The earliest recorded philosophical use of the term "phusis" occurs in the fragments of Heraclitus (most notably at B1 and B123). Phusis, in the non-philosophical writings relevant to Heraclitus’s time (e.g. from Homer to Aeschylus and Pindar), was generally used to characterize the external physical appearance of something. Heraclitus, on the other hand, seems to have used the term in the completely opposite manner: an object’s phusis is hidden (kruptesthai) and greater (kreissōn) than the external appearance (B123 (...) and B54). Despite this difference, Heraclitus’s use has an affinity with the common use in his time: phusis is used to characterize things. In B1, for example, Heraclitus makes it clear that he is interested in explaining the nature of each thing as opposed to some cosmic principle of Nature. By examining various fragments, I make the case that the phusis of a thing, for Heraclitus, can be defined as the set of opposites necessarily inherent in an object upon which all objects of that kind depend for their existence. The interesting result is that Heraclitus’s novel use of phusis happens to be the foundation for one of the ways in which opposites form a unity. This particular thesis states that there are essential properties inherent in objects which are pairs of opposites sufficient to determine the unity of the object in question. If this is right, then we can read some fragments which contain descriptions of worldly objects (e.g. bows, lyres, rivers, barley drinks etc.) in a new light. These descriptions of worldly objects might not be meant to stand as metaphoric symbols for cosmic principles, as is often thought; rather, they can be read as instances of Heraclitus attempting to do a metaphysics of objects. (shrink)

In this paper, I show that Aristophanes’s speech in Plato’s Symposium is tied into an interesting and hitherto unexplored web of ideas in Plato’s ethics and psychology. The poet’s analysis of erōs as ‘leading us to what “belongs” (the oikeion)’ (193d2) and as ‘restoring us in our “original nature” (archaia phusis)’ (193d4) is not a mere negative contribution that renders him a ‘target for Diotima’s fire’ (Dover). Rather, he unwittingly communicates central ethical and psychological ideas which we find developed (...) in key passages of Plato’s dialogues. What is interesting is that Diotima in a curious passage seems to dismiss his contribution of the oikeion as unrelated to our good (agathon) and irrelevant to the analysis of desire (205d10–206a1). I argue that this interpretation of Diotima’s response to Aristophanes, which would render her position an ethical anomaly in Plato’s dialogues, should be rejected. Instead, it is more plausible to read her response as proposing a revisionary conception of the oikeion, relying on the idea that our agathon is our true oikeion. In addition, I tentatively suggest that the theory of psychic pregnancy may be seen as presenting the agathon of wisdom of virtue produced in the ascent as an oikeion. Just as fascinating as Diotima’s stance on the oikeion is the question how her teachings relate to the concept of an archaia phusis of the soul. The idea that the soul’s self-perfection constitutes a return to a temporally prior condition of excellence, which in two places other than the Symposium (Republic X, Timaeus) is called the ‘archaia phusis’, is pervasive and centrally important to Plato’s psychology. I address the question whether Diotima’s ascent passage constitutes a psychological anomaly in portraying self-perfection as unrelated to the concept of the archaia phusis. I argue that an answer to this depends on the stance we take on the Symposium’s position regarding the immortality of the soul. While a reading that posits a rejection of immortality in the Symposium must indeed deny a role for the concept in Diotima’s speech, I show that a reading allowing for immortality as a theoretical commitment in the background has an interesting interpretative option: along with Timaeus 90d5, it may fruitfully interpret the ascent as an ordering of the soul ‘in accordance with its archaia phusis’. (shrink)

This essay explores the treatment of the relation between nature (phusis) and norm or convention (nomos) in Democritus and in certain Platonic dialogues. In his physical theory Democritus draws a sharp contrast between the real nature of things and their representation via human conventions, but in his political and ethical theory he maintains that moral conventions are grounded in the reality of human nature. Plato builds on that insight in the account of the nature of morality in the myth (...) in the Protagoras. That provides material for a defense of morality against the attacks by Callicles in the Gorgias and Thrasymachus and Glaucon in the Republic, all of whom seek to use the nature-convention contrast to devalue morality. (shrink)

