Continental Metaphysics

In this paper, I discuss and compare the possibility of thinking that which is most worth our thought in Deleuze’s What Is Philosophy? and Heidegger’s course lectures in What Is Called Thinking?. Both authors criticize the history of philosophy in similar ways in order to reconsider what should be taken as the nature and task of philosophical thinking. For Deleuze, true thinking is the creation of concepts, but what is most worth our thought in fact cannot be thought. For Heidegger, (...) Being calls on us think, and to think rightly is to be underway toward thinking itself, a grateful heeding of Being. In this paper I explore the very possibility to think that which is most worth our thought. I will argue that although for both authors proper thinking as such is possible, thinking what is most worth our thought seems remarkably both possible as impossible. (shrink)

: Only the rise of science allowed us to identify scriptural ontologies as fantastic conceits, as anthropomorphizations of an indifferent universe. Now that science is beginning to genuinely disenchant the human soul, history suggests that traditional humanistic discourses are about to be rendered fantastic as well. Via a critical reading of Adrian Johnston’s ‘transcendental materialism,’ I attempt to show both the shape and the dimensions of the sociocognitive dilemma presently facing Continental philosophers as they appear to their outgroup detractors. Trusting (...) speculative a priori claims regarding the nature of processes and entities under scientific investigation already excludes Continental philosophers from serious discussion. Using such claims, as Johnston does, to assert the fundamentally intentional nature of the universe amounts to anthropomorphism. Continental philosophy needs to honestly appraise the nature of its relation to the scientific civilization it purports to decode and guide, lest it become mere fantasy, or worse yet, conceptual religion. (shrink)

In almost all of his early works Gilles Deleuze is concerned with one and the same problem: the problem of genesis. In response to this problem, Deleuze argues for a system of heterogenesis. In this article, I argue that Deleuze’s system of heterogenesis operates on three levels: (1) the differential multiplicity of virtual Ideas; (2) the implied multiplicity of intensive dramas; (3) the extensive and qualitative diversity of actual concepts. As I hope to show, the relation between these three levels (...) can be explained in terms of the logic of expression that Deleuze develops in 'Expressionism in Philosophy: Spinoza.' In this way, I hope to gain clarity without losing nuance. The rather technical and abstract language of expression will become more concrete and understandable when it is understood in terms of intensive dramas, virtual Ideas and actual concepts. At the same time, the three levels of expression make it possible to show how these notions are interlinked. Accordingly, this article is divided in four parts. In the first part, I will explain how Deleuze takes up Kant’s discovery of the principle of difference as a reaction against the model of representation. The second part focuses on the two multiplicities (virtual Ideas and intensive dramas) that produce diversity (actual concepts). In the third part, these two multiplicities are linked to each other with the help of the logic of expression that Deleuze derives from Spinoza. The fourth, concluding part will connect the logic of expression to the complex dynamic of difference and repetition. (shrink)

Phenomenological Perspectives on Plurality offers twelve essays that discuss how the question of plurality is thought in contemporary continental philosophy. In particular, its essays investigate how this issue influences topics in ontology, aesthetics, and social and political philosophy as well as other fields. -/- In the wake of the critique of metaphysics as onto-theology, the question of plurality has become a central focus of philosophy today. This question does not only give rise to rethink the beginning of metaphysics as well (...) as some of its basic concepts, such as the notion of God, but also influences the contemporary conception of art, identity and community. -/- Introduction: Thinking Plurality 1. Plurality and the Disintegration of Difference John Sallis 2. Plurality and the Question of God Ben Vedder 3. Decentered-ness: Phenomenological Explorations Günter Figal 4. Reinventing the Wheel: Of Sovereignty, Autobiography, and Deconstruction Michael Naas 5. Identity or Identities? The In-Between of “No Longer and not Yet” Sanem Yazıcıoğlu 6. Towards a Community of the Plural: Philosophical Pluralism, Hermeneutics, and Practice Nicholas Davey 7. The Responsibility to Understand Theodore George 8. Philosophy in the Plural: A View from Radical Exteriority Alejandro A. Vallega 9. Origin, Freedom, and Gelassenheit: On Heidegger’s Second “Country Path Conversation” Holger Zaborowski 10. The Hermeneutic Phenomenological Approach to Plurality: Arendt, Habermas, and Gadamer Veronica Vasterling 11. A System of Heterogenesis: Deleuze on Plurality Martijn Boven 12. Deciding on Plurality? Plato’s Parmenides between Badiou and Agamben Gert-Jan van der Heiden . (shrink)

