of symbolische Prägnanz, this essay stresses not so much the important but often considered aspects of discontinuity and destruction of chronological time, but tries to trace a hidden agenda: the affinity of Benjamin’s dialectical image to genetic processes.


Author(s):  
Natalja Chestopalova

French philosopher, writer, artist and translator Pierre Klossowski was born in Paris and raised in Switzerland, Germany and France. His education was influenced by Rainer Maria Rilke (1875–1926) and André Gide (1869–1951). A friend of Georges Bataille (1897–1962), Walter Benjamin (1892–1940) and Pierre-Jean Jouve (1887–1976), Klossowski produced French translations of works by Friedrich Nietzsche (1844–1900), Franz Kafka (1883–1924), Martin Heidegger (1889–1976) and Ludwig Wittgenstein (1889–1951) from German, and of the works of Suetonius, Virgil, Augustine and Tertullian from Latin.


1999 ◽  
Vol 52 (3) ◽  
pp. 328-345 ◽  
Author(s):  
Christopher Ocker

Dilthey, in his famous essay, ‘Die Enstehung der Hermeneutik’, first published in 1900, taught us that Matthias Flacius Illyricus, the mid sixteenth-century Lutheran theologian, was the author of the first significant treatise on hermeneutics. Conceding a classic Protestant opinion once articulated by Flacius, he consigned medieval interpretation to what must have seemed a justified oblivion: he simply ignored the period between Origen and John Calvin. Calvin, Flacius, and especially Friedrich Schleiermacher were the main contributors to the rediscovery of the interpretive force of history and language, which Dilthey surely felt was best appreciated by his own philosophy of culture. Hans-Georg Gadamer later tried to show that Dilthey himself was weak on language and misinformed about history, falling prey to the movement that Gadamer opprobriously called ‘historicism’. Gadamer's own view of the development of hermeneutics—with its subjection of historical knowledge to ‘our own present horizon of understanding’, its accent on language, and its debt to Martin Heidegger—shifted the chronology of hermeneutics even closer to the present According to Gadamer, the ‘hermeneutic problem’ was specifically created by the alienation of exegesis and understanding from ‘application’, the importance of which was discovered only by Romantic philosophy and best redressed with the help of a language-obsessed philosophy of being. But as was the case for Dilthey, the crucial moment in the development of hermeneutics remained the discovery of the role of language in ‘meaning’, in the broadest sense, so that texts could only be understood in the grand context of a philosophy of life or, in Gadamerian terms, in the context of a philosophy that functioned as present interpretation.


Author(s):  
Kurt Flasch

Abstract In his later thought, Martin Heidegger disclaimed the possibility of a philosophical history of philosophy. In his view, the history of philosophy tends to remain bound to a specißc philosophical orientation and offer merely a philosophical position, not philosophy itself, presenting at best nothing more than an assemblage of doctrinal positions. In contrast, Heidegger developed in his early Freiburg lectures of 1919-1923 an historical-phenomenological program of philosophical history directed against the historical school of Dilthey, whose objekthi-storisch perspective he meant to replace with his own vollzugshistorisch method. For Heidegger, there is no perfected subject at the basis of historical investigation, but rather it is the temporality of the observer which makes possible historical knowledge in the ßrst place. Heidegger's later abandonment of this notion is a significant reason for the lack of a philosophical approach to writing the history of philosophy after 1945 in Germany.


2020 ◽  
Vol 14 (26) ◽  
pp. 248-272
Author(s):  
Alice Mara Serra

This text underlines the way in which, for Georges Didi-Huberman, topics including matter, symptom and memory become primordial to the thinking of images. But as Didi-Huberman proceeds, the course that leads him to highlight such topics first addresses other topics that, inphilosophy and iconography, sought to deny such readings, namely: image as form and its correlative meanings, that is, image as symbol and image as visibility. Didi-Huberman, however, argues that the notion of form may no longer be merely opposed to that of matter, nor be considered as solely idealistic. If, on the one hand, Didi-Huberman presents the insufficiency of the deconstruction of the notion of form presented by Jacques Derrida, on the other hand, the displacements of the notion of form proposed specially in Ce que nous voyons ce qui nous regardepoint to an approximation to deconstruction, mostly to the themes of trace, index and “the belows” (les dessous) of images. In addition, passages of this and other works of Didi-Huberman may insinuate a connection between the notions of trace and aura, which refer to convergences concerning the deconstruction of the visible and the dialectical image. This text seeks to reconstruct such directions from writings of Didi-Huberman and, in this way, restores other writings that border on them: specially from Jacques Derrida and Walter Benjamin.


