Suchergebnisse

Si le taoïsme est une religion bien connue, elle reste souvent mal comprise. Nombre d'idées sur le taoïsme et d'idées taoïstes ont circulé en Occident au xixe et xxe siècles, essentiellement au travers de traductions et d'interprétations de textes considérés comme les textes «sacrés » de cette tradition, comme le Livre de la voie et de la vertu (Daode jing) ou le Livre de Maître Zhuang (Zhuangzi), qui ont généré une immense attraction transculturelle et ont été associés à des penseurs aussi divers que Jean-Jacques Rousseau, Emmanuel Kant, Henry David Thoreau, Ralph Waldo Emerson, Aleister Crowley, Martin Buber et Martin Heidegger, et encore des figures littéraires comme Alfred Tennyson et Oscar Wilde. Cet imaginaire occidental du taoïsme a largement influencé notre perception de cette religion jusqu'au milieu du xxe siècle. Il a produit deux taoïsmes, opérant une distinction artificielle entre un taoïsme «pur » (philosophique) et un taoïsme impur (les pratiques religieuses) – un processus similaire à celui qui amena à considérer le bouddhisme comme une philosophie plutôt qu'une religion. Si la recherche moderne a montré qu'une telle division est à la fois fausse et intenable, celle-ci a donné lieu à nombres de confusions quant à la religion chinoise en général et au taoïsme en particulier. Le présent article explore les questions que soulève cette distinction et met en lumière quelques-uns des aspects moins connus de la tradition taoïste et leurs développements historiques, des aspects souvent occultés par un regard biaisé par la lecture de textes comme le Daode jing.

Abstract: Indonesian history has been filled with many radical ideas and movements aiming to bring about radical changes in the direction of the nation state. Yet radicalism has created fear and angst amongst communities. This paper examines the narrative of radicalism and fear as constructed in an Indonesian Catholic document published in 1967. The document narrates the historical and political events from Indonesia's independence to the early years of Suharto's New Order regime, with a particular focus on the Madiun incident of 1948 and the Crocodile Hole tragedy of 1965. The paper argues that the document scrutinized is nothing but a fear text, and the fear narrative as constructed in the text is related to radicalism – namely the leftist radicalism represented by the Indonesian communists pre-1965, and the rightist radicalism represented by religious (Muslim) radicals post-1965. This main argument is explained with reference to Martin Heidegger's philosophy of fear, and it concludes that the fear experiences concerning the communist past is paralelled with the experiences of fear in recent times in relation to religious (Islamic) radicalism. Keywords: radicalism, fear, communists, Muslims, Catholics, Heidegger Abstrak: Sejarah Indonesia dililiti banyak ide dan gerakan radikal yang bertujuan untuk membawa perubahan radikal ke arah negara bangsa. Namun radikalisme telah menciptakan ketakutan dan kecemasan di antara masyarakat. Makalah ini mengkaji narasi radikalisme dan ketakutan yang dibangun dalam dokumen Katolik Indonesia yang diterbitkan pada tahun 1967. Dokumen tersebut menceritakan peristiwa sejarah dan politik dari kemerdekaan Indonesia hingga tahun-tahun awal rezim Orde Baru Suharto, dengan fokus khusus pada insiden Madiun dari 1948 dan tragedi Lubang Buaya 1965. Makalah ini berpendapat bahwa dokumen yang diteliti tidak lain adalah teks ketakutan, dan narasi rasa takut yang terkonstruksi dalam teks ini terkait dengan radikalisme - yaitu radikalisme kiri yang diwakili oleh komunis Indonesia pra-1965, dan radikalisme kanan yang diwakili oleh radikal agama (Muslim) pasca-1965. Argumen utama ini dijelaskan dengan mengacu pada filosofi rasa takut Martin Heidegger, dan disimpulkan pengalaman-pengalaman ketakutan mengenai masa lalu komunis dilumpuhkan dengan pengalaman-pengalaman ketakutan belakangan ini dalam kaitannya dengan radikalisme agama (Islam). Kata-kata Kunci: radikalisme, ketakutan, komunis, Muslim, Katolik, Heidegger

