Pub Date : 2021-09-02DOI: 10.1080/17570638.2021.2023279
D. Pollard
ABSTRACT A review of Songs of Nature, a study by John Sallis of the landscapes of the modern Chinese artist Cao Jun, with philosophical emphases on the notion of landscape, this analysis widens out to a relevance to all creative work. It homes in on the comparative or intercultural overlap between Western and Eastern traditions. as well as that between painting and music and the other senses. The focus is on the elemental. Art is at base a return to nature with earth and sky as the horizons of what it means to be human.
{"title":"Making Visible: Sallis on the Landscapes of Cao Jun","authors":"D. Pollard","doi":"10.1080/17570638.2021.2023279","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/17570638.2021.2023279","url":null,"abstract":"ABSTRACT A review of Songs of Nature, a study by John Sallis of the landscapes of the modern Chinese artist Cao Jun, with philosophical emphases on the notion of landscape, this analysis widens out to a relevance to all creative work. It homes in on the comparative or intercultural overlap between Western and Eastern traditions. as well as that between painting and music and the other senses. The focus is on the elemental. Art is at base a return to nature with earth and sky as the horizons of what it means to be human.","PeriodicalId":10599,"journal":{"name":"Comparative and Continental Philosophy","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.2,"publicationDate":"2021-09-02","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"48793366","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2021-05-04DOI: 10.1080/17570638.2021.1975765
Manhua Li
Eric Nelson’s Daoism and Environmental Philosophy: Nourishing Life unfolds as a concise and lucid guide to the major concepts of Daoism and is an inspiring and innovative exposition of the potentia...
{"title":"Daoism and Environmental Philosophy: Nourishing Life","authors":"Manhua Li","doi":"10.1080/17570638.2021.1975765","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/17570638.2021.1975765","url":null,"abstract":"Eric Nelson’s Daoism and Environmental Philosophy: Nourishing Life unfolds as a concise and lucid guide to the major concepts of Daoism and is an inspiring and innovative exposition of the potentia...","PeriodicalId":10599,"journal":{"name":"Comparative and Continental Philosophy","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.2,"publicationDate":"2021-05-04","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"44729956","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2021-05-04DOI: 10.1080/17570638.2021.1995686
J. Wirth, Jennifer Liu
We follow up our special issue on Argentinian philosophy with a selection of essays that continue to expand and pluralize our sense of the philosophical enterprise. In “Aesthetic Negation and Citation: Levinas, Agnon, and the Paradox of Literature,” Lawrence Harvey complicates our expectation that Levinas had an ethical aversion to literature. Not only is Totality and Infinity, for example, bracketed with literary allusions, his mature work makes frequent and appreciative use of it. The author turns to S. Y. Agnon (1888–1970) to offer a complementary model of the ethical force of the kind of literature that “‘de-nucleates’ the totalizing solidity of the underlying Platonic forms.” In “Is Anti-Oedipus Really a Critique of Psychoanalysis?” Axel Chemiavsky explores the foundations of critique in Deleuze and Guattari’s Anti-Oedipus and suggests that the authors combine a Kantian delimitation of the synthesis of the unconsciousness and Nietzsche’s conception of life. Chemiavsky proceeds by first looking at how Anti-Oedipus tries to distinguish between the illegitimate and legitimate uses of synthesis, turning to the question of the object for critique. Psychoanalysis as a conception of life, as Deleuze and Guattari formulate it, is a particular “configuration of desire” where desire itself is multiple. Leo Kwok looks at the problem of what makes understanding philosophical traditions across cultures possible or impossible. The dilemma that either one “assimilates” one tradition into the other or declares an “incommunicability” thesis assumes that intercultural understanding is identical to intercultural philosophy. To solve this dilemma Kwok proposes an approach of intercultural dialogue which begins