Schelling scholars face an uphill battle. His confinement to the smallest circles of ‘continental’ thought puts him at the margins of what today counts as philosophy. His eclipse by Fichte and Hegel and inheritance by better-read thinkers like Kierkegaard and Heidegger tend to reduce him to a historical footnote. And the sometimes obscure formulations he uses makes the otherwise difficult writings of fellow post-Kantians seem comparatively more accessible. For those seeking to widen these circles, see through this eclipse and elucidate (...) these formulations, a deeper internal challenge is to make sense of the appearance and disappearance of intellectual intuition in Schelling’s work. The term’s apotheosis is often attributed to the height of German idealism and especially to Schelling’s identity philosophy, outside which he subjects the term to a radical critique. The identity philosophy aims to cognize the absolute ground of the system of knowledge and the system of nature, for which cognition Schelling enlists intellectual intuition. While the identity philosophy falls between a Fichtean debut and a late attack on Hegel, it is difficult to determine its exact parameter. I propose that a necessary condition for doing so is to clarify the explanatory role of intellectual intuition—that is, the specific problem to which it is the intended solution—on which the identity philosophy depends. To this end, I will trace a nexus of problems that Schelling’s use of intellectual intuition is meant to solve. Doing so will not only help to delineate the identity philosophy, but show it to be continuous with Schelling’s earlier and later periods. In §1, I account for the nexus of the problems of grounding, freedom and meaning. These problems demand, respectively, a principle by which cognition forms a system rather than an aggregate, a principle by which a system of cognition is compatible with freedom rather than incompatible and a principle by which a system of freedom can show why there is meaning rather than none. In §2, I reconstruct Schelling’s argument in the identity philosophy for why intellectual intuition can resolve this nexus of problems and, in §3, his arguments during other periods of his thought for why it cannot. I conclude in §4 by suggesting why the identity philosophy is continuous with these periods. Beyond fulfilling the interpretive task of making sense of intellectual intuition in Schelling’s sprawling corpus, my aim is thus to contribute to a unified reading of the latter. (shrink)

Martin Heidegger has made uncovering the truth of being his life’s work. He ultimately came to locate this truth at the site of the clearing (lichtung), which allowed him to sweep away the traditional formulation of the question of being and begin anew with beyng. This second beginning, as Heidegger called it, stood apart from the original in that he saw fit to cloak beyng in nothingness. This paper explores Heidegger’s use of nothingness and his claim that in order to (...) overcome the divide between the two beginnings, we must leap into the abyss of the clearing. Given Heidegger’s interest in East Asian philosophy, his use of nothingness appears to resemble that of Daoism. Despite this outward similarity, however, this paper will argue that Heidegger’s doctrine of nothingness failed to grasp the cosmological significance of the clearing for he saw it only in terms of symbolizing the existential play of being. Thus while Heidegger argues that the clearing marks the unconcealement of beyng, Daoism uses the clearing to point us to the root of being in nothingness. (shrink)

Following Kant, subjectivity is seen as an obstacle to any access into things themselves. For this reason, Kant concludes that metaphysics as the science of being as being is necessarily impossible. In this essay, the possibilities of metaphysics in light of the problem of subjectivity are reexamined. The nature of subjectivity and the subject’s encounter with being are analyzed yielding two fundamental relational structures that hold with respect to being and the subject. Further examination of the act of reflection coupled (...) with judgment reveals that these structures may in fact be transcended, from which an encounter with being as such follows. On the basis of reflection and judgment, metaphysics is in consequence determined to be possible. (shrink)

Las pretensiones del autor son: (i) Describir la versión modal de la prueba ontológica propuesta por Charles Hartshorne, una versión que enfatiza la anomalía modal del concepto de Dios, que demuestra que las dos únicas alternativas metafísicas coherentes son el positivismo y un teísmo basado en la noción de “necesidad bajo condiciones tautológicas”, y que vindica esta última opción apelando a una filosofía del proceso inspirada en Whitehead y cuya herramienta conceptual básica es la distinción entre existencia y actualidad. (ii) (...) Evaluar la propuesta de Hartshorne, defendiéndola frente a equivocaciones frecuentes y desarrollándola en al menos dos aspectos, incluyendo un análisis del proyecto de Russell de reducir las proposiciones modales a enunciados de alcance, y proponiendo una concepción iterativa de la modalidad. (iii) Reivindicar la actitud filosófica de Hartshorne, un racionalismo circunspecto que evita el reduccionismo sin temer el conocimiento racional. (shrink)

