Saturday, September 14, 2019
In New Statesman on the current popularity of Heidegger for location.
For Heidegger and his politically minded pupils, the cause behind our unsettled condition is clear: liberalism. His understanding of liberalism was expansive, encompassing all notions of abstract equality (including Marxism) and stemming from the misguided “metaphysics” of mind-body dualism. Any notion of a “universal” human must deny the embeddedness of Being, he argued, leaving individuals to languish in a lifeless state. Long before our “age of globalisation”, Heidegger warned that by wanting to treat everyone the same, liberalism would make the entire world the same – robbing it of all the particularities that made life meaningful. Stripping humans of their differences in the name of equality led not to individual empowerment, but to collective impoverishment – a spiritual death.
With group photo, with Einstein and MH, in what I'm guessing is Davos.
New workshop at Bard: Heidegger for Historians - History as Conservation.
This workshop is focused on Martin Heidegger’s most concentrated engagement with thinking about history, his 1926 summer seminar on Johann Gustav Droysen’s textbook on historical methodology (Grundriss der Historik). While Heidegger’s teacher, Heinrich Rickert, was a central figure in the late nineteenth-century German debate about what constituted historical knowledge (as opposed to natural scientific knowledge), and while history was the subject of the public lecture that marked his entry into university life in 1915 (“The Concept of Time in the Science of History”), and while history occupied a major role in Being and Time, his classic work of 1927, that 1926 seminar, which was his most direct engagement with academic history and its practice has neither been published, translated, or commented upon.
Thursday, September 12, 2019
In Phenomenological Reviews Gabriel Popa reviews Adam Knowles's Heidegger’s Fascist Affinities: A Politics of Silence.
The idea is to capture silence through and within legein, that is through a kind of “discoursive speech” which is no longer opposed to vocalization as a form of corrupted speech, but it makes way for steresis, understood as a type of privation that withdraws/robs (robbing) what essentially belongs to something or someone, as sickness is a privation of health or blindness is a privation of seeing. In the same vein, while in the SuZ the absence of overt utterance does not necessarily mean that interpretation or discourse are absent, here we may find that even in the presence of speaking there may be a form of silencing still active which does not mean the absence of words. The idea of steresis clears the path for the introduction of silence into the handicraft of writing, by means of altering, if not totally collapsing, the distinction between discourse and language. As a form of poiesis, it will guide one through the manifoldness of logos, according to a guiding meaning, working its way by means of separation and elimination of wrong paths, same way as the “sculptor hews away the marble to bring out a form”.
Wednesday, September 11, 2019
In NDPR Hakhamanesh Zangeneh reviews Martin Heidegger's The Question Concerning the Thing: On Kant's Doctrine of the Transcendental Principles, translated by James D. Reid and Benjamin D. Crowe.
The references are first to Galileo and Newton and then, eventually, to Leibniz, Wolff and Baumgarten as representing rationalist metaphysics. In fact, Heidegger claims that a 'mathematical spirit' is the origin of Modern metaphysics as such. He goes on to explicitly reject the characterization of the Modern in terms of Descartes and of subjectivity. Instead, he insists that 'the mathematical' already determines Descartes' entire context and contribution. Indeed, the 'scientific' character of Modernity saturates the determination of the latter in terms of subjectivity. This, again, follows from his conception of the history of truth. Modern philosophy unfolds, according to Heidegger, based on a conception of truth as certitude.
Monday, September 09, 2019
The New Statesman on tech wrecking the earth.
Although he acknowledged that modern science had material benefits, Heidegger worried that its power had blinded us to the dangers of treating the natural world as a resource for production and consumption. A self-serving, perfunctory use of technology, he warned, leads to sacrilege, violence and destruction – the very attitudes our current climate emergency is founded upon.
Sunday, September 08, 2019
Martin Heidegger: Life & Philosophy by Iain Thomson.


All Things Shining on Enlightenment thinking.
Whatever Heidegger’s notion of authenticity, therefore, it involves an account of the self according to which the most authentic form of existence involves “being one’s own” in something like the Augustinian sense of being true to the basic ontological features of what one is. Heidegger disagrees with Augustine, of course, about what those basic ontological features are. But the notion of being true to them, of being authentic or “being one’s own,” is similar. Whatever this account of the self amounts to in detail, it is clearly very different from what one finds in the early modern philosophers of the Enlightenment period.
Saturday, September 07, 2019
Existential Comics with Heidegger.
For when Ereignis is not sufficient.

Appropriation appropriates! Send your appropriations to enowning at gmail.com.

View mobile version