A Place Without a Form

The old spiritual masters told us to be in the world but not of it. We moderns have given this a secular twist. We are in our world — we have values, ways of life, world pictures — but not of it — we are to be aware of our freedom, aware of the contingency of our world and its dependence on factors many of which are or will be under our control. We both inhabit our world and enjoy the status of distanced controllers. Or, if our lack of control and our dependence on historical and social factors is being emphasized, we are to inhabit our world with a certain knowing irony, since we understand the process by which it came about, even if we cannot change it. We hnave found ways to institutionalize this split-level identity. Such institutions posit a separation of form and content. In the free market, in procedural justice, in free speech we live out that separation. This parallels cognitive and volitional theories of Kantian and Utilitarian descent, which make the same separation. All these give us freedom by having us seek our identity in a formal process above all content, but at the cost of introducing distance and irony. Martin Heidegger's response to modernity often sounds like a romantic flight from modern distances. He clearly wants to overcome our split-level existence, the uneasy balance of facticity and freedom, which for him is but another manifestation of the will to power which he fines lurking behind our tradition. But to what degree is his own overcoming of modernity also susceptible to split-level living and ironic distance

Das Gestell and Human Autonomy: On Andrew Feenberg\u27s Interpretation of Martin Heidegger

In my thesis, I examine the relationship between modern technology and human autonomy from the philosophical perspective of Martin Heidegger. He argues that the essence of modern technology is the Gestell. Often translated as ‘enframing,’ the Gestell is a mode of revealing, or understanding, being, in which all beings are revealed as, or understood as, raw materials. By revealing all beings as raw materials, we eventually understand ourselves as raw materials. I argue that this undermines human autonomy, but, unlike Andrew Feenberg, I do not believe this process is irreversible from Heidegger’s perspective. I articulate the meaning of the Gestell as an historical claim and how it challenges human autonomy, but may never absolutely eradicate it. Contra Feenberg’s interpretation, I argue that Heidegger’s ontology, including the Gestell, provides a crucial ground for understanding how we might salvage autonomy in a culture increasingly dominated by modern technology. Specifically, by drawing on Heidegger’s conception of Gelassenheit, I suggest that salvaging human autonomy requires a calm acceptance and opening up to the challenge of modern technology. This is not, as Feenberg suggests, a passive acceptance of the eradication of human autonomy. Rather, this is the ontological ground that provides us with the possibility of salvaging autonomy. By opening us up to the essence of modern technology, we understand the contingency of the Gestell, its essentially ambiguous nature, and are granted with the freedom to subordinate its reign to other human values and modes of understanding being

Heidegger, Will to Power and Gestell

For Heidegger Nietzsche is the last metaphysician because he determines truth in relation to the establishment of value-scheme. Heidegger argues that beginning from schematism and its overcoming is starting too late. Starting from beings as value-structures turns Will to Power itself into a value, the highest value. What Nietzsche fails to do is think from WITHIN, that is , AS the supposed self-presencing lingering of the schematism. The fore-structuring gesture of transcendence is not what goes beyond schematism, or before it as its condition of possibility, but what is 'built into' it, what happens IN the 'is', AS the 'is

HEIDEGGER DAN BAHAYA TEKNOLOGI

AbstrakTeknologi adalah keniscayaan. Kita membutuhkan teknologi untuk hidup, namun teknologi juga menunjukkan wajahnya yang seram: krisis ekologi, perang nuklir dan disrupsi. Bagi Heidegger, teknologi bukan sekedar pengetahuan teknis dan kumpulan perangkat (instrumentum) untuk mempermudah kerja. Inti teknologi adalah Gestell yang membingkai segala sesuatu, termasuk manusia, sebagai sumber daya untuk dieksploitasi. Heidegger menengarai bahwa inti teknologi berasal dari Metafisika Barat yang berciri ontoteologis. Manusia mesti berpikir secara lain, bukan lagi kalkulatif melainkan meditatif supaya ia memiliki relasi lebih baik dengan physis (alam). Kata Kunci: teknologi, ontoteologi, Gestell (Enframing), pikiran kalkulatif dan meditatif AbstractIn this age, technology is an imperative. Though we need it, technology has its own dangers: ecological crisis, nuclear war and technological disruption. Heidegger thought that technology was not merely a technical knowledge, nor a set of instruments to make work easier. The essence of technology is Gestell, Enframing, a stand point to consider everything, including man, as a standing reserve ready to be exploited. For Heidegger, the essence of technology comes from Western Metaphysics, characterized by its ontotheological structure. Man should look for another kind of thinking, meditative one, to have a better relationship with nature. Key words: technology, ontotheology, Gestell (Enframing), calculative and meditative thinking

Das Gestell and Human Autonomy: On Andrew Feenberg\u27s Interpretation of Martin Heidegger

