In this essay I lay out the textual materials surrounding the birth of physical anthropology as a racial science in the eighteenth century with a special focus on the development of Kant's own contributions to the new field. Kant’s contributions to natural history demonstrated his commitment to a physical, mental, and moral hierarchy among the races and I spend some time describing both the advantages he drew from this hierarchy for making sense of the social and political history of inequality (...) between peoples, and the obviously problematic relationship that such views would entail for Kant’s universalism as he began to formulate his ethical program in the 1780s. While there is continued scholarly debate regarding a purported moral “turn” made by Kant once he dropped his commitment to a racial hierarchy in the 1790s, what the narrative as a whole reveals is not only the manner by which questions of racial difference defined physical anthropology from its outset, but the easy and uncomplicated manner by which whole member groups of the population could be excluded from lofty pronouncements regarding the “rights of man”—a fact that was as true for Kant in Königsberg, as it was for Jefferson and Hamilton in Philadelphia. (shrink)

Religion has been a constant throughout human history. Evidence of it dates from the earliest times. Religious practice is also universal, appearing in every region of the globe. To judge from recorded history and contemporary accounts, religious intolerance is equally widespread. Yet all the major faiths proclaim the golden rule, namely, to “love your neighbour as yourself.” When Jesus was asked by a lawyer, “Who is my neighbour?” he replied with the story of the good Samaritan—the man who bound up (...) the wounds and looked after the Israelite who was neither his co-religionist nor a member of his race. Jesus’ example has been rarely followed. What is it in religion—and not just in the Christian religion—that leads its members to limit their conception of their neighbour? How is it that, in preaching the universal brotherhood of mankind, religions so often practice the opposite? In my paper, I suggest some answers by focusing on the notions of faith, ethics and finitude. (shrink)

Religion has been a constant throughout human history. Evidence of it dates from the earliest times. Religious practice is also universal, appearing in every region of the globe. To judge from recorded history and contemporary accounts, religious intolerance is equally widespread. Yet all the major faiths proclaim the golden rule, namely, to “love your neighbour as yourself.” When Jesus was asked by a lawyer, “Who is my neighbour?” he replied with the story of the good Samaritan—the man who bound up (...) the wounds and looked after the Israelite who was neither his co-religionist nor a member of his race. Jesus’ example has been rarely followed. What is it in religion—and not just in the Christian religion—that leads its members to limit their conception of their neighbour? How is it that, in preaching the universal brotherhood of mankind, religions so often practice the opposite? In my paper, I suggest some answers by focusing on the notions of faith, ethics and finitude. (shrink)

Religion has been a constant throughout human history. Evidence of it dates from the earliest times. Religious practice is also universal, appearing in every region of the globe. To judge from recorded history and contemporary accounts, religious intolerance is equally widespread. Yet all the major faiths proclaim the golden rule, namely, to “love your neighbour as yourself.” When Jesus was asked by a lawyer, “Who is my neighbour?” he replied with the story of the good Samaritan—the man who bound up (...) the wounds and looked after the Israelite who was neither his co-religionist nor a member of his race. Jesus’ example has been rarely followed. What is it in religion—and not just in the Christian religion—that leads its members to limit their conception of their neighbour? How is it that, in preaching the universal brotherhood of mankind, religions so often practice the opposite? In my paper, I suggest some answers by focusing on the notions of faith, ethics and finitude. (shrink)

A. M. Turing argued that there was "little point in trying to make a 'thinking machine' more human by dressing it up in ... artificial flesh." We should, instead, draw "a fairly sharp line between the physical and the intellectual capacities of a man." For over fifty years, drawing this line has meant disregarding the role flesh plays in our intellectual capacities. Correspondingly, intelligence has been defined in terms of the algorithms that both men and machines can perform. I would (...) like to raise some doubts about this paradigm in artificial intelligence research. Intelligence, I believe, does not just involve the working of algorithms. It is founded on flesh's ability to move itself, to feel itself, and to engage in the body projects that accompanied our learning a language. This implies that to copy intelligence -- i.e., to produce an artificial version of it -- the flesh that forms its basis must also be reproduced. (shrink)