This essay responds to Lewis Ford’s “Allan’s Atheism,” in which he assesses a recent essay of mine that finds God an unnecessary and indeed coherence-destroying addition to Process and Reality. I clarify my position by showing how Whitehead’s notions of physical purpose and aesthetic determination adequately account for the novelty required for an actual occasion’s concrescence and for increases in achieved value. I then criticize Ford’s claim that genuine novelties must have a divine origin and that in Adventures of Ideas (...) the Eros of the Universe refers to God. (shrink)

Il concetto di organismo rappresenta uno dei fuochi centrali del pensiero di Leibniz. Interrogarsi sul significato della sua definizione significa inoltrarsi su un terreno problematico particolarmente delicato della tradizione filosofico-scientifica occidentale, dal momento che tale concetto trova proprio nella filosofia leibniziana una delle sue prime esplicitazioni teoriche. Può infatti non essere banale ricordare come il termine "organismus", assente nelle lingue classiche, faccia una delle sue prime apparizioni proprio negli scritti di Leibniz, il quale lo impiega con la piena consapevolezza di (...) chi vuole contrassegnare un costrutto teorico preciso. Ricostruire la genesi storica di tale concetto significa allora riportare alla luce la complessità di strutture teoretiche entro cui esso è stato pensato da Leibniz e, al tempo stesso, consegnare all'attenzione del dibattito contemporaneo la radicale problematicità con cui il pensiero moderno, attraverso uno dei suoi maggiori interpreti, si è interrogato sulla nozione di "vita". (shrink)

This article defends what I call the atmospheric claim about trust: at least one form of trust manifests itself in human life in a manner that is like an atmosphere (generalized, ambient, and diffuse). I also provide a provisional defense of the claim that trust is a necessary condition for the thriving of something that matters to us. I offer a phenomenological sketch of existential trust. Existential trust is a primordial and atmospheric (generalized, ambient, and diffuse) manifestation of trust that (...) constitutes a fundamental way of being in relationship with the world as a whole such that one feels supportively upheld, vulnerably open, orientationally attuned, and demanded in relation to this world, with the overall effect of feeling at home in it. (shrink)

Hegel’s Science of Logic is widely acknowledged as one of the greatest works of European philosophy. However, its contribution to arguably the most important philosophical problem, Pyrrhonian scepticism, has never been examined in any detail. Pyrrhonian Scepticism and Hegel's Theory of Judgement fills a great lacuna in Hegel scholarship by convincingly proving that the dialectic of the judgement in Hegel’s Science of Logic successfully refutes this kind of scepticism. Although Ioannis Trisokkas has written the book primarily for those students of (...) philosophy who already have an interest in Hegel’s epistemology and philosophy of language and/or his Science of Logic, it will also appeal to those who investigate the problem of scepticism independently of the Hegel corpus. (shrink)

Miles Kennedy: Home: A Bachelardian concrete metaphysics Content Type Journal Article Pages 1-4 DOI 10.1007/s11007-012-9212-2 Authors Dylan Trigg, Centre de Recherche en Épistémologie Appliquée, Paris, France Journal Continental Philosophy Review Online ISSN 1573-1103 Print ISSN 1387-2842.

This paper addresses the nature and value of Giorgio Agamben’s negative thought, which revolves around the theme of nothingness. I begin by observing the validity of negative thinking, and thus oppose those affirmative philosophies that reject Agamben’s thought simply on the basis of its negativity. Indeed, the importance of negative thought is set forth by Agamben’s attention to the specific biopolitical logic that governs the present. If we are to understand the present, then we must begin by understanding the nothingness (...) inherent in the logic of biopolitics. At the same time, I argue, it is important to distinguish two kinds of negative thought. The first, ultimately limited manner of negative thought follows a strictly Heideggerian path of contemplation. While Agamben shows a certain affinity with this style of thinking, I call for increased focus on a different manner of negative thought, one that turns on the power to think nothingness. I develop this second manner of negative thought by advancing the concepts of love and exile, which provide the means by which the potentiality of nothingness may inhabited in novel ways. (shrink)

Nietzsche writes a great deal about freedom throughout his work, but never more explicitly than in Twiling of the Idols, a book he described as 'my philosophy in a nutshell'. This paper offers an analysis of Nietzsche's conception freedom and the role it plays within Twilight.