In my thesis, I examine the relationship between modern technology and human autonomy from the philosophical perspective of Martin Heidegger. He argues that the essence of modern technology is the Gestell. Often translated as ‘enframing,’ the Gestell is a mode of revealing, or understanding, being, in which all beings are revealed as, or understood as, raw materials. By revealing all beings as raw materials, we eventually understand ourselves as raw materials. I argue that this undermines human autonomy, but, unlike Andrew Feenberg, I do not believe this process is irreversible from Heidegger’s perspective. I articulate the meaning of the Gestell as an historical claim and how it challenges human autonomy, but may never absolutely eradicate it. Contra Feenberg’s interpretation, I argue that Heidegger’s ontology, including the Gestell, provides a crucial ground for understanding how we might salvage autonomy in a culture increasingly dominated by modern technology. Specifically, by drawing on Heidegger’s conception of Gelassenheit, I suggest that salvaging human autonomy requires a calm acceptance and opening up to the challenge of modern technology. This is not, as Feenberg suggests, a passive acceptance of the eradication of human autonomy. Rather, this is the ontological ground that provides us with the possibility of salvaging autonomy. By opening us up to the essence of modern technology, we understand the contingency of the Gestell, its essentially ambiguous nature, and are granted with the freedom to subordinate its reign to other human values and modes of understanding being

Sympathy for the Scientist: Re-Calibrating a Heideggerian Critique of Metaphysics

This paper attempts to develop an ethico-aesthetic framework for enriching one's life and ethical outlook. Drawing primarily from Nietzsche, Foucault, and Heidegger, an argument is made that Heidegger's understanding of this issue was mistaken. The ontological crisis of modernity is not the overt influence of mathematics as a worldview over poetics and more traditionally aesthetic approaches. It is the rampant mis-and over-application of abstraction within one's view of the world while denying the material realities of life as we live it. This runaway abstractive worldview leads to the misapplication of mathematics and other sciences which in turn facilitate the dehumanization of life and those within it. When we try to solve the real problems of our material human lives through overly abstractive means, then we arrive at inauthentic arguments that fuel popular disdain for philosophy as irrelevant and nothing more than the purview of the elite. The goal is a recalibration of the argument toward addressing the denial of materiality within Modernism

Läufer auf Gestell in Plastikbox MÜ64-18

LÄUFER AUF GESTELL IN PLASTIKBOX MÜ64-18 Läufer auf Gestell in Plastikbox MÜ64-18 (Gesamtansicht MÜ64-18) Läufer auf Gestell in Plastikbox MÜ64-18 (Gesamtansicht MÜ64-18) Läufer auf Gestell in Plastikbox MÜ64-18 (Vorderansicht MÜ64-18) Läufer auf Gestell in Plastikbox MÜ64-18 (Seitenansicht (links) MÜ64-18) Läufer auf Gestell in Plastikbox MÜ64-18 (Rückansicht MÜ64-18) Läufer auf Gestell in Plastikbox MÜ64-18 (Seitenansicht (rechts) MÜ64-18) Läufer auf Gestell in Plastikbox MÜ64-18 (Untersicht MÜ64-18) Läufer auf Gestell in Plastikbox MÜ64-18 (Details (1) MÜ64-18) Läufer auf Gestell in Plastikbox MÜ64-18 (Details (2) MÜ64-18) Läufer auf Gestell in Plastikbox MÜ64-18 (Details (3) MÜ64-18) Läufer auf Gestell in Plastikbox MÜ64-18 (Details (4) MÜ64-18) Läufer auf Gestell in Plastikbox MÜ64-18 (Details (5) MÜ64-18

Finitud y duración

Este artículo presenta una articulación de las ideas de duración, cosmicidad, proximidad y finitud a modo de puntos definidores de un ethos cercano al de la sostenibilidad y contrapuesto al Gestell heideggeriano de la técnica moderna, al nihilismo indistante del consumismo y a la retórica de la innovación tecnológica.This paper presents an articulation of the ideas of duration, cosmicity, proximity and finitude as the defining features of an ethos close to that of sustainability, and contrary to the heideggerian Gestell of modern technique, to the nihilism undistant from consumerism and the rhetoric of technological innovation

Das Gestell des Behaim-Globus

Der älteste erhaltene Erdglobus, der sogenannte Behaim-Globus aus dem Jahre 1492/94 zeigt das Weltbild noch ohne Amerika. Während der Erdglobus mit seinem Kartenbild und seinen Bildern und Texten häufig Gegenstand der Forschung war, blieb diese Aufmerksamkeit dem Gestell des Behaim-Globus verwehrt. Der Beitrag widmet sich erstmals dem eisernen Gestell des Globus. Kunsttechnologische Untersuchungen von Gestell und Horizontring werden mit historischen Quellen abgeglichen und kontextualisiert