scholarly journals From ontology to poetry: the essence of Martin Heidegger's thought

2021 ◽  
pp. 93-106
Author(s):  
Bruno MOTANDI
Keyword(s):  
Martin Heidegger ◽  
Speculative Philosophy ◽  
Fundamental Ontology ◽  
History Of

How does the concept of being come to our mind? Where does the verb “to be” originate from the origins of speculative philosophy? Such questions raise problems about the conditions for the emergence of ontology in the history of the speculative sciences. It is historically known that the return to fundamental ontology as a science or primary philosophy in contemporary times, with Martin Heidegger, takes place under the banner of poetry. The objective of this article is to show that with Heidegger, it is certainly the being that is at the center of ontology, but this being is essentially linked to verbal and nominal poetry. From modernity, it is a question of understanding with Heidegger, that the essence of thought, beyond the representation given to it by the Moderns, is inscribed in the collecting donation of being. Hence the need to welcome the being in a thought that becomes poetry.

scholarly journals FREEDOM AS THE MAIN PROBLEM OF PHILOSOPHY GÜNTHER NEUMANN DER FREIHEITSBEGRIFF BEI GOTTFRIED WILHELM LEIBNIZ UND MARTIN HEIDEGGER. PHILOSOPHISCHE SCHRIFTEN, BAND 9. Berlin: Duncker & Humblot, 2019 ISBN 978-3-428-15537-8 HEIDEGGER UND LEIBNIZ. MIT EINEM GELEITWORT VON FRIEDRICH-WILHELM VON HERRMANN (DAS DENKEN MARTIN HEIDEGGERS II 2 HRSG. VON HANS-CHRISTIAN GÜNTHER). Traugott Bautz Verlag, Nordhausen, 2020 ISBN 978-3-95948-493-0

2021 ◽  
Vol 10 (1) ◽  
pp. 305-311
Author(s):  
◽  
VALTERS ZARIŅŠ ◽  
Keyword(s):  
Martin Heidegger ◽  
Gottfried Wilhelm Leibniz ◽  
The Other ◽  
Being And Time ◽  
Close Reading ◽  
Human Being ◽  
Fundamental Ontology ◽  
Freedom Of Will ◽  
History Of

Book review focuses on two books by Gunther Neumann, dedicated to the thought of Heidegger and Leibniz. If one of the books deals specifically with the understanding of freedom in both of the two philosophers, then the other one deals more with Heidegger’s three approaches to Leibniz’s thought: (1) Interpretation of Leibniz in the context of the making of fundamental ontology and in Being and Time, as well as the reading of Leibniz after Being and Time; (2) Interpretation of Leibniz during the transition to Ereignis thought; (3) Interpetation of Leibniz in the framework of Ereignis thought. Author’s scrupulous close reading approach allows to show the changes in Heidegger’s approach to Leibniz’s philosophy, as well as sketch out the placement of Leibniz’s great themes on the horizon of Heidegger’s history of the truth of being. Author also shows that from metaphysics there stems a certain view in the modern philosophical discussions oriented on neurosciences—a certain view on the human being and on the freedom of will. On this background Heidegger appears as a thinker who has looked beyond the alloy of metaphysics and sciences, in which the concept of freedom has been greatly restricted. Heidegger manages (thanks to the radical questioning of Being) to turn the view on the problem of freedom, which appears in G. Neumann’s books as the main problem of philosophy—through the contact of Leibniz’s thought and Heidegger’s.

scholarly journals Education and the task of deconstructing the history of ontology

2021 ◽  
Vol 13 (1) ◽  
pp. 2082-2093
Author(s):  
Paulo Eduardo Lopes da Silva
Keyword(s):  
Martin Heidegger ◽  
Fundamental Ontology ◽  
Current Conception ◽  
History Of

Throughout the history of Ontology, the comprehension of Being has often deviated from its original path and taken different directions. What are the consequences of this detour when it comes to the current conception about the phenomenon we call Education? From the Fundamental Ontology of Martin Heidegger until the considerations of other contemporary thinkers, this article proposes an involvement and commitment regarding the task of deconstructing the history of Ontology in order to enable an approach that unveils the most original essence of Education as παιδεία. This is the challenge that concerns all those who somehow confront the questions related to everydayness and the possibility of Dasein to find its truth even in face of the dictatorship of the ‘they’ (das Man). Therefore, the aim of these reflections is to offer a new and introductory perspective that can open a horizon of projects in which we become transparent to ourselves in our resoluteness (Entschlossenheit).

Conclusion: What is Speculative Empiricism?

