Critics have charged that Martin Heidegger's account of authenticity is morally nihilistic, that his fundamental ontology is either egocentric or chauvinistic; and many see Heidegger's turn to Nazism in 1933 as following logically from an indifference, and even hostility, to ""otherness"" in the premises of his early philosophy. In ""The Fragile ""We"", ethical implications of Heidegger's ""being and time"", Lawrence Vogel presents 3 interpretations of authentic existence - the existentialist, the historicist, and the cosmopolitan - each of which is a plausible version of the personal ideal depicted in ""being and time."" He then draws parallels between these interpretations and three moments in the contemporary liberal-communitarian debate over the relationship of the ""I"" and the ""We."" His book contributes both to a diagnosis of what there is about ""Being and time"" that invites moral nihilism and to a sense of how fundamental ontology might be recast so that ""the other"" is accorded an appropriate place in an account of human existence.
Ethical Implications of Heidegger's ""Being and Time jetzt bestellen!
Autoren/Hrsg.
Weitere Infos & Material
Fundamental ontology as a ""fundamental ethics""; Heidegger's critique of morality: the inauthenticity of the morally conscientious individual; The existentialist interpretation: authentic being-unto-death and the authority of the individual; The historicist interpretation: authentic historicality and the authority of tradition; The cosmopolitan interpretation: authentic being-with-others and the authority of the other person; Is fundamental ontology morally nihilistic?