A constant theme in human self-reflection has been our ability to escape the control of nature. As Sophocles remarks in his Antigone, “Many are the wonders, none is more wonderful than what is man. He has a way against everything.”[1] A list follows of the ways in which man overcomes the limits imposed by the seas, the land, and the seasons. We do this by creating new environments for ourselves. These environments condition us. Thus, we do not just escape nature (...) by building cities. We, in turn, become city dwellers. The fact that we determine ourselves by determining our world has led thinkers like Hannah Arendt to describe us as conditioned beings. In her words, “Men are conditioned beings because everything they come into contact with turns immediately into a condition of their existence.” This includes “the things that owe their existence exclusively to men.” They too “constantly condition their human makers.” [2] Since Hegel’s time, such self-conditioning has been understood to include our very nature. Our ability to determine our environments, i.e., escape being determined by nature, has been taken to mean that our nature is our own creation. There are, in other words, no external limits to the freedom we have to determine who and what we are. This freedom, to put it paradoxically, is ground-less. There is nothing prior to it that determines it. “Freedom,” here, does not signify some nature or essence, but rather the lack of such. As Heidegger writes, “Freedom is the abyss (Ab-grund) of human existence (Dasein).” It is our character as ground-less beings. (shrink)

The word “theodicy” comes from the Greek words for God (theos) and justice (diké). Although coined by Leibniz, the attempt it represents is far older. In the Jewish tradition, it stretches to the beginning—that is to the stories of Genesis with their attempts to explain how evil could exist in a world created by God. God, after each creative act, sees that his creations are “good.” Women, however, bear their children in pain (Gn 3:16) and the ground, sprouting “thorns and (...) thistles,” can at times appears “cursed” to the farmer (Gn 3:18). How do we explain this? How is it compatible with God’s justice? Is it, in fact, possible to “justify God’s ways to man”? Beginning with Genesis’s account of man’s disobedience, there is a whole tradition of efforts to answer this question. It includes Isaiah’s notion of the “suffering servant”—the person who suffers for the sins of others—and the Maccabean notion of the “martyr”—the innocent and just sufferer who serves as a witness for the truth. As the philosopher, Hans Jonas, observes, the “event of Auschwitz” marks an important challenge to this tradition. “Auschwitz” names not just the setting in which over a million Jews, Gypsies and Poles perished. It also signifies the dehumanization of its victims. In the “factory-like working of its machine” for extermination, even the gesture of martyrdom and witness was not left to the dying. In Jonas’s words, “Not fidelity or infidelity, belief or unbelief, not guilt or punishment, not trial, witness and messianic hope, nay, not even strength or weakness, heroism or cowardice, defiance or submission had a place there. .... Of all this, Auschwitz, which also devoured the infants and babes, knew.. (shrink)

The paper is concerned with the anthropology of the Sophists.

The essay “Was ist der Mensch?” appeared for the first time in December 1944 in the German magazine with a hundred years of tradition edited by the publisher J. J. Weber Illustrierte Zeitung Leipzig [Illustrated Magazine Leipzig]. This special cultural edition, entitled Der europäische Mensch [The European Man], which was distributed exclusively abroad, was to be the last volume of the magazine after its final regular issue in September 1994 (No. 5041). Only in 1947, the text was republished, (...) with the same pagination, in a compilation made by J. J. Weber, Vom Wahren, Schönen, Guten. Aus dem Schatz europäischer Kunst und Kultur [On the True, the Beautiful, the Good. From the Treasury of European Art and Culture]. The publisher was expropriated in 1948, and three years later the company was finally removed from the German commercial registry. “Was ist der Mensch?” has never been released in any of Gadamer’s books or separately published in a journal; it also does not appear within the 10 volumes of his Gesammelte Werke [Collected Works]—the only exception is an Italian translation included in a volume devoted to Gadamer’s views on education and the notion of Bildung (cf. Gadamer 2012). The aim of this translation is to make accessible this Gadamer’s quest for the occidental interpretations of human self-consciousness, which has until now been almost unknown and in which, for the first time, Gadamer shows, from a theoretical standpoint, not only his early—although implicit—keen interest in Max Scheler’s anthropology (particularly Scheler’s considerations on the basic historical types of the occidental man’s self-perception in accordance with the basic and underlying concept of human history that still have powerful effectiveness in modern times), but also—at the historical threshold of the imminent ending of World War II—his own concern regarding possible philosophical answers to the question: “What is man?” Cf. especially Scheler 1926 (GW 9, 120–144); 1928 (GW 9, 7–71); 1929 (GW 9, 145–170). All commenting annotations to Gadamer’s text are authored by the editor and translator. (shrink)