2018 ◽  
pp. 79
Author(s):  
Carlos Pérez López

Resumen:En el estado actual de las relaciones interdisciplinarias de los saberes científicos, la historia, como disciplina científica, plantearía una situación particular. No se trata de un saber puro que se cierra sobre sí mismo en la especificidad de una lengua de especialistas, sino de una composición de conocimientos sobre múltiples temporalidades heterogéneas que convergen en la materia misma de su ejercicio científico, esto es, la mirada al pasado. Así, posiciones teóricas tan distanciadas sobre el conocimiento histórico, como las de Walter Benjamin, Jacques Rancière y Reinhart Ko- selleck, dan cuenta de esta apertura disciplinaria de la historia hacia los saberes y tiempos que la componen. Un estudio sobre el concepto de “tiempo histórico” y sobre la figura del historiador en estos pensadores es la tarea que nos hemos propuesto para demostrarlo.Palabras clave: Walter Benjamin - Jacques Rancière - Reinhart Koselleck – tiempo histórico – historiografíaAbstract:In the current state of interdisciplinary relations among scientific knowl- edge, history – as a scientific discipline –would pose a particular situation. It is not a pure knowledge closed in the specificity of a specialist language, but a composition of knowledge about multiple heterogeneous temporali- ties converging in the very subject of its scientific exercise, that is, looking into the past. Thus, theoretical positions about historical knowledge, such Walter Benjamin’s, Jacques Rancière’s and Reinhart Koselleck’s, account for this disciplinary opening of history towards knowledge and times comprising it. A study about the concept of “historical time” and the figure of the historian in these thinkers is the task we have proposed to demonstrate it.Keywords: Walter Benjamin - Jacques Rancière - Reinhart Koselleck – historical time – historiographyResumo:No estado atual das relações interdisciplinares dos saberes científicos, a história, como disciplina científica, proporia uma situação particular. Não se trata de um saber puro que fica fechado em si mesmo, na especificidade de uma língua de especialistas, mas de uma composição de conhecimen- tos sobre múltiplas temporalidades heterogêneas que convergem na matéria mesma do seu exercício científico, isto é, o olhar para o passado. Assim, posições teóricas tão distanciadas sobre o conhecimento histórico, como as de Walter Benjamin, Jacques Rancière e Reinhart Koselleck, dão conta desta abertura disciplinar da história perante os diversos saberes e tempos que a compõem. Um estudo sobre o conceito do “tempo his- tórico” e sobre a figura do historiador nestes pensadores é a tarefa que nos temos proposto para demonstrá-lo.Palavras-chave: Walter Benjamin - Jacques Rancière - Reinhart Koselleck – tempo histórico – historiografia


2021 ◽  
Vol 5 (15) ◽  
pp. 5-24
Author(s):  
Ester Jordana Lluch

El presente artículo examina las relaciones entre escritura, técnica y pensamiento. Las reflexiones de Martin Heidegger en torno a porqué la ciencia no piensa nos permiten abordar el problema de la homogenización del pensamiento y de la escritura en las universidades contemporáneas. Afirmar hoy que «la academia no piensa» invita a una reflexión respecto a esos modos de pensamiento y escritura imperantes. Siguiendo los vínculos que Heidegger establece entre el avenimiento de la técnica y la transformación de la escritura analizamos su noción de serenidad para contraponerla al modo en que Friedrich Nietzsche, Walter Benjamin y Michel Foucault se sirven de distintos objetos técnicos para generar nuevas formas de pensamiento y de escritura.


Antíteses ◽  
2019 ◽  
Vol 12 (23) ◽  
pp. 487
Author(s):  
Augusto Bruno De Carvalho Dias Leite

Através da exposição inicial do significado da tradição para Martin Heidegger, Sigmund Freud e Walter Benjamin, proponho-me a analisar as implicações ontológicas e epistemológicas que a tradição identificada com a transmissão cultural produz para a compreensão histórica. Para tanto, a impessoalidade (Heidegger), a estrutura super-egoica (Freud) e a transmissibilidade (Benjamin) serão examinadas por este artigo à luz do conceito de passado como o limite-critivo do tempo em conexão com a tradição – apresentada como condição existencial.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document