Suchergebnisse

This volume examines the specifics of Plessner's philosophy in comparison with the conceptions of Dewey, Freud, Habermas, Heidegger, Jaspers, Kant, Nietzsche, v. Uexküll and today's brain, cognition and behavioral research. It shows how philosophical anthropology overcomes the speciesism, ethnocentrism, anthropocentrism of modernity in favour of a common and open future of personal life forms.

How can we make the critical potential of Hegelian philosophy understandable from a historical perspective? To answer this question, this study retraces Hegel's transformation from his writings about the "work of the Republicans for the common good" (1795)to the "work of the concept" (1807) This arc marks the beginning of Hegel's objectification of heroic idealism – to which Marx was able to link his own ideas

This article compares Max Horkheimer's and Theodor W. Adorno's foundation of the Frankfurt Critical Theory with Helmuth Plessner's foundation of Philosophical Anthropology. While Horkheimer's and Plessner's paradigms are mutually incompatible, Adorno's "negative dialectics" and Plessner's "negative anthropology" (G. Gamm) can be seen as complementing one another. Jürgen Habermas at one point sketched a complementary relationship between his own publicly communicative theory of modern society and Plessner's philosophy of nature and human expressivity, and though he then came to doubt this, he later reaffirmed it. Faced with the "life power" in "high capitalism" (Plessner), the ambitions for a public democracy in a pluralistic society have to be broadened from an argumentative focus (Habermas) to include the human condition and the expressive modes of our experience as essentially embodied persons. The article discusses some possible aspects of this complementarity under the title of a "critical anthropology" (H. Schnädelbach)