Wie machen wir uns als Menschen? Diese Frage liegt vor allen Problemen der Philosophie und der Wissenschaften vom Menschen. In diesem Band wird sie als Grundfrage der Anthropologie behandelt. Anthropologie ist als »erste Philosophie« eine Reflexion über die Selbst-Verständigung des Menschen. Wie der Mensch sich macht, wird als Entwurf seiner selbst untersucht. Gunter Gebauer exploriert das Projekt aus verschiedenen Richtungen, die in das Zentrum der aktuellen Wissenschaften vom Menschen führen: die Körpertechniken, der Habitus, die Sprache, die Selbstsorge, die Empathie. (...) Der Band wendet sich an Leser*innen mit Interesse an einem vertieften Verständnis des Menschen und der Wissenschaften vom Menschen. (shrink)

Wie machen wir uns als Menschen? Diese Frage liegt vor allen Problemen der Philosophie und der Wissenschaften vom Menschen. In diesem Band wird sie als Grundfrage der Anthropologie behandelt. Anthropologie ist als »erste Philosophie« eine Reflexion über die Selbst-Verständigung des Menschen. Wie der Mensch sich macht, wird als Entwurf seiner selbst untersucht. Gunter Gebauer exploriert das Projekt aus verschiedenen Richtungen, die in das Zentrum der aktuellen Wissenschaften vom Menschen führen: die Körpertechniken, der Habitus, die Sprache, die Selbstsorge, die Empathie. (...) Der Band wendet sich an Leser*innen mit Interesse an einem vertieften Verständnis des Menschen und der Wissenschaften vom Menschen. (shrink)

This book examines The New Science by Giambattista Vico. Unlike previous commentators, I do not interpret it idealistically as purely intellectual history but rather pragmatically in light of the ways humans have concretely organized their lives over time.

The human being as a constituted objectivity is a fragile ‘figure’ who lives in through their individual and shared experience. As a constituted objectivity, it influences our experiences, actions and the constitution of our community. Nevertheless, it appears to us, who actually constitute it, as a completely independent and immutable object, as a mere fact our experience has to comply with, and as a normative representation of the human being. This paper inquires - from a phenomenological point of view - (...) about the structure that underlies the norm at work in our experience, as well as in the high- and low-level dimensions of the intersubjective community. Indirectly, such a structure can be identified through the connection between Husserl’s understanding of normality and objectivity. My claim is that normativity can be understood as a necessary function and thus can be distinguished from objectivity and normality. Normativity appears, therefore, as a function of objectivity, which allows one to distinguish the latter from normality. As such, normativity should not be confused with an active agreement or regulation, but rather identified as a necessary constitutive structure arising from experiential intersubjective sense-borrowing performance. At the same time, due to its connection to objectivity, normativity also appears to strongly influence the social production of validity, therefore being endorsed by institutions. (shrink)

Present-day Science-Fiction films repeatedly describe an obliteration of boundaries between human and other beings, and technical artefacts, which includes a threat to the human species. This motif relates to an anthropological fear of transformation of the human species due to advances in technology. This fear does not primarily refer to an invasion by extraterrestrial enemies, but to the anthropotechnization of man.

The paper focuses on the problem of the “anthropological turn” in Russian Neo- Kantianism. There are three sources of this “anthropological turn”. The first one is the concept of man in German Neo-Kantianism which was developed on the basis of Kant’s ethics. The second one is the influence of Russian culture and history. The third is the state of Russian philosophy at the end of the 19th and the beginning of the 20th century. The Russian Neo-Kantians reflected closely on the (...) doctrine of Leo Tolstoi and on the existence of man in the contemporary historical changes and cataclysms. They conclude the freedom of man as his essence depends on the political state of society and its moral base. There is no genuine existence of man without social politics based on morality and the human ideal. (shrink)

The depiction of the relation of God and man is one of the most difficult challenges of religious philosophy and even more the understanding of God and the human self-conception are deeply entwined. Trying an access to both questions starting from subjectivity, the idea of God is investigated in Descartes, Feuerbach and Husserl. After a discussion of the idea of God in Descartes and its consequences for human aspiration, the opposite standpoint of Feuerbach and his so-called theory of projection will (...) be examined. Finally, aspects from both thinkers are brought together in Husserl’s phenomenological ethics. The idea of God is the entelechy of reason and self-realizing goodness, in which the searching person can realize its own potentials as much as its own abyss, yet is always called to advance beyond herself and toward the ever-beyond God within. (shrink)

What is the origin and goal of man? In this lecture to a small audience I will pursue this question by comparing passages from Platonic Philebus with those from Aristotle's Nicomachian Ethics and comparing both together with a passage from the Letter to Menoikeus. It turns out that the Aristotelian idea of eudaimonia (happiness) is not so far removed from Epicurus, since eudaimonia also includes hedone, lust.

