Item description for Heidegger in Question: The Art of Existing (Philosophy and Literary Theory) by Robert Bernasconi & Hughes Silverman...
Robert Bernasconi explores in the context of Heidegger's thought a number of questions of far-reaching concern: what is the role of literary examples within philosophy? Is art dead? What is the relation of art to nature? Is there a place for the idea of a "people" in art and literary theory, and in philosophy? Is the history of philosophy to be written as a narrative? What is the status of ethics within philosophy? What place does philosophy give to praxis? What is the place today of the belief in the nobility of the philosophical life? What is the relation of politics to thought? Reflecting a dominant concern of recent Heidegger scholarship, the focal point of a number of the essays is the relation of Heidegger's own politics to his thought. In addition to this examination of what appears to compromise Heidegger's philosophy, Bernasconi explores its relation to the further possibilities which that thought has opened in the writings of Arendt, Gadamer, Levinas, and Derrida.
Promise Angels is dedicated to bringing you great books at great prices. Whether you read for entertainment, to learn, or for literacy - you will find what you want at promiseangels.com!
Studio: Humanity Books
Est. Packaging Dimensions: Length: 8.54" Width: 5.32" Height: 0.66" Weight: 0.73 lbs.
Release Date May 1, 1996
Publisher Humanity Books
ISBN 1573925004 ISBN13 9781573925006
Availability 0 units.
More About Robert Bernasconi & Hughes Silverman
Robert Bernasconi is Professor of Philosophy, Moss Professor of Philosophy at the University of Memphis.
Robert Bernasconi has an academic affiliation as follows - Pennsylvania State University, University of Memphis University of Mem.
Robert Bernasconi has published or released items in the following series...
Reviews - What do customers think about Heidegger in Question: The Art of Existing (Philosophy and Literary Theory)?
Has anything been questioned? Feb 28, 2005
This book does not really 'question' Heidegger at all. In most respects, it simply repeats the platitudes found every-where else. I agree with the verdict of the other reviewer, in thinking that Bernasconi is over-rated, much as he likes to wear the mantle of 'continental philosopher.'
Quite rightly, we ought to complain when Aristotle's Nicomachean Ethics is presented in a 'Heideggerian'context. Perhaps Heidegger did this himself, but only on the basis of a selective (mis)reading. What Aristotle says about 'praxis' (or the kalei praxeis) in Chapter VI of N.E.and its cognate elements may well lend itself to this sort of thing, but Aristotle's final statement in Chapter X - on the 'Bios Theoretikos,' leads us back to the 'separate life' and a separate reality (choriston auto ti kath auto)which is anathema to Heidegger's (and Bernasconi's) ideal. Whatever, Aristotle didn't think he was a Heideggerian.
But then, what else can you expect from a contemporary philosopher who has persistently reconstructed classical philosophy to suit his own ends? Another example was the notion that the 'actus signatus' of Thomas Aquinas can be read as a pure, phenomenological solution to the old subject-object problem. The text in question (Sum. Theo.) dealing with sensible knowledge - is part of a whole corpus which presupposed the existence of God. That - and that alone, gave Thomas the ground for his 'adequatio.' No God, no ground for the adequatio.
One might also add that Bernasconi's text says virtually nothing about the moral question-mark hovering over Heidegger's work, given his absolute failure to address the Nazi problem during the Third Reich period - and the problem posed by knowledge of the holocaust - after the war. Where are the real questions. . .?
not terrible, but terribly overrated Apr 29, 2000
This book is a collection of many separate articles on Heidegger, apparently slapped together under one cover due to the usual academic pressures to publish books. Bernasconi uses a refreshingly direct style, free of preciousness (unlike his colleagues John Sallis and David Krell). For this he deserves our thanks. Unfortunately, the book itself does little to justify Bernasconi's reputation as one of the big guns in contemporary Heidegger studies. Most disappointing is the unconvincing chapter linking Being and Time to Aristotle's Nicomachean Ethics, notable for sloppy argumentation and faux classical erudition.