with questioning, supplemented by what he calls the “TQX model.” This technique (if one may call it so) is demonstrated through looking at ideas from the Mencius and Levinas. He concludes by giving an example of intercultural dialogue with an investigation into the concept of dao as “origin” and Derrida’s articulations of “genesis.” Jiani Fan pushes against the general conception that Nietzsche is an heir to the Ancient Skeptics, contending that Nietzsche’s position is much more ambivalent, his inheritance not without critique. Through an exploration of Nietzsche’s rhetoric, Fan examines the peculiarity of his literary style that, while indebted to the Pyrrhonians, nevertheless reveals an “assertive” yet “non-committal” perspective. This tension reveals a particular uncertainty in value judgments that do not allow for interrogation into presuppositions and criteria. Joshua Stoll in “Being to Being: Sartre, Ramchandra Gandhi, and Abhinavagupta on Intersubjectivity” critically intervenes into Sartre’s notorious assumption that “hell is other people” as we become trapped in the gaze (le regard) of others. Turning to the advaita or non-dual thought of the contemporary Indian philosopher Ramchandra Gandhi as well as the medieval Kashmiri thinker Abhinavagupta,
继我们关于阿根廷哲学的特刊之后，我们精选了一些文章，这些文章继续扩展和丰富我们对哲学事业的理解。劳伦斯·哈维在《美学否定与引文：莱文、阿农与文学悖论》一书中，使我们对莱文对文学有伦理厌恶的期望变得复杂。例如，“总体性”和“无限性”不仅被文学典故所包围，他的成熟作品也经常对其进行欣赏性的使用。作者求助于S.Y.Agnon（1888-1970），为这种文学的伦理力量提供了一个补充模型，“去核化”了潜在柏拉图形式的整体性。阿克塞尔·切米亚夫斯基在《反俄狄浦斯真的是精神分析批判吗。Chemiavsky首先着眼于反俄狄浦斯如何试图区分合成的非法和合法用途，并转向批判对象的问题。精神分析作为一种生活概念，正如德勒兹和瓜塔里所表述的那样，是一种特殊的“欲望配置”，欲望本身是多重的。Leo Kwok关注的问题是，是什么让理解不同文化的哲学传统成为可能或不可能。要么将一种传统“同化”为另一种传统，要么宣布“不可沟通”的困境假设跨文化理解与跨文化哲学是相同的。为了解决这一困境，郭提出了一种跨文化对话的方法，这种方法从提问开始，辅以他所说的“TQX模式”。这种方法（如果可以这么说的话）是通过观察孟子和列文的思想来证明的。最后，范以跨文化对话为例，考察了道作为“起源”的概念和德里达对“起源”问题的阐述。他反对尼采是古代怀疑论者继承人的普遍观点，认为尼采的立场更加矛盾，他的继承并非没有批判。通过对尼采修辞学的探索，范审视了他的文学风格的独特性，这种风格虽然归功于皮尔逊学派，但却揭示了一种“自信”但“不确定”的视角。这种张力揭示了价值判断中的一种特殊的不确定性，这种不确定性不允许对预设和标准进行审问。Joshua Stoll在《存在：萨特、拉姆昌德拉·甘地和阿比那瓦古普塔论主体间性》中批判性地介入了萨特臭名昭著的假设，即当我们陷入他人的凝视（尊重）时，“地狱就是他人”。转向当代印度哲学家拉姆昌德拉·甘地和中世纪克什米尔思想家阿比那瓦古普塔的advaita或非双重思想，作者提供了一种相反的解读，在这种解读中，主要关系变得服从和解放。本期包括两部重要新作的评论文章。Glen A.Mazis讨论了Adam Loughnane的《Merleau Ponti and Nishida:Artists Expressing Faith Intraneous to Implementation》，Mike Grimshaw反思了Saitya Das关于克尔凯郭尔政治神学的挑衅性新作。最后以严对约翰逊、卡博尼和圣奥伯特的《世界诗学：哲学》的书评作为结语
{"title":"In This Issue 13.02","authors":"J. Wirth, Jennifer Liu","doi":"10.1080/17570638.2021.1995686","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/17570638.2021.1995686","url":null,"abstract":"We follow up our special issue on Argentinian philosophy with a selection of essays that continue to expand and pluralize our sense of the philosophical enterprise. In “Aesthetic Negation and Citation: Levinas, Agnon, and the Paradox of Literature,” Lawrence Harvey complicates our expectation that Levinas had an ethical aversion to literature. Not only is Totality and Infinity, for example, bracketed with literary allusions, his mature work makes frequent and appreciative use of it. The author turns to S. Y. Agnon (1888–1970) to offer a complementary model of the ethical force of the kind of literature that “‘de-nucleates’ the totalizing solidity of the underlying Platonic forms.” In “Is Anti-Oedipus Really a Critique of Psychoanalysis?” Axel Chemiavsky explores the foundations of critique in Deleuze and Guattari’s Anti-Oedipus and suggests that the authors combine a Kantian delimitation of the synthesis of the unconsciousness and Nietzsche’s conception of life. Chemiavsky proceeds by first looking at how Anti-Oedipus tries to distinguish between the illegitimate and legitimate uses of synthesis, turning to the question of the object for critique. Psychoanalysis as a conception of life, as Deleuze and Guattari formulate it, is a particular “configuration of desire” where desire itself is multiple. Leo Kwok looks at the problem of what makes understanding philosophical traditions across cultures possible or impossible. The dilemma that either one “assimilates” one tradition into the other or declares an “incommunicability” thesis assumes that intercultural understanding is identical to intercultural philosophy. To solve this dilemma Kwok proposes an approach of intercultural dialogue which begins with questioning, supplemented by what he calls the “TQX model.” This technique (if one may call it so) is demonstrated