"Die eigentliche Optik Paul Richard Blums sollte man akkurat als holistisch bezeichnen. Es handelt sich um ein verborgenes Streben nach Ganzheitlichkeit, das diesem Buch eine methodologische Einheit gibt. ... Ein Mensch zu sein nach dem Zeitalter der Renaissance und Moderne ... bedeutet die Aufgabe, sich in einer strukturellen und inhaltlichen Offenheit zu situieren, die die verschiedenen Antworten auf die Frage: Was heißt es, ein Mensch zu sein? in der paradoxen Einheit eines neuen Humanismus zusammenbringt. ... Genau wie die (...) Philosophie des 20. Jahrhunderts ... das Fragen selbst ins Zentrum des Denkens stellte, so versucht Blum, Peter Wust folgend, das Prinzip insecuritas als Herzstück seiner Philosophie zu definieren." Balázs Mezei (Budapest). (shrink)

The phenomenological interpretation of the human being is not a naturalistic explanation. Likewise phenomenology does not interpret the human being as an example of a complex animal: from a phenomenological point of view man is not an animal, inasmuch as his definition and his essence imply a specifically human component, which cannot be attributed to the linear development of animal complexity. However, this does not mean that any animal component is excluded from the structure of humans. How can human animality (...) be acknowledged without denying human specificity and upholding a reductionist view? The purpose of the paper is to analyse and compare two different ways in which the phenomenological tradition has answered this question. (shrink)

In diesem Beitrag wird argumentiert, dass Beispiele nicht nur als rhetorische Unterstützung für eine vorgestellte allgemeine These verwendet werden, sondern auch ohne Erklärung zirkulieren (ob mit oder ohne versteckte Absicht). Wir treffen oft auf Besonderheiten (Personen, Fälle, Situationen, Geschichten usw.), die erst mit der Zeit die Bedeutung eines Beispiels für etwas annehmen. Das Lernen aus solchen Beispielen ist ein langwieriger Prozess, der darauf beruht, dass man ernsthafte und bedeutsame Aspekte (oft im Zusammenhang mit wesentlichen Strukturen des menschlichen Lebens) erkennt, die (...) sich in ihnen widerspiegeln, und der dazu führt, dass man i) in der Lage ist, bedeutsame Verbindungen zu anderen Besonderheiten zu erkennen und ii) nach dieser Erkenntnis zu handeln. Es ist umstritten, ob i) und ii) untrennbar miteinander verbunden sind. Der schwer fassbare Charakter des Lernens an Beispielen - die Schwierigkeit, zu entscheiden, ob ein Lernen stattgefunden hat - wird am Beispiel umweltbezogener Handlungen illustriert. (shrink)

Roland Mierzwa würdigt in dieser Untersuchung das Gewissen des Menschen im umfassenden Sinn, so werden zum Beispiel die Grenzen des romantischen Gewissens oder des Über-Ich-Gewissens von Freud aufgezeigt. Mit der Erfahrung des Gewissensentscheides unter dem Kirchenasyl als Wir-Gewissen kommt es zu einer Korrektur der individualistisch enggeführten Gewissensdiskussion, wie sie bisher etwa in der evangelischen Theologie oder bei der Kriegsdienstverweigerung vorlag. Auf das Alltagsgewissen wird verwiesen als Grundlage für ein gelebtes komplexes Verantwortungsgewissen (Bonhoeffer); in begrenztem Umfang kann die Sozialisation auf ein (...) wacheres Gewissensbewusstsein hinwirken. Auch wenn das Rechtfertigungsgeschehen für ein lebendiges Gewissen entscheidend ist, kommt man an einer Gewissensbildung nicht vorbei, wobei Herzensbildung einen besonderen Stellenwert hat. Wurde das spirituelle Moment bei der Gewissensbildung in der Diskussion bislang nur unzureichend gewürdigt, so wird hier eine Reihe interessanter Aspekte dazu dargelegt"--Page 4 of cover. (shrink)

A section of the author's Philosophical Anthropology, dealing with the pragmatic conception of man as acting being. This view rejects the notions of a rationally ordered world and of a supra-temporal nature of man, holding that man creates through his acts both himself and the world.--E. E.

