现象学、解释学、生命哲学——海德格尔与胡塞尔、狄尔泰及雅斯贝尔斯遭遇

近来,海德格尔早期的一些弗赖堡讲座稿[《全集》56/57卷,《全集》58卷,《全集》61卷,《全集》63卷和"那托普论文":《对亚里士多德的现象学解释(解释学境域的显示)》]等相关手稿,以及关于时间概念的演讲稿(《时间概念》)被发表了,于是我们现在可以更好地理解海德格尔通向《存在与时间》的哲学道路(这是一条由于在《存在与时间》之前十年的沉默而长期不为我们所知的道路),从而也能更好地理解这部杰作本身了.战后期间海德格尔的另一重要早期文献,即他未发表的关于雅斯贝尔斯的详尽评论,一段时间以来就已为世人所见了(《全集》9卷1-44页).他1925年夏季学期的讲座稿(《全集》20卷)也是如此.这个文本突出地显示了在通往《存在与时间》的道路上,海德格尔与胡塞尔现象学甚为广泛而细致的遭遇.     

Going Under Toward the Abyssal Question: Heidegger's Confrontation with Hegel on Negativity

Consulting Heidegger's other texts composed during 1936–1942, this article employs a principle of charity and constructs a consistent discourse about an inceptual negativity Heidegger articulates through a confrontation with Hegel in GA 68. Heidegger deliberately differentiates his use of denial (Verneinung) that bears Being-historical significance from Hegel's Negation that allegedly aims at synthesis or elevation as a dialectical movement. Being unsatisfied with his approach that remains entangled with metaphysics in the Contributions, Heidegger attempts to transform the question of the Nothing from a subsidiary question to Beyng to an abyssal question. One needs to go under toward the Nothing in its concealed, conjoined, and most intimate relation to Beyng. The movement of going under is fundamentally significant for transitions that could occur from out of the history of Beyng. Never being the fullness of essence, the Nothing places a limit on Beyng, constantly thwarts its unfolding, and maintains it in finitude.     

Liturgy, Art and Politics

This article examines the category of "liturgy" in its relation to aesthetics, ethics and politics. It is argued that liturgy occupies a unique mediating position between art and politics, for, on the one hand, it ensures that the political points perpetually beyond itself, and, on the other hand, the artistic is prevented from lapsing into a "magic circle" of compensatory reality or merely "fine" art. Alternative aesthetic formulations, for example, that of Adorno, are examined and shown to be problematic and ultimately nihilistic and unrealizable. By contrast, a liturgical aesthetic is shown to have a genuine ethical practicability. Modernity is then examined. It is argued that late capitalist structures—including (contra Paul Piccone) is apparently opposed structures, such a post-Fordist organicism—can be seen as a kind of anti-liturgy liturgy, or, one might say here, "ritual" (for all the latter term's more dubious post-nineteenth century assumptions can here be assumed), which has produced an entirely self-perpetuating minimal automated subjectivity. Finally, it is concluded that the manifold problems faced by non-liturgical aesthetics and politics can be reduced to this separation of the ideal from the real. This separation is further examined. The lineaments of a specific liturgical tradition—in this case, the Christian—and especially its eucharistic focus—are analyzed, and it is suggested that here one might find suggestions as to a fusion of the ideal and the real, and hence indications of how one might begin to outwit several of the problems in aesthetic and political theory already shown to involve difficulties.     

Art,Politics, and the Pedagogical Relation

In recent years the French philosopher Jacques Rancière has addressed the predicament of artists and curators who, in their eagerness to convey a critical message or engage their viewers in an emancipatory process, end up predetermining the outcomes of the experience, hence blocking its critical or emancipatory potential. In this essay I consider Rancière’s writing on this topic and draw out the parallels with the predicament of teachers and curriculum designers who have critical and emancipatory objectives. The risk of education that strives for emancipation is that it can become so directive in steering students to the “right” outcomes that it does not leave these students any intellectual room. Rancière’s work is helpful in reminding us that teachers and curricula with explicitly critical, political, emancipatory objectives can defeat their own purposes and become stultifying if they do not leave the student room to use her or his own intelligence.     

