Schelling’s and Heidegger’s Critique of Hegel and another Grounding of Thought
0
조회
0
다운로드
0
인용
0
참고문헌
키워드
초록
There are undoubtedly many points of similarity between Schelling’s late philosophy and Heidegger’s late work. Nevertheless, it is not a simple task to compare the late thoughts of the two philosophers, because they operated in entirely different philosophical themes. To compare these two philosophers, one should begin by exploring the possibility of integrating them into the same philosophical problem, since comparison is possible only when the individuals compared are addressing the same point of view. In this paper, my perspective is that the means through which Schelling and Heidegger can be considered regarding the same philosophical problem is to explore their critiques of Hegel’s philosophy. This is because, in their late thoughts, they both not only criticized the principle of self-consciousness in Hegel’s philosophy that it is ungrounded ontologically, but also reached the same conclusion that the grounding of self-consciousness within thought itself is impossible. In particular, this conclusion indicates that their late thoughts were targeted at attempting to resolve the problem tackled in their conclusion. Therefore, to compare their late thoughts, I investigate the reasons for their criticism of the principle of self-consciousness in Hegel’s philosophy. Moreover, I further examine the similarities and differences of their critiques, their own solutions for the problems raised, and on which points their own philosophies had similarity and difference. Through these investigations, I seek to indicate the reason why Schelling advocated a transition from the negative philosophy to the positive philosophy, and likewise, Heidegger for “Turning.” In conclusion, I try to elucidate that Schelling’s “Ecstasy” and Heidegger’s “Turning” are another attempt to ground the self-consciousness as principle of rational philosophy.
Abstract
There are undoubtedly many points of similarity between Schelling’s late philosophy and Heidegger’s late work. Nevertheless, it is not a simple task to compare the late thoughts of the two philosophers, because they operated in entirely different philosophical themes. To compare these two philosophers, one should begin by exploring the possibility of integrating them into the same philosophical problem, since comparison is possible only when the individuals compared are addressing the same point of view. In this paper, my perspective is that the means through which Schelling and Heidegger can be considered regarding the same philosophical problem is to explore their critiques of Hegel’s philosophy. This is because, in their late thoughts, they both not only criticized the principle of self-consciousness in Hegel’s philosophy that it is ungrounded ontologically, but also reached the same conclusion that the grounding of self-consciousness within thought itself is impossible. In particular, this conclusion indicates that their late thoughts were targeted at attempting to resolve the problem tackled in their conclusion. Therefore, to compare their late thoughts, I investigate the reasons for their criticism of the principle of self-consciousness in Hegel’s philosophy. Moreover, I further examine the similarities and differences of their critiques, their own solutions for the problems raised, and on which points their own philosophies had similarity and difference. Through these investigations, I seek to indicate the reason why Schelling advocated a transition from the negative philosophy to the positive philosophy, and likewise, Heidegger for “Turning.” In conclusion, I try to elucidate that Schelling’s “Ecstasy” and Heidegger’s “Turning” are another attempt to ground the self-consciousness as principle of rational philosophy.
참고문헌 (26)
- Heidegger Martin, "Holzwege, Ba. 5" (1977)
- Heidegger Martin, "Nietzsche: Der europäische Nihilismus in Ba. 48" (1986)
- Heidegger Martin, "Hegel und die Griechen, in Wegmarken, Ba. 9" (1976)
- Heidegger Martin, "Identität und Differenz" (1978), Günther Neske Pfullinhen
- Heidegger Martin, "Hegel und die Griechen in Wegmarken, Ba. 9" (1976)
- Heidegger Martin, "Wegmarken, Ba. 9"
- Heidegger Martin, "Überwindung der Metaphysik, in Vorträge und Aufsätze, Ba. 7" (1978)
- Heidegger Martin, "Vom Wesen der Wahrheit, in Wegmarken, Ba. 9" (1976)
- Heidegger Martin, "Beiträge zur Philosophie, Ba. 65" (1994)
- Heidegger Martin, "Hegel, Ba. 68" (1993)
- Schelling, "Zur Geschichte der neueren Philosophie" (1974)
- Schelling, "Schellings Werke 6th Ergänzungsband" (1858)
- 42 (Paulus-Nachschrift), "Schelling Philosophie der Offerung 1841", pp.1993, Schelling
- Alan White, "Absolute Knowledge: Hegel and the Problem of Metaphysics" (1983)
- Bruce Matthews, "Schelling, FWJ, The Grounding of Positive Philosophy" (2007), State University of New York press
- David Kolb, "The Critique of pure Modernity: Hegel, Heidegger and After" (1986), University Of Chicago Press
- Dennis J. Schmidt, "Between Hegel and Heidegger", Man and World, 15(1) (1982)
- Fred Rush, "Interpreting Schelling: critical essays" (2014), Cambridge University Press
- I. Leask, "Schelling and Onto-theology", New Blackfriars, 81 (2000)
- Marie-Elise Zovko, "Jahrbuch für Philosophie des Forschungsinstituts für Philosophie Hannover 10" (1999)
- 28). Die Protokolle von Martin Heideggers Seminar zu Schellings „Freiheitsschrift“ (1927, "Heideggers Schelling Seminar (1927", 28) und die Akten des Internationalen Schelling-Tags
- Robert Sinnebrink, "Sein und Geist: Heidegger’s Confrontation with Hegel’s Phenomenology", The Journal of Natural and Social Philosophy, 3(2-3) (2007)
- Robert Gascoigne, "Religion, Rationality, and Community" (1985), Springer Netherlands
- Robert R. Williams, "Hegel and his Critics" (1989)
- Stephen Houlgate, "Schelling's Critique of Hegel's Science of Logic", The Review of Metaphysics (1999)
- Walter Schulz, "Die Vollendung des Deutschen Idealismus in der Spätphilosophie Schellings" (1975), Pfullingen