Die Untersuchungen von Max Scheler zu Emotionen und der Intentionalität von affektiven Prozessen sind auch für Nicht-Phänomenologen überaus aufschlussreich. Denn man findet bei ihm systematisches Arbeiten, das sich der Wichtigkeit und der Grenzen der logischen Analyse ebenso bewusst ist, wie denen der empirischen Forschung. Darüber hinaus ist sein Nachdenken darauf gerichtet, den Menschen sowohl als denkendes Wesen, das zu höheren Reflexionen in der Lage ist, als auch als empfindendes ‚Naturwesen’ mittles philosophischer Überlegung zu verstehen. Max Scheler steht damit in einem (...) gewissen Gegensatz zu der ihm vorangegangenen Kantisch geprägten deutschen Philosophietradition, aber auch zu der ihm nachfolgenden, rein begrifflich orientierten analytischen Philosophietradition. Dennoch ist eine erneute Scheler-Lektüre gerade vor dem Hintergrund der letzteren, nämlich der Geschichte der analytischen Philosophie höchst aufschlussreich. (shrink)

The book is a reconstruction of the works of Adolf Portmann (1897–1982) as contributions (1) to a philosophical anthropology as the foundation of a theory of education and socialization related to psychology of ontogenetic development, (2) to biosemiotics and (3) to an critical theory of the technical civilization of modern capitalism. The paradigm of Portmann ist characterized by the transition of the dualism of nature and culture going beyond cartsianism and the mechanical and functional understanding of causality in science. Man (...) is defined as nature with incoporated spirit. The author of this reconstruction of Portmann’s works explains some autobiographical ways to understand what Portmann means for himself. (shrink)

ERNST BENZ DIE SCHÖPFERISCHE BEDEUTUNG DES WORTES BEI JACOB BOEHME I Wenn der diesjährige Eranos sich als Thema : „Mensch und Wort" gestellt hat, ...

English summary: Questions about the origins and reality of good and evil and about their mutual relationship play a central part in the history of philosophy and religion from their very beginning. Giving answers to these questions had a decisive influence on how the world and its civilization(s) as well as human beings and their ethics were perceived in their relations to higher beings (god or gods). The contributions within this conference volume illustrate which concepts regarding these questions were developed (...) in ancient civilizations around the Mediterranean, from the early literatures of Egypt and Mesopotamia, Iran and Greece to biblical, Qumranic and ancient Christian texts as well as the writings of the Manichaeans and the Quran. Thus this volume gives a representative overview of the responses of the ancient world to one of the fundamental questions of mankind. German description: Die Frage nach Herkunft und Wirklichkeit des Guten und des Bosen sowie nach ihrem Verhaltnis zueinander hat in der Philosophie- und Religionsgeschichte von Anfang an eine zentrale Rolle gespielt. Ihre Beantwortung hatte entscheidenden Einfluss darauf, wie man Welt und Kultur, Mensch und Ethik in der Beziehung zu Gott bzw. den Gottern wahrnahm. Die Beitrage des Konferenzbandes stellen dar, welche Auffassungen hierzu in Altertum und Antike entwickelt wurden. Dabei reicht der Bogen von den fruhen Literaturen aus Agypten und Mesopotamien, Iran und Griechenland uber biblische, qumranische und antik-christliche Texte bis zu dem Werk Manis und dem Koran. So vermittelt der Band einen reprasentativen Eindruck von den Antworten der alten Welt auf eine Lebensfrage der Menschheit. Mit Beitragen von: Wilhelm Blumer, Devorah Dimant, Jan Dochhorn, Therese Fuhrer, Philip Kreyenbroek, Catherine Mittermeyer, Angelika Neuwirth, Bernd Schipper, Konrad Schmid, Markus Stein, Martin Tamcke, Ulrich Volp. (shrink)

In einer Zeit, in der die Polarisierung von Gesellschaften ebenso in den öffentlichen Diskurs eindringt wie die ganze Menschheit betreffende, existenzielle Unsicherheiten, gewinnen Aspekte der Identität sowohl Raum als auch Bedeutung. Im ersten Teil des Beitrags werden Aspekte der Geborgenheit durch Identität beleuchtet und die Instrumentarisierung im Sinne einer ‚Identitätsnutzung‘ diskutiert. Der zweite Abschnitt geht der Frage nach, ob der Mensch eine ökologische Identität per evolutionem sein Eigen nennen kann oder vielleicht sogar eine Identität der Nachhaltigkeit erworben hat. Mit (...) der inzwischen kritischen Zunahme der Weltbevölkerung sieht sich die ganze Menschheit selbst erzeugten Problemen gegenüber, deren Lösung immer unwahrscheinlicher wird. In einer Anzahl von Ländern der Erde beobachtet man eine Abnahme der Fertilität von Frauen. Dies betrifft weite Teile von Europa und Amerika, aber ebenso muslimische Länder wie Saudi Arabien oder den Irak. Vielleicht bewirkt eine steigende Zukunftsunsicherheit eine unmerklich heranwachsende Identität der Frauen im Sinne einer Nachhaltigkeit und Bewahrung. (shrink)