Antik Yunan düşüncesinde özgürlük meselesini irdelemek doğa kavrayışını ele almakla mümkün olabilir. Özgürlük her halükarda sınırları belirsiz bir kavramdır ve onu tanımlama çabaları bu yüzden çoğunlukla tek taraflı bir yaklaşımın örnekleridir. Söz konusu dönem dilinde özgürlük sözcüğünün muadili olarak kabul edilebilecek bir sözcük bulunmamaktadır ama bu, orada özgürlüğün sorun edilmediği anlamına gelmemektedir. Çünkü insanlar arası etkileşimin bulunduğu her bağlamda özgürlük bir sorunsal olarak zaten orada olan bir şeydir. Bu çalışmada öncelikle Antik Yunan mitoslarında doğumlarla şekillenen evren anlatısının bir özeti verildi. (...) İnsanın bu evrene dahil oluşuna değinildikten sonra Prometheus’un ateşi çalıp ulaştırmasıyla insanda meydana gelen değişimler özgürlük bağlamında değerlendirildi. Böylece doğa kavrayışı bağlamında Antik Yunan mitoslarında özgürlük sorunsalının tespiti yapıldı. İster tanrısal ister beşeri olsun, özgürlüğün doğa kavrayışıyla kayıtlı olduğu vurgulandı ve özgürlük sorunsalının ancak dönemin ‘doğa’ kavrayışının değerlendirilmesiyle ele alınabileceği ileri sürüldü. (shrink)

Bien que Heidegger ne soit l’auteur d’aucune philosophie de la nature au sens que Kant, Hegel ou Schelling donnèrent à cette expression, il définit néanmoins le philosopher, et plus largement tout logos, comme une pensée de la nature, faisant un avec la nature, voire s’identifiant à elle. Heidegger puise le sens de la nature comme uni-totalité des étants mondains, telle que la rassemble, la recueille et la sauvegarde le logos non seulement chez Aristote, mais encore et surtout chez Héraclite. Sa (...) philosophie est en effet hantée par sa lecture rémanente de la phusis d’Héraclite. La libre interprétation que Heidegger donne de la nature héraclitéenne (laquelle aime à se cacher), qu’elle soit ou non fidèle à la philologie et à la langue grecque archaïque, puise du moins son originalité dans la mise au jour d’un double processus de voilement-dévoilement, qui est à la fois celui du logos et celui de l’être en son rapport aux étants, c’est-à-dire le mouvement général même par lequel la nature se manifeste en se retirant. (shrink)

Neste artigo, tenciono mostrar que é impossível concluir, como fez André Grabar, que há uma mudança da atitude de Plotino em relação à obra de arte. Plotino coloca sob o vocábulo tékhne toda uma série de atividades humanas associando artes, ofícios e inclusive ciências que não apresentam nenhum traço comum além daquele da competência. Além do mais, a tékhne não é associada à produção artística. Enfim, em Plotino assim como em Platão, a natureza precede sempre a tékhne; com efeito, somente (...) a natureza tem uma ação espontânea, contínua e dispensadora de vida e de potência. (shrink)