through looking at ideas from the Mencius and Levinas. He concludes by giving an example of intercultural dialogue with an investigation into the concept of dao as “origin” and Derrida’s articulations of “genesis.” Jiani Fan pushes against the general conception that Nietzsche is an heir to the Ancient Skeptics, contending that Nietzsche’s position is much more ambivalent, his inheritance not without critique. Through an exploration of Nietzsche’s rhetoric, Fan examines the peculiarity of his literary style that, while indebted to the Pyrrhonians, nevertheless reveals an “assertive” yet “non-committal” perspective. This tension reveals a particular uncertainty in value judgments that do not allow for interrogation into presuppositions and criteria. Joshua Stoll in “Being to Being: Sartre, Ramchandra Gandhi, and Abhinavagupta on Intersubjectivity” critically intervenes into Sartre’s notorious assumption that “hell is other people” as we become trapped in the gaze (le regard) of others. Turning to the advaita or non-dual thought of the contemporary Indian philosopher Ramchandra Gandhi as well as the medieval Kashmiri thinker Abhinavagupta,","PeriodicalId":10599,"journal":{"name":"Comparative and Continental Philosophy","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.2,"publicationDate":"2021-05-04","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"41824664","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2021-05-04DOI: 10.1080/17570638.2021.1975762
L. Harvey
ABSTRACT Prima facie, the philosophy of Emmanuel Levinas would seem to be inherently averse to literature as an ethical mode. Indeed, in his early work, up to and including Totality and Infinity (1961), literary art is often censured with what amounts to Platonic zeal. However, as I will demonstrate, this criticism stands alongside what is seemingly an incongruous use of literary art as a means of ethical exemplification. By exploring this tension, I will show how the contra-epistemic aesthetic of S. Y. Agnon (1888–1970) can be read within ethical terms consistent with Levinas’s philosophical position.
从表面上看，伊曼纽尔·列维纳斯的哲学似乎天生就反对将文学作为一种伦理模式。的确，在他的早期作品中，直到并包括《总体性与无限》(1961)，文学艺术经常受到柏拉图式热情的谴责。然而，正如我将证明的那样，这种批评与文学艺术作为道德例证手段的看似不协调的使用是一致的。通过探索这种张力，我将展示如何在与列维纳斯的哲学立场一致的伦理术语中阅读S. Y. Agnon(1888-1970)的反认知美学。
{"title":"Aesthetic Negation and Citation: Levinas, Agnon and the Paradox of Literature","authors":"L. Harvey","doi":"10.1080/17570638.2021.1975762","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/17570638.2021.1975762","url":null,"abstract":"ABSTRACT Prima facie, the philosophy of Emmanuel Levinas would seem to be inherently averse to literature as an ethical mode. Indeed, in his early work, up to and including Totality and Infinity (1961), literary art is often censured with what amounts to Platonic zeal. However, as I will demonstrate, this criticism stands alongside what is seemingly an incongruous use of literary art as a means of ethical exemplification. By exploring this tension, I will show how the contra-epistemic aesthetic of S. Y. Agnon (1888–1970) can be read within ethical terms consistent with Levinas’s philosophical position.","PeriodicalId":10599,"journal":{"name":"Comparative and Continental Philosophy","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.2,"publicationDate":"2021-05-04","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"47952426","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2021-05-04DOI: 10.1080/17570638.2021.1979531
M. Grimshaw
ABSTRACT A continuation of Das’s deep engagement with political theology (that is, his political theology of Schelling [2016]), this text undertakes a deep and provocative reading of Kierkegaard’s political theology that strikes to the depths of our ontology. Positioned versus Church and State, a refutation of Christendom and its continuations in secular modernity, Kierkegaard’s political theology also exposes the limits and issues of Schmitt’s project. Tracing the influence of Schelling’s eschatological political theology upon Kierkegaard’s thought, Das articulates a political theology “to come” that is based upon the scandalous event of the crucifixion and in turn creates the scandalous ontology of the event. The result is an ontology lived in response to a negative political theology in which we live without probability within the event of Kierkegaardian sovereign love.