It is a remarkable thing to find oneself suddenly surprised by an author after having spent years analysing, interpreting, and teaching their works. And yet, that is precisely the experience of many Kant specialists in recent times, as greater attention than ever has been placed on Kant’s discussions of gender and race. Part of the disorientation for Kantians surely comes from the way in which these investigations—oriented as they are by questions of empire as opposed to say, metaphysics—are able to (...) make a body of work that has been long-familiar seem strange and new. It is in this vein that I want to use my discussion here as an opportunity to reconsider one of Kant’s most familiar texts, the Groundwork of the Metaphysics of Morals, in order to focus on the case of moral failure presented by the person who has chosen an easy path in life: one who has ‘seine Talente verrosten ließ’ (4:423; let their talents rust, 75), to use Kant’s phrase.1 With this in focus, I will identify four subsequent counter examples offered up by Kant, each meant to offer specific cases of non-Europeans in a manner that can provide further moral instruction on this point. What this approach should reveal is not only Kant’s unsurprising consistency regarding the need for self-improvement, but also the compatibility he evidently saw between engaging his readers in moral guidance, on the one hand, and identifying non-European others as counterexamples of a morally worthless existence, on the other. (shrink)

Nietzsches entschiedene Wendung gegen den Idealismus und die romantische Vergötterung "grosser Menschen" seit Menschliches, Allzumenschliches beduetet offensichtlich nicht eine Absage an jeglich Form des Ideals "Bleibt der Erde treu", gilt von nun an jedoch als Maxime, der jedes Streben nach einer höheren Kultur unterworfen wird. Nietzsches höchster Typus Mensch zeichnet sich nicht nur dadurch aus, dass er die Realität werden kann. Er sei kein ""idealistischer" Typus einer höheren Art Mensch", wird in Ecce homo ausdrücklich bekräftigt. Während in Also (...) spruch Zarathustra das einholen des Ideals exemplarisch vorgeführt wird, setzt Nietzsche seinerseits alles daran, es seinem "Sohn Zarathustra" gleichzutun d.h. seinem "höeren Selbst" tatsächlich gerecht zu werden.Nietzsche's decisive turn against idealism and the romantic adulation of "great men" since Human, All Too Human obviously does not entail a refusal of any kind of ideal. All striving for a superior culture however should from now on follow the maxim to "remain true to the earth". Not only does Nietzsche's highest type of man conceive reality as it is: the overman himself is conceived as an ideal that actually can become real. he is not an ""idealistic" type of a higher kind of man", as Ecce homo explicitly confirms. Whereas Thus Spoke Zarathustra shows the protagonists catching up with his ideal, Nietzsche himself is determined to live up to his "son Zarathustra", i.e. to fulfill the demands and standards of his "higher self". (shrink)

_Selfhood and Appearing_ explores how, as embodied subjects, we are in the very world that we consciously internalize. Employing the insights of Merleau-Ponty and Patočka, this volume examines how the intertwining of both senses of “being-in” constitutes our reality.

Fr. James Demske first published this book in 1963 in Germany under the title: Sein, Mensch und Tod: Das Todesproblem bei Martin Heidegger. Except for minor revisions--such as changing the numeration and headings of the chapters and the occasional expansion of paragraphs--this is substantially the same book. The author follows the development of the problem of death in Heidegger through the famous discussion in Being and Time and into the later works. The fact of the continuing importance of "death" (...) in Heidegger's work is easily overlooked. But while the phrase "Being-unto-death" disappears after Being and Time the same phenomenon of Dasein's mortality reappears in the later accounts of the "Quadrate" : the heavens and earth, gods, and mortals. Chapter six of Demske's book is one of the few and clearest accounts of this central theme in Heidegger's thought. The book as a whole, apart from its thematization of the problem of death, presents a sound appraisal and a clear overview of the development of Heidegger's "path of thought" and is, on that account too, a welcome addition to the literature.--J. D. C. (shrink)

This last work by Paul de Man before his death in 1983 brings together what is essentially his complete work on the study of European Romanticism and post-Romanticism.

