Full-text resources of CEJSH and other databases are now available in the new Library of Science.
Visit https://bibliotekanauki.pl

Results found: 5

first rewind previous Page / 1 next fast forward last

Search results

help Sort By:

help Limit search:
first rewind previous Page / 1 next fast forward last
1
Content available remote

Tělo za daností : Patočkova fenomenologie těla

100%
EN
What significant role does the body play in Patočka’s phenomenology? This study identifies the main characteristics of Patočka’s conception of body over the course of the development of his thought. The body is the place in which the life of consciousness is (magically) joined with the world of ob¬jects, and at the same time it is the setting (but not the means) of appearing. The study demonstrates that the key problem of Patočka’s phenomenology of embodiment is the one of whether body can be reduced to a given fini¬tude, or whether it has the potential to go beyond the given, thus possessing its own kind of in finity. The appreciation of the body in the late Patočka assumes a methodological point of departure in motion. With the support of this point of departure, we may defend the thesis that the whole perfor¬mance of sense is bodily, although neither body nor consciousness can be identified with the final basis of appearing.
2
Content available remote

Nezjevnost řeči

100%
EN
This review study, after a brief summary of the main theses and lines of argument in Language and Appearing, focuses on problematic elements in Kouba’s study. It points to a selectivity in Kouba’s presentation of the philosophy of language and the philosophy of communication. As the main deficiency in Kouba’s approach, it identifies an insufficient appreciation of the role of language, which is in effect reduced to the linguistic or linguistic competence. This reduction is conditioned (already in Heidegger himself) by a primary emphasis on the temporality of existence. In a sketch of a positive alternative approach, the study stresses the problematic character of the conception of communication as the transfer of dialogically-conceived sense, and it points to the sensory dimension of communication and to the multiplicity of “communications” conditioning being in the world.
DE
In der vorliegenden Rezensionsstudie fasst der Autor zunächst kurz die Hauptthesen und Argumentationslinien von Rede und Offenbarheit zusammen, um anschließend auf die problematischen Elemente in Koubas Studie einzugehen. Dabei verweist er auf Koubas selektive Darstellung der Philosophie der Sprache und des Sprechens und identifiziert die mangelnde Anerkennung der Rolle der Rede, die praktisch auf den Vorgang des Sprechens bzw. die Fähigkeit zu sprechen reduziert wird, als grundlegenden Mangel in Koubas Ansatz. Diese Reduzierung ist primär (bereits bei Heidegger selbst) durch die Betonung der zeitlichen Begrenztheit der Existenz bedingt. In der Studie wird eine positive Alternative skizziert und dabei das Problem der Auffassung der Rede als Überträger eines dialogisch aufgefassten Sinns betont. Gleichfalls wird auf die Sinnesdimension der Rede und auf die Vielzahl von „Reden“ verwiesen, die das Sein in der Welt bedingen.
EN
On the one hand, the present paper pursues transformations of Jan Patočka’s approach to the body and corporeality and tries to pinpoint its problematic aspects. The more essential and detailed part of the text presents a systematic interpretation of sketchy analyses of corporeality, as they appear in Patočka’s wartime manuscripts methodically based on transcendental phenomenology. Special attention is paid to Jan Patočka’s considerations on the sensory perception, and also to his more speculative ideas inspired by these reflections. In this context, we concentrate on the problem of the so called „hyletic stratum“. In the final part of the paper, we ask the question whether the sensible phenomenon of “expression”, and the considerations on the corporeal character of our existence in general, do not force us to abandon the way of thinking in substantial categories or, to be more precise, to abandon the idea of substantial “being for itself” independent on the being in relations with others.
EN
This study analyses Patočka’s conception of the relation between the finite human bein­g and the infinite, or rather, various conceptions of this relation which also imply different understandings of what the finite human being and the infinite consist in. The key theme becomes the different possibilities of interpreting Patočka’s early thesis stating that “the absolute is not outside us but in us”. The late Patočka explicitly dismisses the idea that the finite human being can discover the infinite in itself and that this “discovery” requires turning away from the world. The infinite can be reali­sed only by a loving relating to others irreducible to a collective “service to being”. The present interpretation aims to reinterpret true love as a movement which turns to others in their concrete (affective) situation of (present) praxis. It is through this movement that the finite human being lives in the infinite.
EN
The study illuminates the manner of Adorno’s critical engagement with Hegel’s dialectic, with a primary focus on the question of the relationship between the whole and the individual. First, I show for what reasons Adorno criticizes the primacy of the whole, and on what basis he formulates the thesis that the whole is the false. Then I pay attention to Adorno’s concept of immanent criticism: criticism is based on the norms and values inherent in society, and shows their contradiction with the reality of that society. I illustrate immanent criticism with the concept and reality of human autonomy. Adorno’s defense of the individual and his criticism of the favoring of the whole are connected with his emphasis on somatic existence, which makes it possible to perceive the irrationality of (supposed) Reason in the most tangible way. Individual experience, which is never just individual, thus underpins the relevant critique of the whole, against which it also leans.
CS
Studie osvětluje způsob Adornova kritického navázání na Hegelovu dialektiku s primárním zřetelem k otázce vztahu mezi celkem a jednotlivinou. Nejprve ukazuji, z jakých důvodů Adorno kritizuje primát celku a na základě čeho formuluje tezi, podle níž celek je nepravda. Poté věnuji pozornost Adornově koncepci imanentní kritiky: kritika vychází z norem a hodnot, které jsou vlastní společnosti, a ukazuje jejich rozpor s realitou této společnosti. Imanentní kritiku ilustruji na pojmu a realitě lidské autonomie. Adornovo hájení jedince a jeho kritika upřednostňování celku souvisí s důrazem na somatičnost existence, která umožňuje nejhmatatelněji pocítit iracionalitu (domnělého) Rozumu. Individuální zkušenost, která nikdy není jen individuální, se tak stává oporou relevantní kritiky celku, o nějž se zároveň opírá.
DE
In der vorliegenden Studie wird Adornos kritische Anknüpfung an Hegels Dialektik mit Schwerpunkt auf die Frage der Beziehung zwischen dem Ganzen und der Einzelheit erörtert. Zunächst wird gezeigt, aus welchen Gründen Adorno das Primat des Ganzen kritisiert und auf welcher Grundlage er die These formuliert, dergemäß das Ganze das Unwahre ist. Anschließend wird Adornos Konzept der immanenten Kritik einer näheren Betrachtung unterzogen: Diese Kritik geht aus von Werten und Normen, die der Gesellschaft eigen sind, und verweist auf den Widerspruch zur Realität dieser Gesellschaft. Die immanente Kritik wird anhand des Begriffs der Realität der menschlichen Autonomie aufgezeigt. Adornos Verteidigung des Einzelnen und seine Kritik an der Bevorzugung des Ganzen hängt dabei zusammen mit seiner Betonung Leiblichkeit der Existenz, die es am greifbarsten ermöglicht, die Irrationalität der (vermeintlichen) Vernunft zu spüren. Die individuelle Erfahrung, die nie rein individuell ist, wird so zur Stütze der relevanten Kritik des Ganzen, auf das sie sich gleichzeitig stützt.
first rewind previous Page / 1 next fast forward last
JavaScript is turned off in your web browser. Turn it on to take full advantage of this site, then refresh the page.