This political philosophy leaves me cold. Worse still, under the present conditions philosophy will continue to develop in this way. At least 20 years will pass before it expires of its own accord. We could be trapped. The lineage is irrevocable. There will never be a return to, say, aestheticism. Saying this, there is some respite to be afforded in research – contributing something ‘original’ to the archive. But this is an indulgence, and in those moments I find myself questioning the relevance of, say, Siegfried Kraceur then I have no justification. It is an extravagance.
At best, the application of dead philosophers onto a living world is only justified by the deforming the original content of that philosophy, or at least by making it relevant. The future of Heidegger will not consist in his philosophy of Being, but in his philosophy of ecology. Da-sein is indicative of a particular age and with the passing of that age, the term is reduced to a historic entity.
Does it matter that there exists a discordance between research and the context from whence that research arose? Perhaps only in philosophy where the obligation to say something with effect takes precedence – . Envy therefore of Medieval scholars who are able to give themselves over to a historic period without any concern with resurrecting that period to the present. When a philosopher submits to this inquisitive outlook, he is relegated to a historian of ideas, and unless you are fond of dense anthologies and excessive footnotes, then there is no worse a fate for a philosopher than being labelled a historian of ideas.
At best, the application of dead philosophers onto a living world is only justified by the deforming the original content of that philosophy, or at least by making it relevant. The future of Heidegger will not consist in his philosophy of Being, but in his philosophy of ecology. Da-sein is indicative of a particular age and with the passing of that age, the term is reduced to a historic entity.
Does it matter that there exists a discordance between research and the context from whence that research arose? Perhaps only in philosophy where the obligation to say something with effect takes precedence – . Envy therefore of Medieval scholars who are able to give themselves over to a historic period without any concern with resurrecting that period to the present. When a philosopher submits to this inquisitive outlook, he is relegated to a historian of ideas, and unless you are fond of dense anthologies and excessive footnotes, then there is no worse a fate for a philosopher than being labelled a historian of ideas.