When I began to think about a book on Kant and the life sciences, the idea that Kant would ever have been influenced by the ideas coming out of this field seemed impossible to believe. In fact, I spent an entire Summer determined to prove that my thesis was wrong. The problem was, I kept finding evidence in support of it (fully one third of Kant’s Organicism is devoted to a glut of historical research filling up the endnotes, research stemming, (...) for the most part, from an initial disbelief in my own hypothesis). Most of the scholars who had considered this connection before me had had their training in the history of science. My situation was different, I had been trained in philosophy. I knew my Descartes but I had never read Harvey; I had written on Locke but I had never heard of Ray…. (shrink)

Focusing on Immanuel Kant's lectures on anthropology, the essay endeavors to address long-standing concerns regarding both the relationship between these empirical investigations and Kant's better known universalism, and more pressingly, between Kant's own racism on display in the lectures, and his simultaneous promotion of a universal moral theory that would unhesitatingly condemn such attitudes. -/- Reprinted in: 'Philosophies of Difference: Nature, Racism, and Sexuate Difference' edited by R. Gustafsson, R. Hill, and H. Ngo (Routledge, 2019), pp. 125-144.

In lieu of an abstract, here is a brief excerpt of the content:“Even the Papuan is a Man and not a Beast”: Husserl on Universalism and the Relativity of CulturesDermot Moran (bio)“[A]nd in this broad sense even the Papuan is a man and not a beast.” ([U]nd in diesem weiten Sinne ist auch der Papua Mensch und nicht Tier, Husserl, Crisis, 290/Hua. VI.337–38)1“Reason is the specific characteristic of man, as a being living in personal activities and habitualities.” (Vernunft ist (...) das Spezifische des Menschen, als in personalen Aktivitäten und Habitualitäten lebenden Wesens, Husserl, Crisis, 338/Hua. VI.272)1. Particular Historicities and Universal ReasonIn this paper2 i shall explore—and suggest a way of resolving—the evident tensions to be found in Husserl’s Crisis of European Sciences (and associated texts) [End Page 463] between his commitment to the universality of reason as the goal or telos of European humanity (founded on the ancient Greek “breakthrough” to philosophy and science) and his recognition of the empirical plurality and “relativity” (Relativität) of individual peoples and nations (e.g. Indian, Chinese, Papuan, Bantu) locked into their own particular “socialities” (Sozialitäten), communal worlds, and historical trajectories (what Husserl broadly calls “historicities,” Geschichtlichkeiten, Historizitäten). 3 I shall examine the complex relations and tensions between Husserl’s conception of universality, whereby the same reason functions in every human as animal rationale, “no matter how primitive he is” (“Origin of Geometry,” Crisis, 378/ Hua. VI.385), and his concept of the self-enclosed particularity of individual peoples with their own cultural forms. Indeed, Husserl often emphasizes that the most prominent feature of cultural plurality is precisely its relativity: “relativity belongs to the normal course of life.”4 I shall evaluate Husserl’s response, which defends the project of realizing the ideal of a critical universal rationality, by situating his discussion in terms of the cultural conflict of the time with the rising National Socialist commitment to racial particularism, and by showing Husserl’s commitment to the inherent universality of the one shared life-world.In his research manuscripts of the 1920s and 1930s Husserl frequently discusses the complex relationships that exist between different cultures and traditions; different cultures have their specific historicities (Crisis, 274/Hua. VI.320), dialects, norms, ways of life, and so on. This is simply a matter of fact. There are, furthermore, some well-known and controversial passages in Husserl’s “Vienna Lecture” of May 1935 and also in his Crisis texts (both in the main 1936 published text, Part One [§6] and in the then unpublished Crisis Part Three A §365) where Husserl speaks of the universality inherent in European philosophical culture of the logos and contrasts it with various other communal forms, which are, in his view, merely “empirical-anthropological” types, enclosed in their particular historicities and relativities. Indeed, in this context, Husserl regularly invokes the idea of the “relativity of everything historical” (die Relativität alles Historischen, Crisis, 373/Hua. VI.382). In addition, there are a number of related texts, collected in the Crisis supplementary volume (Hua. XXIX),6 in the Intersubjectivity volumes (especially Hua. XV),7 as well as in the recent volume on the life-world [End Page 464] (Hua. XXXIX),8 which discuss the empirical differences between peoples and also the layers and strata of social groups, nations, and even the idea of larger international collectivities or “supernations” (Übernationen), such as Europe, or the League of Nations. Furthermore, there are—as Husserl indicates in his 1935 letter to the prominent French anthropologist Lucien Lévy-Bruhl—even cultures that are completely “self-enclosed” (abgeschlossene) unities, cut off, some of which know no history. According to Husserl, into this classical world of closed cultures, the ancient Greeks bring a new form of universality, one that leads them, through the grasp of idealization to infinite tasks, to break through the finite horizons of their environing world (Umwelt), which presents itself to them as a “near-world” (Nahwelt, Crisis, 324/Hua. VI.303; Hua. XXVII.228), and to arrive at the highly refined concept of the “true world” or the “scientific world [which] is a purposeful structure (Zweckgebilde) extending to infinity” (Crisis, 382... (shrink)