Division III of Being and Time (BT) was supposed to address the question of the sense of being. Being and its sense are in question because while we do understand being, it is also strangely withheld from us. That we understand being is evidenced by the fact that we have access to what and that things are (rather than not); that being is withheld from us is evidenced by the fact that we do not seem to be able to articulate (...) what it is that we grasp in this. Being is both given to us and withheld from us. To be given yet withheld is to be question-worthy—and it is also to be the proper object of phenomenology (BT 35). Being is the phenomenon: that which shows itself (phainomenon) (BT 31) but also needs to be “let be seen” (legein) (BT 32). To make sense of being is to make sense of both how it shows itself and how it hides itself. -/- Division I explains how being shows itself by, first, explaining how we discover entities in their being and, second, explicating the structure of our openness to being (i.e., disclosedness). The next step should be to explain how being hides itself—the phenomenon that Heidegger sometimes calls “falling.” But Heidegger does not do this. He is distracted by a different (albeit related) phenomenon: inauthenticity. By pursuing authenticity and inauthenticity throughout §40 and the so-called existentialist chapters in Division II, Heidegger does give us important insight into the riskiness and fragility of our relationship to being. But he does not capture the finitude that he should be aiming at: the withholding of being. Lacking this, Heidegger does not have our finite openness to being fully in view. As a result, the structure of the temporality that he draws out accounts for our openness to being but not for the finitude of this openness. This finitude is not a mere limitation on our part—it is not just that we don’t fully “get” being. It belongs to how being works that it withholds itself from us and so makes itself question-worthy. So, if Heidegger’s goal in Division III is to show how being makes sense, then he will need to make sense of this fundamental feature of being. It is, if nothing else, the feature that sparked his investigation. But because he lost sight of the withholding of being at the end of Division I, Heidegger is not in a position to make sense of being in Division III. -/- By the time he starts working seriously with the notion of phusis in the 1930s, Heidegger has reoriented himself to the phenomenon of being’s withholding. By approaching BT from the perspective of Heidegger’s work in this period, then, we can see more clearly what BT accomplished and where it veered off course. I will do this by interpreting Heidegger’s reading (in Introduction to Metaphysics [IM]) of the opening strophes of the choral ode from Sophocles’ Antigone. On Heidegger’s ontological reading, these strophes show us the various features of being by speaking of the natural world: being is understood as the sea, the earth, and the living thing. I will argue that BT illuminates being as the living thing and being as the earth, and in this explains how being is given to us. But BT falters when it tries to reach being as the sea. The sea is an image of being’s simultaneous granting and withholding. Because Heidegger has not thought being’s withholding in Divisions I and II, he cannot go on to make sense of this withholding as simultaneous with being’s granting in Division III. In short, Heidegger should have thought being as the sea in Division III, but he cannot. (shrink)

This chapter contains sections titled: Introduction Phusis and Nomos Political Justice Psychic Justice Just Action.

Si la notion de « préindividuel » fait figure de nouveauté lexicale par rapport au vocabulaire de la métaphysique traditionnelle, et se présente ainsi comme une idée « neuve » à partir de laquelle Gilbert Simondon prétend rompre avec toute une tradition de pensée de l’individuation, celui-ci se réfère pourtant à plusieurs reprises pour en expliciter le sens aux notions d’apeiron et de phusis présocratiques. Cependant, c’est en s’appuyant également sur la notion de « métastabilité », qu’il emprunte à (...) la thermodynamique des états loin de l’équilibre, que Simondon confère à l’idée de « préindividuel » une signification originale. Il s’agira d’abord de comprendre comment s’inscrit dans la construction de l’hypothèse simondonienne ce retour à la pensée présocratique, avant de nous interroger sur les fondements de la méthode qui consiste à « actualiser » l’idée d’un état de l’être antérieur à toute forme individuée en empruntant des notions et des paradigmes aux sciences positives qui cherchent à théoriser les processus de transformation et de changement d’état de systèmes. Le but de cet examen est de questionner la légitimité d’une démarche analogique qui prétend faire bénéficier la réflexion métaphysique du développement des sciences, et de montrer dans quelle mesure la méthode « transductive » de construction de l’idée de préindividuel échappe au double écueil qui consisterait soit à s’en tenir à un usage métaphorique des schèmes de pensée scientifiques, soit à verser dans une forme de positivisme réductionniste. (shrink)