{"title":"The Exception of Transcendence: The Political Theology of Kierkegaard and Das","authors":"M. Grimshaw","doi":"10.1080/17570638.2021.1979531","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/17570638.2021.1979531","url":null,"abstract":"ABSTRACT A continuation of Das’s deep engagement with political theology (that is, his political theology of Schelling [2016]), this text undertakes a deep and provocative reading of Kierkegaard’s political theology that strikes to the depths of our ontology. Positioned versus Church and State, a refutation of Christendom and its continuations in secular modernity, Kierkegaard’s political theology also exposes the limits and issues of Schmitt’s project. Tracing the influence of Schelling’s eschatological political theology upon Kierkegaard’s thought, Das articulates a political theology “to come” that is based upon the scandalous event of the crucifixion and in turn creates the scandalous ontology of the event. The result is an ontology lived in response to a negative political theology in which we live without probability within the event of Kierkegaardian sovereign love.","PeriodicalId":10599,"journal":{"name":"Comparative and Continental Philosophy","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.2,"publicationDate":"2021-05-04","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"41771916","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2021-05-04DOI: 10.1080/17570638.2021.1975767
A. Cherniavsky
ABSTRACT “: We cannot say psychoanalysts are very jolly people; see the dead look they have, their stiff necks.” In 1972, the tone Gilles Deleuze and Félix Guattari used in Anti-Oedipus caused an immediate public reaction: it was regarded as the mark of a fatal critique of psychoanalysis. However, critique, in philosophy, is used in certain technical and precise senses. We will try to demonstrate that, technically, Anti-Oedipus is a delimitation of a Kantian sort, an evaluation of a Nietzschean kind, and, finally, a divergence in terms of Deleuze himself. Thanks to this precision, we will find that the target of Anti-Oedipus is not psychoanalysis in general but what Deleuze and Guattari call, respectively, “the illegitimate use of the synthesis of the unconscious,” a conception of life presupposed by psychoanalysis, and a configuration of desire that explains both psychoanalysis and the system in which it functions.
{"title":"Is Anti-Oedipus Really a Critique of Psychoanalysis?","authors":"A. Cherniavsky","doi":"10.1080/17570638.2021.1975767","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/17570638.2021.1975767","url":null,"abstract":"ABSTRACT “: We cannot say psychoanalysts are very jolly people; see the dead look they have, their stiff necks.” In 1972, the tone Gilles Deleuze and Félix Guattari used in Anti-Oedipus caused an immediate public reaction: it was regarded as the mark of a fatal critique of psychoanalysis. However, critique, in philosophy, is used in certain technical and precise senses. We will try to demonstrate that, technically, Anti-Oedipus is a delimitation of a Kantian sort, an evaluation of a Nietzschean kind, and, finally, a divergence in terms of Deleuze himself. Thanks to this precision, we will find that the target of Anti-Oedipus is not psychoanalysis in general but what Deleuze and Guattari call, respectively, “the illegitimate use of the synthesis of the unconscious,” a conception of life presupposed by psychoanalysis, and a configuration of desire that explains both psychoanalysis and the system in which it functions.","PeriodicalId":10599,"journal":{"name":"Comparative and Continental Philosophy","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.2,"publicationDate":"2021-05-04","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"42612822","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2021-05-04DOI: 10.1080/17570638.2021.1975944
Joshua Stoll
ABSTRACT This paper explores and critiques Sartre’s conception of being-for-others from a non-dual (advaita) perspective. His conception of intersubjectivity as being-for-others views the primary relation between oneself and others as oppressive and objectifying; the other, he says, is the death of my possibilities. It will be argued, however, that others also represent precisely the birth of one’s possibilities. To this end, we will interpret the relation of being to being from a non-dual (advaita) orientation through the work of the contemporary Indian philosopher Ramchandra Gandhi and the medieval Kashmiri polymath Abhinavagupta. Both of these thinkers emphasize the act of address as the primary relation between self-conscious beings, a relation that is fundamentally subjectifying rather than objectifying. Through address, we achieve what Sartre argues is impossible: a free recognition of each other as free self-conscious subjects.