Abstract: This essay addresses three specific moments in the history of the role played by intuition in Kant's system. Part one develops Kant's attitude toward intuition in order to understand how ‘sensible intuition’ becomes the first step in his development of transcendental idealism and how this in turn requires him to reject the possibility of an ‘intellectual intuition’ for human cognition. Part two considers the role of Jacobi when it came to interpreting both Kant's epistemic achievement and what were taken (...) to be the outstanding problems of freedom's relation to nature; problems interpreted to be resolvable only via an appeal to ‘intellectual intuition’. Part three begins with Kant's subsequent return to the question of freedom and nature in his Critique of Judgment. With Goethe's contemporaneous Metamorphoses of Plants as a contrast case, it becomes clear that whereas Goethe can embrace the role of an intuitive understanding in his account of nature and within the logic of polarity in particular, Kant could never allow an intuition of nature that in his system would spell the very impossibility of freedom itself. (shrink)

In this essay I position Kant's "psychology" portion of the lectures on metaphysics against the backdrop of Kant's work to develop a new lecture course on anthropology during the 1770s. I argue that the development of this course caused significant trouble for Kant in three distinct ways, though in each case the difficulty would turn on Kant's approach to "empirical psychology." The first problem for Kant had to do with refashioning psychology such that empirical psychology could be reassigned to anthropology (...) and rational psychology protected from the spectre of subreption. The second problem, and in many way the larger one for Kant during this time period, followed from Kant's desire to make use of empirical psychology's account of the mental faculties in his own transcendental theory of cognition. This introduced a separate problem for Kant, however, since this was a time during which physiological psychology was on the rise, a psychology that was being promoted by Ernst Platner and his followers, as "anthropology." This left Kant with the unwelcome task of simultaneously distinguishing his own philosophical anthropology from Platner's, and distancing his own transcendental theory of cognition from the likes of Herder and Tetens, given their embrace of the "embodied mind" approach being advanced by the physiological psychologists. (shrink)

This is an article-length summary of the argument in my book, Kant's Organicism: Epigenesis and the Development of Critical Philosophy (University of Chicago Press, 2013; 2015).

My discussion in this essay begins with a short rehearsal of Kant’s approach to anthropology and history in order to provide the framework for my subsequent focus on the political commentary that has surrounded the Black Lives Matter movement. This movement presents the most recent political challenge to white America’s belief in the inevitability of progress and I am interested in the light that might be shed on this challenge when viewed through the lens of Enlightenment conceptions of not just (...) history, but cultural and racial fitness for progressive development. I conclude with suggestions for the direction a new political imaginary might take, one capable of acknowledging the real history of race in America even as it makes room for the still necessary role played by our hope for progress, and the possibility of an expanded moral horizon. (shrink)

This essay traces the central role played by the notion of seeds and germs for understanding the complex metaphysics at work in both Ficino's reinterpretation of Greek philosophy for a Humanist audience, and in Kant's own efforts to describe the moral shaping of humankind that he took to be the heart of the Enlightenment project.

Kant’s Organicism: Epigenesis and the Development of Critical Philosophy, traces the decisive role played by eighteenth century embryological research for Immanuel Kant’s theories of mind and cognition. I begin this book by following the course of life science debates regarding organic generation in England and France between 1650 and 1750 before turning to a description of their influence in Germany in the second half of the eighteenth century. Once this background has been established, the remainder of Kant’s Organicism moves to (...) the influential role played by models of embryological development for Kant’s approach to understanding the cognitive processes responsible for the generation of knowledge, with special attention paid to Kant’s Precritical writings in the 1760s and 1770s. The book closes with a reinterpretation of Kant’s transcendental deduction in the Critique of Pure Reason. (shrink)