Both Heraclitus and Democritus, as the philosophers of historia peri phuseôs, consider nature and human character, habit, law and soul as interrelated emphasizing the links between phusis, kinesis, ethos, logos, kresis, nomos and daimon. On the one hand, Heraclitus’s principle of change (panta rhei) and his emphasis on the element of fire and cosmic motion ultimately dominate his ethics reinforcing his ideas of change, moderation, balance and justice, on the other, Democritus’s atomist description of phusis and motion underlies (...) his principle of moderation and his ideas of health and measured life. In this series, particularly referring to the main principles of motion, moderation and justice, I attempt to describe a coherent pre-Socratic ethical perspective based on the Heraclitean and Democritean fragments. I explore the connections between their physics and ethics also borrowing from Nietzsche’s lectures and writings on the Pre-Socratics. I redefine such Heraclitean and Democritean concepts as harmony, order, perfection, health, self-control, contentment, cheerfulness, concord, sound judgment, wisdom, measure and balance and discuss them under the principles of motion (phusis), moderation (sophrosyne) and justice. In doing so, I also expose the relevance of the Heraclitean notion of logos (interpreting it as the underlying categorical principle of transition between phusis and ethos) in bringing together these ideas and principles. Finally, based on this pre-Socratic Weltanschauung, I assess the possibility of a coherent picture of humanity, its nature and conduct as extending from or fitting into or extending-from-when-fitting-into the cosmos of moving forces and atoms. (shrink)

Some artworks are called sublime because of their capacity to move human imagination in a different way than the experience of beauty. The following discussion explores how Van Gogh’s The Starry Night along with some of his other late landscape paintings accomplish this peculiar movement of imagination thus qualifying as sublime artworks. These artworks constitute examples of the higher aesthetic principles and must be judged according to the cosmological-aesthetic criteria for they manage to generate a transition between ethos and (...) class='Hi'>phusis and present them in unity. Here, referring to Heraclitean, Kantian, Nietzschean and Heideggerian metaphysics and aesthetics, I propose that the principles of motion and transition be the new cosmologic-aesthetic categories for the judgment of sublime artworks as well as for the understanding of the world (Weltanschauung) they represent. (shrink)

It is often assumed that science provides the most accurate knowledge about nature. This view not only collapses distinctions between different forms of knowing but also results in a paradox whereby understanding what it means to exist in the world is dictated by practioners of science. In this essay I argue for the relevance of an existential conception of nature via the philosophy of Martin Heidegger, and how his notions of thrownness and phusis enable us to recognize a certain (...) ethical bond to nature. I conclude with a critical analysis of liability insurance and actuarial science to demonstrate my points. (shrink)

Phusis, Aletheia, Khreon, Moira, Logos: tels sont les Grundworte, ces paroles fondamentales qui inaugurerent notre destin, et dont Heidegger devoile le double statut: ouvrant le commencement, elles abritent l'origine; donnant le branle a l'histoire manifeste de la pensee, elles restent en meme temps porteuses de son versant secret, et toujours oublie. C'est ce versant secret qui est ici explore, faisant de ce livre la patiente reconstitution du texte de l'origine. Texte essentiel, puisque ce n'est que lorsqu'il est retabli que (...) notre histoire, enfin rendue a elle-meme, peut trouver sa cloture; que la question de l'etre, enfin pensee comme question, peut etre abandonnee. C'est dire que l'oeuvre heideggerienne connait un double tournant: le premier permet a la pensee de s'engager dans la question de l'etre comme histoire; le second lui permet de se degager de cette meme question, et de clore l'histoire. De ces deux ruptures, l'une precoce et assez generalement reconnue, est celle de la Kehre, l'autre, tardive et plus meconnue, est celle de l'Ereignis. (shrink)

There is prima facie evidence that Theophrastus naturalized nous to the extent that he spoke of it in naturalizing terms. But our evidence also suggests that Theophrastus accepted the reasons Aristotle had for excluding nous from the reach of natural philosophy. We show that, far from revealing an inconsistency on Theophrastus’ part, this apparent tension results from a consciously adopted strategy. Theophrastus is developing one aspect of Aristotle’s account of nous he found underdeveloped and feared might be misunderstood, namely the (...) infrangible organic unity of the whole human being, including its nous. That is why he insists that nous, although ‘from outside,’ is ‘grown together’ with us, why he speaks of it as a nature (phusis), and why he insists that thought is a motion (kinêsis). We show how these striking claims can be understood against the broader background of Theophrastus’ natural philosophy. (shrink)