Der Autor fragt nicht, ob sich aus dem Werk Heideggers eine Ethik herauslesen oder ableiten läßt, "sondern ob Heidegger so etwas wie eine Ethik geradezu intendiert hat." Es wird deutlich gemacht, daß Heidegger in "Sein und Zeit" keinen Zweifel daran läßt, daß die Ethik unter das Verdikt der Seinsvergessenheit und des unzureichenden, durch eine Vorhandenheits- bzw. Zuhandenheitsontologie irregeleiteten Daseinsverständnisses fällt. Der Autor skizziert Heideggers Kritik an traditioneller Ethik und fragt sodann nach der Möglichkeit einer Fundamentalethik. Im Anschluß an Heideggers Weltbegriff werden zwei Weisen menschlichen Handelns näher unterschieden: Einmal das Handeln, das sich im Rahmen der bedeutungsmäßig erschlossenen Welt abspielt. Zum anderen das Handeln, das nicht auf die innerweltlichen Dinge bezogen ist, sondern das sich auf die Welt selbst als den Horizont von Bedeutsamkeit überhaupt richtet. Dieses Handeln erscheint als Sorge um die Lichtung von Welt überhaupt. Wenn sich das Denken Heideggers, so wird weiter ausgeführt, als Sorge um die Offenbarkeit von Sein begreift und wenn Ethik als Reflexion auf Bestimmungsgründe menschlichen Handelns zu verstehen ist, dann ist das Denken Heideggers seiner Intention nach als eine Ethik zu begreifen. (ICD)

Presents a philosophical analysis of the activity of day-to-day real-life experience, drawing on the approaches of several philosophers who have addressed the problems of the value of experience in the world, including Walter Benjamin, Theodor W. Adorno, G. W. F. Hegel, & M. Heidegger. In a comparative analysis that oscillates between differences & similarities of these philosophers, an attempt is made to unthread today's meaning of experience, or to determine whether it is declining or has been, tragically & without remedy, destroyed by wars & the technological horrors of modernity. Adapted from the source document.

Marder interviews writer Santiago Zabala. Among other things, Zabala talks about his book Hermeneutic Communism: From Heidegger to Marx and the hermeneutical contribution to contemporary political philosophy. Adapted from the source document.

<p><strong>DESAPROPRIAÇÃO INDIRETA POR INSTITUIÇÃO DE ÁREAS AMBIENTAIS: UM ESTUDO CRÍTICO À LUZ DA TESE DOS DIREITOS DE RONALD DWORKIN </strong></p><p><strong>Resumo:</strong> Esta pesquisa pretende uma abordagem crítica a respeito da desapropriação indireta por instituição de áreas ambientais. Para tanto, tecerá, ab initio, considerações a respeito do direito de propriedade e de sua função social. A seguir, expõe, em linhas gerais, o tratamento dispensado à desapropriação na ordem jurídica brasileira. Após, reduz o campo de abordagem à questão da desapropriação indireta e adentra ao problema da desapropriação indireta por instituição de áreas ambientais. Rememora, de modo sucinto, a tese dos direitos de Ronald Dworkin (2000, 2002), e analisa sua pertinência para o enfrentamento do problema da desapropriação. Visa ensaiar uma proposta consistente de tratamento da matéria da desapropriação indireta por instituição de áreas ambientais. Possui como atitude epistemológica a fenomenologia hermenêutica de Martin Heidegger (2012). Em sentido estrito, partilha do pluralismo metódico, que se unifica no seio da fenomenologia da percepção de Merleau-Ponty, tal como observa Maman (2003). Assume, como orientação filosófica básica, a pesquisa crítica e, como técnica, a pesquisa bibliográfica e documental.</p><p><strong>Palavras-chaves:</strong> expropriação ilegítima; meio ambiente; jurisprudência; trunfos; utilitarismo.</p><p><strong>EXPROPRIATION INDIRECTLY IN ENVIRONMENTAL AREAS INSTITUTION: A CRITICAL STUDY IN THE LIGHT OF THE RIGHTS THESIS OF RONALD DWORKIN </strong></p><p><strong>Abstract:</strong> This research aims a critical approach regarding indirect expropriation by establishing environmental areas. To do so, will weave, ab initio, considerations concerning the right of ownership and its social function. The following sets out, in general, the treatment of the expropriation in the Brazilian legal system. After reduces the field approach to the issue of indirect expropriation and enters the problem of indirect expropriation by establishing environmental areas. Recalls, succinctly, the thesis of Ronald Dworkin rights (2000, 2002), and analyzes its relevance to address the problem of dispossession. Visa rehearse a consistent proposal for treatment of the subject of indirect expropriation by establishing environmental areas. It has as an epistemological attitude hermeneutic phenomenology of Martin Heidegger (2012). Strictly speaking, sharing of methodical pluralism which unifies within the phenomenology of perception Merleau-Ponty, as notes Maman (2003). Takes as a basic philosophical orientation, critical research and, as a technique, bibliographic and documentary research.</p><p><strong>Keywords:</strong> illegitimate expropriation; environment; jurisprudence; assets; utilitarianism.</p><strong>Data da submissão:</strong> 30/09/2016 <strong>Data da aprovação:</strong> 21/11/2016