2018 ◽  
Author(s):  
Didier Debaise
Keyword(s):  
Social Groups ◽  
Speculative Philosophy ◽  
System P ◽  
History Of ◽  
Selection Of

Process and Reality ends with a warning: ‘[t]he chief danger to philosophy is narrowness in the selection of evidence’ (PR, 337). Although this danger of narrowness might emerge from the ‘idiosyncrasies and timidities of particular authors, of particular social groups, of particular schools of thought, of particular epochs in the history of civilization’ (PR, 337), we should not be mistaken: it occurs within philosophy, in its activity, its method. And the fact that this issue arises at the end of Process and Reality reveals the ambition that has accompanied its composition: Whitehead has resisted this danger through the form and ambition of his speculative construction. The temptation of a narrowness in selection attempts to expel speculative philosophy at the same time as it haunts each part of its system.

scholarly journals Affective Aporetics: Complementary Contradictions in the Interpretation of Friedrich Nietzsche

PhaenEx ◽  
2011 ◽  
Vol 6 (1) ◽  
pp. 121
Author(s):  
NANDITA BISWAS MELLAMPHY
Keyword(s):  
Martin Heidegger ◽  
Friedrich Nietzsche ◽  
The Self ◽  
Leo Strauss ◽  
Will To Power ◽  
Karl Jaspers ◽  
Place Holder ◽  
History Of ◽  
The Subject ◽  
The Relationship

In 1971, Wolfgang Müller-Lauter introduced his study of Nietzsche as an investigation into the history of modern nihilism in which “contradiction” forms the central thread of the argument. For Müller-Lauter, the interpretive task is not to demonstrate the overall coherence or incoherence of Nietzsche’s philosophy, but to examine Nietzsche’s “philosophy of contradiction.” Against those such as Karl Jaspers, Karl Löwith and Martin Heidegger, Müller-Lauter argued that contradiction is the foundation of Nietzsche’s thought, and not a problem to be corrected or cast aside for exegetical or political purposes. For Müller-Lauter, contradiction qua incompatibility (not just mere opposition) holds a key to Nietzsche’s affective vision of philosophy. Beginning with the relationship between will to power and eternal recurrence, in this paper I examine aspects of Müller-Lauter’s account of Nietzsche’s philosophy of contradiction specifically in relation to the counter-interpretations offered by two other German commentators of Nietzsche, Leo Strauss and Karl Löwith, in order to confirm Müller-Lauter’s suggestion that contradiction is indeed an operative engine of Nietzsche’s thought. Indeed contradiction is a key Nietzschean theme and an important dynamic of becoming which enables the subject to be revealed as a “multiplicity” (BGE §12) and as a “fiction” (KSA 12:9[91]). Following Müller-Lauter’s assertion that for Nietzsche the problem of nihilism is fundamentally synonymous with the struggle of contradiction experienced by will to power, this paper interprets Nietzsche’s philosophy of contradiction in terms of subjective, bodily life (rather than in terms of logical incoherences or ontological inconsistencies). Against the backdrop of nihilism, the “self” (and its related place holder the “subject”), I will argue, becomes the psycho-physiological battlespace for the struggle and articulation of “contradiction” in Nietzsche’s thought.  

scholarly journals Davos 1929: “¿Qué es el Hombre?” El desencuentro entre Cassirer y Heidegger. Razones filosófica y política

2021 ◽  
pp. 177
Author(s):  
Julio Quesada
Keyword(s):  
Martin Heidegger ◽  
Edmund Husserl ◽  
Transcendental Phenomenology ◽  
History Of Philosophy ◽  
Existential Philosophy ◽  
Ernst Cassirer ◽  
Anti Semitism ◽  
History Of

Mi ensayo ha querido explicar genealógicamente y de forma contextualizada el desencuentro entre Ernst Cassirer y Martin Heidegger en Davos, y la deriva de éste hacia el nazismo desde los presupuestos de su filosofía existencial. ¿Qué papel juega el antisemitismo espiritual en la crítica heideggeriana al neokantismo y la fenomenología trascendental? ¿Por qué la fenomenología de Edmund Husserl es "una monstruosidad"? ¿Por qué Kant se convierte en batalla y campo de batalla de la Kulturkampf? ¿Por qué se lee a Heidegger como se lee? ¿Qué sentido tiene la práctica de la historia de la filosofía en el “final” de la filosofía?My essay wanted to explain genealogically and in a contextualized way the disagreement between Cassirer and Heidegger in Davos, and its drift towards Nazism from the budgets of their existential philosophy. What role does spiritual anti-Semitism play in the Heideggerian critique of neo-Kantianism and transcendental phenomenology? Why is Husserl's phenomenology "a monstrosity"? Why does Kant become the battle and battlefield of the Kulturkampf? Why do you read Heidegger as you read? What is the meaning of the practice of the history of philosophy in the “final” of philosophy?