This paper enhances postnatural environmentalism (represented by Steven Vogel) by highlighting and incorporating selected concepts from Martin Heidegger's ontology. In particular, I examine Heidegger's detailed analysis of the affinity between phusis and techne, the critique of ‘replaceability’, the problem of ‘proper use’, and his earlier concept of a tool structure. This analysis is aimed at grounding the metaphysical and ethical significance of technical artefacts. It shows that Heidegger can support postnatural environmentalism's claim that artefacts should not be jettisoned by (...) environmental thinking because that leads to reckless treatment of them. Exploration of these issues also contributes to environmental interpretations of Heidegger's philosophical legacy, which were limited to natural beings. (shrink)

Can on-line ‘place-based learning’ be more than a facsimile or ritual? Using a phenomenology of my pandemic practice, I investigate the meaning of ‘place-based learning:’ entertaining Aristotle’s seminal thought on place as a container to venture into contemporary phenomenological inquiries where places and things are not only conceptually implicated by each other, but immanent and potentially powerful elements in learning experiences. Bonnett’s (2021) ecologizing of education shows that authentic forms must be embodied and emplaced in order to open learners to (...) the more in situ, deeply-contextualized and yet ‘transcendental’ and ‘ecstatic’ reception of the more-than-human realm of nature (as what comes-forth, phusis). But this Heideggerian narrative with which I resonate poses challenges for students and place-based educators. Wittgenstein’s philosophical approach, itself modelled on place-based investigation of language (our ‘home city’), draws me back from metaphysical inclinations to dwell constructively on ordinary discourses rooted in educational practices. (shrink)

The present essay formulates a phytocentric alternative to the biocentric and zoocentric critiques of anthropocentrism. Treating phuton—the Greek for “plant,” also meaning “growing being”—as a concrete entry point into the world of phusis , I situate the intersecting trajectories and communities of growth at the center of environmental theory and praxis. I explore the potential of phytocentrism for the “greening” of human consciousness brought back to its vegetal roots, as well as for tackling issues related, among others, to the (...) use of biotechnologies and dietary ethics. (shrink)

This paper addresses a difficult passage from Aristotle’s Metaphysics (V. 4, 1015a11-13) in which he identifies a metaphorical use of the term “nature” (phusis) to refer to the entities which he calls “substances” (ousiai). I claim that the passage at stake deploys the very notion of metaphor on the basis of an analogy (as defined in the Poetics and in the Rhetorics), which is grounded on a weak (and, sometimes, very weak) similarity between two relations (each involving two relata). (...) The sentences found in 1015a11-13 belong to those kind of metalinguistic sentences which we usually employ to shed some light on the metaphorical use of a term. The similarity Aristotle is presupposing is this: both nature and substance are, in their respective fields, some kind of principle that guarantees (besides other things) certain persistence conditions for what they are the principles of. And this weak similarity is enough for the term “nature” to refer metaphorically to substances. (shrink)

This article evaluates the success of Reiner Schürmann’s reading of Cicero in Broken Hegemonies. It examines his reading phusis/natura, the divine mind and natural law, the “natural birth of the city,” and universal/(normative) singular dichotomies in the presentation of the “Latin fantasm” Cicero’s work allegedly represents. Offering a closer reading of Cicero, specifically his De Legibus, De Re Publica and De Officiis, this article will show that Cicero does not represent the Latin fantasm in any clear and compelling way. (...) In particular, the “law of nature” in Cicero is not hegemonic in the way that Schürmann insists it is. (shrink)