« En dépit de l'apparente contradiction entre la philosophie de Michel Henry comme ontologie de l'immanence pure et la philosophie d'Emmanuel Lévinas comme métaphysique de la transcendance absolue et de l'altérité radicale, nous essayons de penser entre elles une analogie fondamentale de démarche philosophique. Nous tentons de montrer quelles constituent, en utilisant les mêmes thématiques, un même effort pour rompre avec le monisme occidental de la manifestation ontologique comme représentation et intention et pour réaliser une synthèse philosophique entre la métaphysique (...) et la phénoménologie. Althought there seems to he a contradiction between Michel Henrys philosophy considered as an ontologie of sheer immanence and Emmanuel Lévinas's viewed as a metaphysics of absolute trancendence or radical otherness, we are attempting to bring out the similarity of philosophical thought processes at hand in both outlooks. We intend to show that, in taking up the same set of themes, they represent a similar effort to get away from the western monism of ontological manifestation thought of as both representation and intention, and to achieve a synthesis between metaphysics and phenomenology (trans. Christine Corlay). (shrink)

Um den wissenschaftlichen Gegenständen die endliche Einheit ihrer unendlichen Bestimmungen zu geben, ist nach Hermann Cohen ein Begriff von Realität nötig, der absolut im Denken gründet (Differential). Differentialmethodisch begründet auch Franz Rosenzweig die Gegenstände seines Offenbarungssystems (Gott, Welt, Mensch), um sie dann in lebendige Beziehungen der Sprache treten zu lassen. Wie kommt es zu dieser Umkehr des Denkens ins Kategoriale und Ethische der Sprache? Ist sie ein isoliertes, bloß individuelles Ereignis oder vielmehr das Werk eines Denkers seiner Zeit? Wo liegt (...) und welche Koordinaten hat Rosenzweigs geschichtlicher Ort? Die Beantwortung dieser Fragen nimmt den interessanten Weg von Edmund Husserl über Martin Heidegger zu Emmanuel Lévinas und kommt dabei dem Logos einer Denkgeschichte auf die Spur. (shrink)

The discussions which follow rest on a distinction, first expounded by Husserl, between formal logic and formal ontology. The former concerns itself with (formal) meaning-structures; the latter with formal structures amongst objects and their parts. The paper attempts to show how, when formal ontological considerations are brought into play, contemporary extensionalist theories of part and whole, and above all the mereology of Leniewski, can be generalised to embrace not only relations between concrete objects and object-pieces, but also relations between what (...) we shall call dependent parts or moments. A two-dimensional formal language is canvassed for the resultant ontological theory, a language which owes more to the tradition of Euler, Boole and Venn than to the quantifier-centred languages which have predominated amongst analytic philosophers since the time of Frege and Russell. Analytic philosophical arguments against moments, and against the entire project of a formal ontology, are considered and rejected. The paper concludes with a brief account of some applications of the theory presented. (shrink)

My contribution seeks to unfold an ontology of the imagination based on the history of the productive imagination in its relation to common sense and recent developments of the notion of the social imaginary, while making use of ideas found in both Western and Japanese thinkers. Kyoto School philosopher Miki Kiyoshi shows a connection between the imagination he inherits from Kant and a certain form-formlessness dynamic he inherits from Nishida Kitarō’s notion of a self-forming formlessness. The source of the imagination’s (...) creativity is in that formlessness that lies both within the interior depths of the psyche and outside in the environing nature. Post-war Japanese philosopher Nakamura Yūjirō—taking off from Miki’s attempts to concretize Nishida’s theory of place in terms of the imagination—in turn points to a connection between imagination and place and explicates this via his development of the Aristotelian notion of common sense (koinē aisthēsis, sensus communis). Common sense in itself has a long history within the West that involves a variety of meanings starting with the Aristotelian faculty for integrating the various senses (as koinē aisthēsis) that was closely associated with the imagination, and ending with two contrasting notions of a communal or social sensibility (as sensus communis)—the vulgar “commonplace” notion of common sense as habituated custom and the healthy sense of common sense as prudential, contextual, ethical judgment explicated by thinkers like Hannah Arendt. Both are found in Kant’s Critique of Judgment but the imagination’s creativity expressed in genius comes into tension with the latter communal sense of common sense that attempts to fetter that creativity of genius with the judgment of taste. The contemporary notion of the social imaginary, for example in Cornelius Castoriadis, seems to encompass both the vulgar and the healthy senses of common sense, and also recalls the close connection between the imagination and common sense in Aristotle. Contrary to what Kant sought, however, this underscores the temporal contingency or historicity and non-transcendental status of common sense, even in its healthy sense, and its communal judgments. At the same time, the form-formlessness dynamic found in Miki and the tension between unbounded creativity and communal responsibility found in Kant’s third Critique in a certain sense also reappears in Castoriadis’ ontology (of magmas) whereby chaos is the source of the imagination’s creativity not only for the individual psyche but for the social-historical or social imaginary significations as well, that is, in the social imaginary’s inner tension between the instituting and the instituted. Recalling the fact that Nishida was inspired by the Greek notion of chōra in developing his theory of place, I then suggest that the linking of the imagination with the process of the forming of the formless as well as with place may allow us in turn to understand the creative imagination ontologically in the Greek terms of chōrismos—etymologically related to chōra—as the difference that brings order to chaos by allotting beings, each to its own place. Imagination as Ein-bildung might then be viewed as the ontological formation that, through differentiation, gives shape, form, to place. This then leads to the issue of autonomy—To whom does the spontaneity of the creative imagination belong when the chaos or formlessness, indeed “freedom,” at the root of its creativity exceeds the boundaries of subjectivity or reason? Heidegger in his later works, albeit in only a few places, suggests such a sense of the imagination as no longer a faculty of the human subject, no longer a doing of man. (shrink)