Problematization and modification of phenomenological concept of experience in Martin Heidegger`s fundamental ontology

2021 ◽  
Vol - (3) ◽  
pp. 138-148
Author(s):  
Vlada Anuchina
Keyword(s):  
Martin Heidegger ◽  
Fundamental Ontology ◽  
The Subject

The aim of the paper is to justify the view of Martin Heidegger’s concept of Dasein as a recon- ceptualization and modification of Edmund Husserl’s concept of experience (Erfahrung). The subject of analysis is Heidegger's concept “Dasein”, which is one of the most problematic concepts of the entire Heidegger's legacy due to ambiguity of its meaning and the resulting variability of possible interpretations. Specific attention is paid to examining the ontological reading of Heidegger's philosophy as opposed to both existentialist and anthropological ones; the author also textually argues for its legitimacy. Author textually proves that Dasein indeed is a modification of Husserl`s concept of experience. Moreover, she claims that not only the concept of Dasein but fundamental ontology itself may be seen to some extent as an original modification of Husserl’s phenomenology. For not only one of the key phenomenological concepts gets modified, but also its method of exploration and some crucial topics (e. g. the temporality of consciousness) get modified and incorporated in Heidegger’s fundamental ontology project.

On Contents Division of Ancient Greek Philosophy

2018 ◽  
pp. 369-374
Author(s):  
Shaoyu Zhang
Keyword(s):  
Natural Science ◽  
Practical Philosophy ◽  
Western Philosophy ◽  
Greek Philosophy ◽  
Ancient Greek ◽  
Speculative Philosophy ◽  
Science Ethics ◽  
Ancient Greek Philosophy ◽  
History Of

The history of Western philosophy usually divides the ancient Greek philosophy into three parts, namely, natural science, ethics, and logic. The author deems that the ancient Greek philosophy should be divided into two categories: speculative philosophy and practical philosophy, for which writings of Plato and Aristotle provide sufficient grounds.

Society, Nature, Emancipation

Why History? ◽  
2020 ◽  
pp. 154-190
Author(s):  
Donald Bloxham
Keyword(s):  
Life History ◽  
Political Institutions ◽  
Social Life ◽  
Vicarious Experience ◽  
Human History ◽  
Speculative Philosophy ◽  
The Enlightenment ◽  
National Differences ◽  
Intellectual Traditions ◽  
History Of

This chapter is predominantly concerned with the thought tendencies grouped under the heading ‘the Enlightenment’, with regulation caveats about variations in character, national and otherwise, of the intellectual traditions denoted by the term: the French, Scottish, and German cases are each given separate attention. The governing concern is with the most theoretically self-conscious attempts to establish the utility of History as a way of understanding the human experience in light of influential concepts like Volksgeist, circonstance, esprit général, represéntations, and even ‘relations of production’, that elucidated human diversity across time and place. When explaining the broad sweep of human history providential accounts were replaced by secular ones, though in some instances the latter were structurally similar to the former and so had some of the character of History as Speculative Philosophy. On the whole the scholarship under examination evinced a liberal spirit as regards confessional and national differences, though it was frequently marked by a partiality to occidental civilization. Overall, we see a shift away from the study of religious and political institutions and towards—or back towards, insofar as there was some crossover with the French ‘new History’ of the sixteenth century—civic morals, culture, and the structural conditions of social life. History expanded further from being an instruction in statecraft for public men to proffering more rounded edification in the form of vicarious experience of different spheres of life.

Heraclitus armeniacus

2019 ◽  
Vol 22 ◽  
pp. 1-50
Author(s):  
Udo Reinhold Jeck
Keyword(s):  
Martin Heidegger ◽  
20Th Century ◽  
19Th Century ◽  
Greek Version ◽  
Philo Of Alexandria ◽  
Great Loss ◽  
History Of ◽  
The 19Th Century

Abstract It is a great loss to philosophy that Heraclitus’s writing was lost in antiquity, for the surviving fragments rarely contain more than one sentence. Often, they are succinct but concise statements that contain little text. So, when one succeeds in augmenting important fragments with a few words or illuminating their context, there is progress in Heraclitus research. Sometimes, however, this requires recourse to lineages outside the Greek-Latin tradition. An example of this is provided by fragment 123, which has played an important role since its discovery in the Orationes of Themistius: in the 20th century, Martin Heidegger used it several times for his idiosyncratic interpretation of Heraclitus and the philosophy of the Pre-Socratics. However, he did not consider that an Armenian variant of this fragment had become available at the beginning of the 19th century. This Armenian variant derives from a treatise of Philo of Alexandria which has only been transmitted in Armenian and offers more text than the Greek version. As Diels-Kranz did not include this Armenian source in their edition of The Fragments of the Pre-Socratics, this Armenian variant fell into oblivion and was not known to Heidegger either. Now this article, after introductory remarks on the transmission of Heraclitus’s sayings in Themistius and Philo’s Heraclitea, focuses on the history of the Armenian version of fragment 123 and its primary interpretations. It concludes with a reconstruction of the remarks which Ferdinand Lassalle dedicated to this fragment in both its Greek and Armenian versions in 1858.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document