Refine
Year of publication
Document Type
- Article (33)
- Monograph/Edited Volume (9)
- Review (3)
- Part of a Book (2)
- Postprint (2)
- Other (1)
Is part of the Bibliography
- yes (50)
Keywords
- bio-power (2)
- communicative action (2)
- communicative reason (2)
- critical theory (2)
- human condition (2)
- human expressivity (2)
- life-world (2)
- negativity (2)
- post-secular society (2)
- religion (2)
- social critique (2)
- world and subject (2)
- Anthropologie (1)
- Anti-Humanismus (1)
- Arendt (1)
- Evolution of the human (1)
- Hannah (1)
- Helmuth Plessner (1)
- Jurgen Habermas (1)
- Jürgen Habermas (1)
- Life forms (1)
- Non-reductive naturalism (1)
- Open holism (1)
- Philosophical anthropology (1)
- Philosophie (1)
- Presuppositions of evolution (1)
- anthropology (1)
- anti-humanism (1)
- biopolitics (1)
- biopower (1)
- future world history (1)
- global (1)
- history (1)
- human life in nature, society, and history (1)
- mediated immediacy (1)
- philosophical anthropology, anthropological philosophy, unfathomability of humans (1)
- philosophy (1)
- self in competition (1)
- self in cooperation (1)
- shared world (1)
Institute
- Philosophische Fakultät (38)
- Institut für Philosophie (10)
- Extern (1)
- Institut für Romanistik (1)
- Klassische Philologie (1)
According to Plessner, both adaptation and selection can be conceived not just as requested by the environment but also as actively proceeding from the organism. In this respect, Plessner finds in Uexküll’s new biology a powerful counterweight to the constraints of Darwinism. However, despite all the points in common in their respective understanding of the problem, Plessner reproaches to Uexküll to have entirely missed the intermediate layer of the lived body [Leib] between the organism and its environment. Unlike Uexküll, concerning the more developed animals, Plessner took up elements of animal psychology from Wolfgang Köhler and Frederik Jacobus Johannes Buytendijk. Finally, Plessner finds insufficiencies also in Uexküll’s distinction between the notion of world and the notion of environment, which would lead to the parallel positing of different environments. In reaction to Uexküll’s leveling of all environments, Plessner drafted a philosophical-anthropological spectrum between the intelligent way of living observed in the great apes, whose intelligence had been demonstrated, and the co-wordly life of the symbolic mind as seen in the personal sphere of human life.
Communicative Reason Juergen Habermas, interviewed by Christoph Demmerling and Hans-Peter Krueger
(2016)
Jurgen Habermas explicates the concept of communicative reason. He explains the key assumptions of the philosophy of language and social theory associated with this concept. Also discussed is the category of life-world and the role of the body-mind difference for the consciousness of exclusivity in our access to subjective experience. as well as the role of emotions and perceptions in the context of a theory of communicative action. The question of the redemption of the various validity claims as they are associated with the performance of speech acts is related to processes of social learning and to the role of negative experiences. Finally the interview deals with the relationship between religion and reason and the importance of religion in modern, post-secular societies. Questions about the philosophical culture of our present times are discussed at the end of the conversation.
Critical Anthropology? To the Relationship between Philosophical Anthropology and Critical Theory
(2016)
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).
Das Intellektuelle : seine Befreiung durch seine Selbstbejahung in einer gewaltenteiligen Moderne
(2001)
In der Philosophie des 20. Jahrhunderts wird deutlich, dass es in Frankreich und in Deutschland voneinander abweichende Sichtweisen auf die Frage gibt, ob der Mensch eine "Sonderstellung" in der Dynamik des biologischen und geschichtlichen Lebens genießt. Während sich in Deutschland die Tradition eines anthropologischen Denkens neu formiert, ist in Frankreich eine scharfe Skepsis gegenüber dem Erbe des Humanismus charakteristisch. Die Beiträge dieses zweisprachigen Buches untersuchen diese deutsch-französische Konstellation von Fragen und Autoren, und aktualisieren die Reflexion auf die (Grenzen der) Singularität des Menschen.