Shows the relevance of Schiller’s thought for contemporary philosophy, particularly aesthetics, ethics, and politics. This book seeks to draw attention to Friedrich Schiller (1759–1805) as a philosophical thinker in his own right. For too long, his philosophical contribution has been neglected in favor of his much-deserved reputation as a political playwright. The essays in this collection make two arguments. First, Schiller presents a robust philosophical program that can be favorably compared to those of his age, including Rousseau, Kant, Schelling, and (...) Hegel, and he proves to be their equal in his thinking on morality, aesthetics, and politics. Second, Schiller can also guide us in our more contemporary philosophical concerns and approaches, such as phenomenology, hermeneutics, aesthetics, and politics. Here, Schiller instructs us in our engagement with figures such as Walter Benjamin, Michel Foucault, Jacques Rancière, Roberto Esposito, and others. María del Rosario Acosta López is Associate Professor of Philosophy at DePaul University. She has published several books, including La tragedia como conjuro: el problema de lo sublime en Friedrich Schiller. Jeffrey L. Powell is Professor of Philosophy at Marshall University and the editor of Heidegger and Language. (shrink)

The treatment of communication in Heidegger has often been relegated to a secondary status. In this essay, I attempt to remedy this tendency. In my attempt, I first focus on the role of language in Being and Time through focusing on Heidegger's treatment of λογος in the introduction, followed by the role of language in the constitution of the being of the da . The latter takes into account the special status of language in relation to the other two constituent (...) moments of the being of the da , i.e., understanding and attunement or moodedness. In Being and Time , understanding and attunement become factically disclosed as projection and thrownness. However, this disclosure occurs through language as communication. The nature of this disclosure as communication is the holding open of the da , a holding open of the da for the other, the keeping open of world through communication for community. Finally, consistent with Aristotle, community is thought as the basis of the political. (shrink)

The sixth and most recently published of the seven Heidegger manuscripts from his literary remains, The Event , is itself something of an event. If the Beiträge zur Philosophie was to set the stage for what has been received as an even more experimental Heidegger, then The Event in many ways might look back on that experimentation as yesterday’s news. The Event seems to begin where the Beiträge ended, as if there was no longer the need to justify its sentences (...) by means of an appeal to the historical tradition; in fact, such an appeal goes further towards confirming that tradition and its corresponding metaphysics than it does towards problematizing it. This is not to say that The Event progresses as if the historical tradition were no longer unfolding, but that it is much less concerned with trying to make sense of its own unfolding from out of some vaguely universal understanding of that tradition. In fact, while the Beiträge unceasingly attempted to make .. (shrink)

This essay concerns various difficulties encountered in the attempt to assess the relation between Heidegger and Nietzsche. More specifically, those difficulties are due to the notion and function of repetition in the texts of both Heidegger and Nietzsche. I attempt to provide an analysis of repetition in the Heidegger of Being and Time and surrounding texts (e.g., Plato’s Sophist and Grundbegriffe der aristotelischen Philosophie). Following this attempt, I then examine the transformed notion of repetition operative in the now famous text (...) written at the time of the Nietzsche lectures, Beiträge zur Philosophie (Vom Ereignis), a repetition that goes by the name of crossing (Übergang). In my presentation of crossing, I attempt to draw Heidegger and Nietzsche together through the repetition of crossing and that of eternal recurrence of the same. Finally, I argue that what draws Heidegger and Nietzsche together is also what prevents us from distinguishing them in any traditional way, a distinction that could then be followed by any number of judgments regarding historical influence. That is, that what draws the two to thinking is what both draws them together, which is abyssal repetition, and problematizes any attempt to distinguish them. (shrink)