{"title":"Being to Being: Sartre, Ramchandra Gandhi, and Abhinavagupta on Intersubjectivity","authors":"Joshua Stoll","doi":"10.1080/17570638.2021.1975944","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/17570638.2021.1975944","url":null,"abstract":"ABSTRACT This paper explores and critiques Sartre’s conception of being-for-others from a non-dual (advaita) perspective. His conception of intersubjectivity as being-for-others views the primary relation between oneself and others as oppressive and objectifying; the other, he says, is the death of my possibilities. It will be argued, however, that others also represent precisely the birth of one’s possibilities. To this end, we will interpret the relation of being to being from a non-dual (advaita) orientation through the work of the contemporary Indian philosopher Ramchandra Gandhi and the medieval Kashmiri polymath Abhinavagupta. Both of these thinkers emphasize the act of address as the primary relation between self-conscious beings, a relation that is fundamentally subjectifying rather than objectifying. Through address, we achieve what Sartre argues is impossible: a free recognition of each other as free self-conscious subjects.","PeriodicalId":10599,"journal":{"name":"Comparative and Continental Philosophy","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.2,"publicationDate":"2021-05-04","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"42655540","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2021-05-04DOI: 10.1080/17570638.2021.1978134
Yan Yan
Are philosophy and literature different, both in the ways they communicate and the subjects they address? In Merleau-Ponty’s Poetic of the World: Philosophy and Literature, the authors’ answer to t...
{"title":"Merleau-Ponty’s Poetic of the World: Philosophy and Literature","authors":"Yan Yan","doi":"10.1080/17570638.2021.1978134","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/17570638.2021.1978134","url":null,"abstract":"Are philosophy and literature different, both in the ways they communicate and the subjects they address? In Merleau-Ponty’s Poetic of the World: Philosophy and Literature, the authors’ answer to t...","PeriodicalId":10599,"journal":{"name":"Comparative and Continental Philosophy","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.2,"publicationDate":"2021-05-04","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"46992775","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2021-05-04DOI: 10.1080/17570638.2021.1975766
Jiani Fan
ABSTRACT Friedrich Nietzsche offers different opinions of the ancient Skeptics. On certain occasions, he praises them as philosophers of intellectual integrity, because they constantly question dogma and continue to inquire (ζητϵῖν) into the truth. He insists, however, that it is indispensable for every individual to adopt her own perspective in specific conditions, rather than suspend judgment as the Skeptics do. On other occasions, Nietzsche criticizes the ancient Skeptics because they separate their academic investigations from their philosophy of life and only comply with conventions or apparent phenomena observed through sensations. Furthermore, he ridicules their ultimate goal – tranquility of mind (ἀταραξία) – as a product of feeble exhaustion. He himself is ready to embrace torments of life as part of the will to power. Although some similarities can be traced between Nietzsche and the ancient Skeptics, Nietzsche is more consistent in connecting his theoretical investigation and his philosophy as a way of life.
{"title":"Redeemed From Skepticism Nietzsche’s Revaluation of Inquiry (ζητϵῖν) and Tranquility (ἀταραξία) in Pyrrhonian Skeptics","authors":"Jiani Fan","doi":"10.1080/17570638.2021.1975766","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/17570638.2021.1975766","url":null,"abstract":"ABSTRACT Friedrich Nietzsche offers different opinions of the ancient Skeptics. On certain occasions, he praises them as philosophers of intellectual integrity, because they constantly question dogma and continue to inquire (ζητϵῖν) into the truth. He insists, however, that it is indispensable for every individual to adopt her own perspective in specific conditions, rather than suspend judgment as the Skeptics do. On other occasions, Nietzsche criticizes the ancient Skeptics because they separate their academic investigations from their philosophy of life and only comply with conventions or apparent phenomena observed through sensations. Furthermore, he ridicules their ultimate goal – tranquility of mind (ἀταραξία) – as a product of feeble exhaustion. He himself is ready to embrace torments of life as part of the will to power. Although some similarities can be traced between Nietzsche and the ancient Skeptics, Nietzsche is more consistent in connecting his theoretical investigation and his philosophy as a way of life.","PeriodicalId":10599,"journal":{"name":"Comparative and Continental Philosophy","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.2,"publicationDate":"2021-05-04","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"43256209","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
京公网安备 11010802042870号
京ICP备2023020795号-1
扫码关注我们
求助内容：
应助结果提醒方式：