Musing with Kierkegaard: Heidegger's Besinnung

The article deals with the recently published Besinnung, a work dating from 1938–1939, one among the unpublished treatises in Part III of Heidegger's Gesamtausgabe. It follows the Beiträge zur Philosophie (Vom Ereignis) (1936–1938), taking up the same themes as that work, such as the last God, the first and the other beginning, etc. But whereas the earlier work, especially the notion of the last God, relates more to Schelling, this one muses on Kierkegaard. The article sets Besinnung within the context of related works of the same period, not only the Beiträge but also Metaphysik und Nihilismus and Geschichte des Seyns. However, Besinnung also breaks new ground, finding a deeper ontological distinction between Seyn and Sein as the basis for the earlier ontological difference between being and beings. The work is part and parcel with Heidegger's destructuring of metaphysics, which he sees as really a freeing up of the beginning, as also the issue of onto-theology. Thus it is integral with Heidegger's program of getting God out of metaphysics and being out of theology. It is in virtue of the meaning he attaches to Seyn (Logos) in Da-sein that it is possible for him not only to retrieve the meaning of the other beginning, the en-owning (Er-eignis) of Da-sein, and with it the meaning of the first beginning (in the two senses the phrase has in this work), but also thereby to recover the forgotten meaning of being (Sein). The approach to Seyn, with Kierkegaard, is not through the thinking (Denken) that thinks being, which cannot really get beyond beings and/or the Supreme Being of metaphysics, but through a thinking, a musing, that thinks through to (Er-denkt) Seyn. The article concludes with some reflections on the significance of Heidegger as theo-logian.     

Role of Art in Politics: Popper and Marcuse

The aim of the paper is to explore the role of art in politics and understand the limitations of the liberal model of state with respect to aesthetic freedom. This paper critically engages with the claim that political action should be directed towards specific goals that can be rationally justified. It argues that this approach is exclusionary in nature as it leaves little room for art and creative communication. It attempts to do so through the contrasting philosophies of Popper and Marcuse.

     

Paternity,Enframing, and a New Revealing: O'Brien's Philosophy of Reproduction and Heidegger's Critique of Technology

This article seeks to demonstrate the importance of the philosophical work of Mary O'Brien. It does so by showing how O'Brien's work counters Heidegger's strict differentiation between the ancient Greek metaphysics of presence and modern technological thinking. O'Brien's ideas indicate two critical lacunae in Heidegger's interpretation of the ancient Greeks: the latter's attempt to secure paternity and their overlooking of birth as a form of unconcealment. According to O'Brien, the way in which we understand and experience human reproduction influences both our sense of self and our sense of continuity. According to Heidegger, the way in which things are brought forth or unconcealed is fundamental to our being‐in‐the‐world. Neither O'Brien nor Heidegger lived to see the current advancements in reproductive technology, but both would consider them significant and meaningful beyond their social, political, and even ethical implications. Furthermore, recent reproductive technology draws attention to birth as revealing—although as increasingly Enframed. Rapid changes in reproduction may reveal Enframing as Enframing, and also show that technology is not something that we can simply master. But for this to occur, we must take into account the radical critique and rethinking of Heidegger's philosophy implied by O'Brien's thought.     

Deciphering Heidegger's Connection with the Daodejing

This paper carries out an intensive study of Heidegger's famous reflection on the word dao and of his citations from the Daodejing, with the purpose of elucidating his complex relation with Daoist thinking. First I examine whether dao could be said to be a guideword for Heidegger's path of thinking. Then I discuss Heidegger's citations, in six places of his writings, from five chapters of the Daodejing, by situating them in the immediate textual context as well as against the broad background of the fundamental presuppositions and orientations of Heidegger and Laozi's thinking. My examination of Heidegger's citations from the Daodejing has for the first time gathered together all the relevant materials discovered so far.     

The Ontic and the Ontological in Heidegger's Philosophy of Technology: Response to Thomson

Iain Thomson's critique is persuasive on several points but not on the major issue, the relation of the ontological to the ontic in Heidegger's philosophy of technology. This reply attempts to show that these two dimensions of Heidegger's theory are closely related, at least in the technological domain, and not separate, as Thomson affirms. It is argued that Heidegger's evaluations of particular technologies, the flaws of which Thomson concedes, proceed from a flawed ontological conception.