The article explores the connection between James’s “radical empiricism” and Deleuze’s “transcendental empiricism” with a particular focus on the concept of “pure experience.” It argues for the substantial nature of this connection in terms of both philosophical motivations and formal innovations. Both thinkers are motivated to construct “better” empiricisms that do not complacently accept conventional conceptual representations as exhaustive of the real. Moreover, radical empiricism develops a latent critique of representational models of consciousness that is accomplished through a turn to (...) events or processes as ontologically primary. These innovations are further developed by Deleuze in his treatment of the problem of individuation. Taken together, they help to specify the metaphysical reasons for the experimental pluralism that both James and Deleuze affirm, showing how these reasons are inextricable from the radical empiricist impulse to be maximally inclusive of modalities of real experience, including the felt, the vague, and the affective. Emphasizing the metaphysical dimensions of these alternative empiricisms brings into clearer focus the stakes of philosophical thought as part of the open-ended and ongoing relational processes by which the universe continues to unfold. (shrink)

In this collection of the Einstein Lectures delivered by the author at the University of Bern in December 2011, we find succinct and striking arguments that try to distinguish the debates on God from those on religion. Dworkin points out the religiosity prevalent in science and situates atheism also as ‘religious’.

In the present essay I suggest that the main reason why history failed to develop societies in harmony with Nature, including our internal nature as well, is that we failed to evaluate the exact basis of the factor ultimately governing our thoughts. We failed to realise that it is the worldview that ultimately governs our thoughts and through our thoughts, our actions. In this work I consider the ultimate foundations of philosophy, science, religion, and art, pointing out that they were (...) and can be again in harmony with each other if their ultimate tasks are specified. I specify here the first task of philosophy as considering the philosophical significance of the ultimate principles of physics, biology and man/society. These ultimate principles are in direct connection with the ultimate questions of religion. I show that the fundamental nature of art makes it able to perceive the ultimate destination of mankind and the Universe, the world-to-be. I propose that philosophy, religion and art together are able to supply us with an inter-subjective picture of the world-process, including the inter-subjective picture of the future of mankind and the Universe. Care is taken to enlighten the possible role of values in founding scientific research in the frame of present wide-ranging discussions. The result is found that universal values of respect for existence, life and reason represent the inevitable basis of science. The exact foundations of a new, integral worldview are outlined, involving the worldprocess-picture, Nature-picture, images of man, society, self, history and manipulation. A list of our common tasks for founding the Integral Culture is proposed. (shrink)

What is time? Neither the numbering of the motion of things nor their schema, but their way of being. In language, time shows itself as tense. But every verb has both tense and aspect. So what is aspect? Irreducible to tense, it is the way in which anything is at any time whatsoever. Thus the way things are, their being, is not merely temporal – for it is just as aspectual.

This collection examines an aspect of Gilles Deleuze’s thought that has largely been neglected; whether or not Deleuze was a metaphysician. Answering this question may reveal the problematic nature of so-called postmodernism and the critique it leveled at the first philosophy, and it may help readers to better understand philosophy’s fate.

(2013). A MATERIALIST TRANSCENDENTAL: on the onto-logy of logics of worlds. Angelaki: Vol. 18, No. 2, pp. 143-159.