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

Results found: 9

first rewind previous Page / 1 next fast forward last

Search results

Search:
in the keywords:  Michel Henry
help Sort By:

help Limit search:
first rewind previous Page / 1 next fast forward last
EN
Hermeneutics as it is widely understood – (hermeneutics of P. Ricoeur, M. Heidegger,H. Gadamer or the specific hermeneutics of M. Foucault) – is a strategy that effectivelyallows avoidance of a trap as set by binding the modern principle of philosophical correctness.According to this principle, philosophers should not create descriptions of subjectivitywith substantial terms such as durability and identity. The aim of the article is topresent a strong counterpoint to the principle “philosophy of the subject without the subject”,referring to the standpoint represented by French phenomenologist Michel Henry.
PL
Kartezjański dualizm uznaje się współcześnie za źródło i podstawę postępującego rozwoju nauk przyrodniczych i medycznych. Równocześnie, jest on przyczyną redukcjonistycznych i materialistycznych pokus w pojmowaniu człowieka jako wyłącznie biologicznego mechanizmu, którego egzystencję można w całości opisać językiem nauk przyrodniczych. W opozycji do tychże tendencji zaproponować chciałbym konkurencyjny, holistyczny model ludzkiej natury, oparty na filozofii i antropologii Maine de Birana oraz fenomenologii ciała Michela Henry, jako z jednej strony unikających tendencji redukcjonistycznych, z drugiej zaś – wyrosłych z oświeceniowego dziedzictwa nauk filozoficznych i medycznych.
EN
The article proposes a holistic model of human nature, based on philosophy and anthropology of Maine de Biran, and on Michel Henry’s phenomenology of body.
EN
The article proposes a holistic model of human nature, based on philosophy and anthropology of Maine de Biran, and on Michel Henry’s phenomenology of body.
PL
Kartezjański dualizm uznaje się współcześnie za źródło i podstawę postępującego rozwoju nauk przyrodniczych i medycznych. Równocześnie, jest on przyczyną redukcjonistycznych i materialistycznych pokus w pojmowaniu człowieka jako wyłącznie biologicznego mechanizmu, którego egzystencję można w całości opisać językiem nauk przyrodniczych. W opozycji do tychże tendencji zaproponować chciałbym konkurencyjny, holistyczny model ludzkiej natury, oparty na filozofii i antropologii Maine de Birana oraz fenomenologii ciała Michela Henry, jako z jednej strony unikających tendencji redukcjonistycznych, z drugiej zaś – wyrosłych z oświeceniowego dziedzictwa nauk filozoficznych i medycznych.
EN
This article is an analysis of two conceptions of both awareness of other persons and relations with them put forward by Michel Henry and Marc Richir – philosophers who are associated with “new phenomenology in France”. My aim is to show how they reinterpret Husserl’s view of intersubjectvity and attempt to solve the issues related to traditional phenomenological solution. Thanks to rejecting Husserl’s notion of intentionality, they provide a new ground for analysis. The originality of their account lies in an introduction of the very notion of passivity (Henry) and transcedental interfacticity (Richir). In spite of some differences between them, they can be considered as ideas that shed a new light on the problem of intersubjectivity in phenomenology.
Studia Gilsoniana
|
2023
|
vol. 12
|
issue 1
169-209
EN
This work is developed within the context of the theological turn of French phenomenology (Janicaud), analyzing the notion of life that Michel Henry stages in the first of his works, The Essence of Manifestation. To this end, we intend to explain what the French author understands both by the alienated manifestation of phenomena in terms of representation or ontological monism, and by the self-manifestation of life that he privileges, which does not consist in placing the phenomena in the light of a conscience, as would be characteristic of the first manifestation, but in a philosophy of Night that owes nothing in the strict sense to mundane transcendence. The latter is preceded and, in any case, made possible by the former. According to Henry, there is an absolute knowledge that is not susceptible to any progress, thus founding a pathetic philosophy by which life reveals itself (Parousia) without the need for intermediaries that would alienate its intimate immediacy.
Avant
|
2018
|
vol. 9
|
issue 2
157-167
EN
In this paper I compare how Michel Henry and Henri Maldiney interpret Kandinsky’s heritage. Henry’s phenomenology is based on a distinction between two main modes of manifestation: the ordinary one, that is, the manifestation of the world, and the “manifestation of life.” For him, Kandinsky’s work provides a paradigmatic example of the second, more original mode of manifestation, which is free from all forms of self-alienation. Henry claims that this living through the work of art is transformative; it is akin to ascetic practice or mystical experience that goes beyond the distinction of the subject and the object. Maldiney acknowledges Kandinsky’s work as an attempt to provide access to an a-cosmic and ahistoric experience of one’s inner self; yet for him this is not a positive characteristic. For Maldiney, the key distinction is not between modes of phenomenalisation, but between the dimensions of meaning (sens). For him there is no radical self-transformation which is not a transformation of one’s being-in-the-world and one’s meaning of the world, and so Kandinsky’s a-cosmic paintings cannot induce a true transformation of the self. I conclude that the disagreement of Henry and Maldiney on Kandinsky does not unfold on the level of phenomenological description of concrete aesthetic experience, but on the level of metaphysics.
EN
The idea of incarnation is one of the Christian theological concepts that has exerted the strongest influence on philosophical thought in Europe and which was repeatedly referred to in the twentieth century. The paper presents three reinterpretations of this biblical category. Carl Gustav Jung interprets incarnation in the spirit of Gnosticism, as a process of the psychological individuation of God and man; Hans‑Georg Gadamer employs the idea of the inner Word, Verbum interius, to analyse the dogmas of incarnation and the Trinity: seeking in them a solution to the mystery of language; while Michel Henry reaches for the Bible and theology to face anew the issue of human corporeality. These attempts to rethink the theological aspects of the Incarnation of the Son of God reveal the role of this notion in the development of modern psychology, the hermeneutic philosophy of language as well as in anthropology. At the same time, a philosophical reinterpretation of incarnation provides an impulse to rephrase the questions about the relationship between philosophy and theology, as well as faith and reason, good and evil, the relationship between God and man, the mind and the body, as well as speech and thinking. On the other hand, provisional answers to these questions may rekindle theological thought and contribute to the revival of reflection on issues such as the Holy Trinity, the Immaculate and Virgin Conception, or a privation theory of evil. The article provides a starting point for just such a multi‑faceted analysis.
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.