Bis heute hält die Politische Philosophie an dem staatsphilosophischen Diktum einer in viele Staaten zerfallenden Welt fest, die stets Formen der Ausgrenzung und der Trennung hervorbringt. Ralf Rother thematisiert hingegen die Dekonstruktion des Politischen als eine Repolitisierung des politischen Denkens, indem er sich einer Diskussion um Heideggers Terminus »Mitsein« widmet, die von Levinas, Blanchot, Nancy und Derrida initiiert wurde. Im Fokus dieser Debatte steht die Frage: Wie ist ein Zusammenleben derjenigen möglich, die unter Rückgriff auf Hobbes'sche und Schmitt'sche Positionen - z.B. aufgrund unterschiedlicher Herkunft oder Feindschaft - als nicht zusammengehörig verstanden werden?

Die Debatten um Globalisierung, um die Einheit der Welt in der Vielfalt der Kulturen und die damit zusammenhaengenden Konflikte belegen die Aktualitaet des Themas Welt. Die Phaenomenologie kann fuer sich in Anspruch nehmen, dieses Thema auf bis heute richtungsweisende Art in Angriff genommen zu haben. Welt wird dabei nicht als ein Gegenstand unserer Bezugnahme, sondern als der Horizont aller Horizonte, der in jeder Bezugnahme auf einen Gegenstand bereits vorausgesetzt ist, in je verschiedener Weise gedacht. Husserl, Heidegger, Scheler, Merleau-Ponty, Luhmann, Schapp, Levinas, Fink etc.; sie al

This article develops a theoretical & political critique of the contemporary notion of the deconstruction of Christianity primarily in the later work of Jacques Derrida & Jean-Luc Nancy. The deconstruction of Christianity relies upon an understanding of temporality & messianicity derived from Heidegger & Benjamin, & we challenge this privileging of messianism in contemporary philosophy & theology. Messianism is contrasted with plasticity, & plasticity is shown to have resources to overcome the impasses of contemporary thought in a counter-messianic way. To oppose messianism is not to oppose theological thinking, but to open a creative & productive political space for a radical theological & philosophical reflection. Adapted from the source document.

After the Second World War, continental philosophy became increasingly influential on the American literary left. In particular, the philosophy of Martin Heidegger had a profound effect on the Objectivist poet, George Oppen, in the 1950s and 1960s, and less than a decade later Ludwig Wittgenstein's philosophy was crucial to the Language poet, Ron Silliman. Each poet turned to philosophy in response to the crises of post-war America. As a consequence, Heidegger's and Wittgenstein's philosophies have since become dominant frameworks for reading Oppen's and Silliman's poetry, and for reading twentieth-century poetry more generally.Such readings, however, risk reducing a poet's work to the passive reflection of contextual materials. In contrast, this thesis proposes a combination of 'faithful' and 'unfaithful' reading, interpreting a poet's work from both within and without the parameters set by its context. Faithful reading responds to and unfaithful reading questions the hold that context currently wields over interpretation. This thesis argues that, while philosophical influence is important to any understanding of Oppen's and Silliman's poetry, faithful reading alone often neglects the ways in which poetry is meaningful in relation to competing philosophies. Furthermore, the thesis argues that, despite the great differences between Heidegger and Wittgenstein, both Oppen and Silliman use philosophy to create poetry that responds directly to a time of historical and cultural crisis. Heidegger's philosophy helps Oppen to seek a phenomenological experience that is like Heidegger's concept of Ereignis, the event of Being's disclosure. For Oppen, this experience is capable of resisting the ideologies behind his capitalist culture and American war-time atrocity. At the same time, however, the experience resists the language that is used to express it. Wittgenstein's philosophy also helped Silliman respond to the historical crisis of war-time atrocity and capitalism's dominance over his culture. Wittgenstein demonstrates that language's meanings are social and determined within 'forms of life'. This allows Silliman to emphasise, politicize, and trouble at the intersection of language's meanings the forms of life from which they emerge. This contention with what Wittgenstein calls the 'grammatical criteria' of meaning also works to disclose the crisis to which the poems respond.

It has often been noted that Leo Strauss developed his understanding of political philosophy through a critical engagement with Heidegger. Yet most analyses focus on Strauss's American works while neglecting his earlier response during the crisis years of the Weimar Republic. The article seeks to overcome this limitation by 'deconstructing' Strauss's American definitions of political philosophy in light of both his Weimar understanding of politische Wissenschaft and his 1922 discovery of Heidegger's Aristotle. I argue that Strauss's conception of political philosophy originated in Heidegger's subversion of the traditional distinction between theory and praxis. I thus propose a way to read Strauss from the start following his own changing views of that distinction. [Reprinted by permission of Sage Publications Ltd., copyright holder.]