This paper attempts to compare the positions of Jan Patočka and Pavel Kouba concerning Friedrich Nietzsche and thus to show the role of his philosophy in the Czech phenomenology. The difference between Patočka and Kouba is that Patočka (in a similar way as Heidegger) understands Nietzsche still as a representative of traditional metaphysics (although brought to the utmost frontier), whereas Kouba succeeds to incorporate Nietzsche in the corpus of phenomenological thought and adopt his basic ideas for the specific understanding of (...) the world and of the position of Man in the world. In Kouba’s concept, Nietzsche is not just a figure from the history of philosophy, but an interesting focus around which phenomenological self-reflection can gravitate. (shrink)

The article tries to show, from the phenomenological posi­tion, that it must be possible to reflect on so called pre-linguistic experience. The argumenta­tion is based on a disputation with a symptomatic example used by Wittgen-stein to substan­tiate his language games theory. The analysis of the example at­tempts to indicate that the language games theory, which has to justify the rejection of the existence of pre-linguistic experience, meets with discre-pancies and difficulties which limit the range of this theory to a certain (...) extent. Because it presupposes the existence of „private“, experiential sphere in which – even before language and verbali­zation enter the game – the struc­turing of the world, identifi­cation of things and an elementary under-stan­ding of these processes must be realized. It seems that the dis-cussion on this topic is not only a spe­cific polemic over one problem that can be found in Wittgenstein, but has wider implications because the language games concept in the form of various „discourses“, „vocabularies“ or „cultures“ has found great favour in contemporary postmo­dern philo­sophy. On its basis postmodern philosophy very radi­cally crosses out the world, profanes its rational, objec­tive description and calls for free variation of different interpretations – their legitimacy is authenti­cated only by a consensus of their users. In this dispute, phe­nome­nology does not declare that there is a single true description of the world and that it is possible to find a reliable criterion for its definite legiti­mization. It does, however, draw on the fact that so called pre-linguistic expe­rience does not succumb to the variability of langu­age games and the interests of its users, but that it more and more cle­arly reflects the unitary and scru­table style of showing the real, ob­jectively given world even though this al­ways happens in se­emingly impalpable subjective acts. (shrink)

This essay follows the strategy of Kant’s »Copernican Turn« bearing pragmatic features. It tries to show that this strategy is unjustified, that it forms theses about the character of reality and that it cannot provide the basis for »antirealism« developed – following Kant – by Richard Rorty. These problems indicate deficiencies of nominalist empiricism which Kant hasn’t managed to refute, and which today calls for further critical analyses of experience. Phenomenology in this context proves to be of particular importance.

This paper attempts to compare the positions of Jan Patočka and Pavel Kouba concerning Friedrich Nietzsche and thus to show the role of his philosophy in the Czech phenomenology. The difference between Patočka and Kouba is that Patočka (in a similar way as Heidegger) understands Nietzsche still as a representative of traditional metaphysics (although brought to the utmost frontier), whereas Kouba succeeds to incorporate Nietzsche in the corpus of phenomenological thought and adopt his basic ideas for the specific understanding of (...) the world and of the position of Man in the world. In Kouba’s concept, Nietzsche is not just a figure from the history of philosophy, but an interesting focus around which phenomenological self-reflection can gravitate. (shrink)

This paper attempts to compare the positions of Jan Patočka and Pavel Kouba concerning Friedrich Nietzsche and thus to show the role of his philosophy in the Czech phenomenology. The difference between Patočka and Kouba is that Patočka (in a similar way as Heidegger) understands Nietzsche still as a representative of traditional metaphysics (although brought to the utmost frontier), whereas Kouba succeeds to incorporate Nietzsche in the corpus of phenomenological thought and adopt his basic ideas for the specific understanding of (...) the world and of the position of Man in the world. In Kouba’s concept, Nietzsche is not just a figure from the history of philosophy, but an interesting focus around which phenomenological self-reflection can gravitate. (shrink)