The concept of nature (Gr. phúsis; Ar. ṭabīʿa) lies at the heart of classical physics. Seemingly small differences about nature can blossom into significant disagreements. The present study offers an exposition of certain neglected passages concerning ṭabīʿa in Ibn Sīnā’s al-Samāʿ al-ṭabīʿī(The Physics of the Healing). The pre­dominant view of ṭabīʿa is that it as an active principle, a concep­tion of nature that radically departs from Aristotle’s account of phúsis in Physics I-II. I dispute this interpretation by investigat­ing two neglected (...) texts in the Physics of the Healing. First, these texts indicate that nature should be associated with matter and form (I, 6) and, second, they argue that failing to account for matter and form makes knowledge of nature incomplete (I, 9). (shrink)

Nietzsche kritikuoja religines gamtos (Natur) interpretacijas ir pasisako už „žmonijos natūralizaciją“. Sąvokos „gamta“ ar „prigimtis“ (Natur) Nietzschės darbuose neturi aiškaus, sisteminio apibrėžimo, todėl jų interpretacijos šio filosofo tyrimuose yra prieštaringos. Išryškėja dvi priešingos perspektyvos: Vanessa Lemm gamtą interpretuoja kaip dionisišką chaosą, skatinantį emancipacinį vyraujančių idėjų atmetimą, o Costinas Alamariu – kaip aristokratišką phusis, ugdančią aukštesnius žmogiškuosius tipus. Šiame straipsnyje teigiama, kad šie iš pirmo žvilgsnio prieštaringi požiūriai yra suderinami. Nietzsche pasitelkia gamtos kaip chaoso sampratą kritikuoti antropocentristines pažiūras, pristatydamas gamtos (...) supratimo, atsieto nuo žmogiškos perspektyvos, galimybę. Darbe analizuojama ir kritikuojama Lemm šios koncepcijos iliustracija pasitelkiant lyčių skirtumus. Galiausiai, teigiama, jog Alamariu interpretacija atitinka vėlesnius, Nietzschės tyrinėjimuose dažnai ignoruojamus, pozityvius šio filosofo etinius-politinius siekius, susijusius su aukštesnių žmogiškųjų tipų ugdymu. (shrink)

Cette dimension d’immensité est la première qui me vient à l’esprit, dès lors qu’il est question d’aborder la nature. Nature est un mot qui avait presque disparu, de l’université en tout cas. À partir de lectures hâtives, de Foucault notamment, on en était arrivé à ne plus voir dans la nature que l’illusion voire le fantasme d’une originarité perdue. Or cela, je ne l’ai jamais pensé, je ne l’ai jamais cru, j’ai toujours pensé, au contraire, qu’avec phusis et bios, (...) nous avions un infini de la... (shrink)

This chapter contains section titled: Mapping out the Problem: The “Old Oligarch” Modern and Ancient Quandaries The Challenge of Thrasymachus and Callicles Thucydidean Imperialists Revisit Nomos and Phusis Socrates and Nomos Logos and Ergon Democratic Epistemology and Relativism Democratic Epistemology and Untrustworthy Rhetoric ‐ or, Where Does the Truth Lie? Socrates and Athens.

In lieu of an abstract, here is a brief excerpt of the content:Reviewed by:The Self and Its Body in Hegel’s Phenomenology of Spirit by John RussonRobert BermanJohn Russon. The Self and Its Body in Hegel’s Phenomenology of Spirit. Toronto: University of Toronto Press, 1997. Pp. xv + 199. Cloth, $60.00To intoduce his account of the human body, Russon places two epigraphs at the front of his book, one from Diogenes Laertius, the other from Artaud. The first tells of Zeno, seeking (...) the oracle’s counsel about how best to live and advised to “mix his flesh with corpses.” What sounds like a recommendation to practice necrophilia, Zeno cleverly interprets to mean that he ought to spend his life reading old books. The second likens culture to a new bodily organ, radicalizing Merleau-Ponty’s view that the blind man’s cane is an extension of his body. Diogenes’ anecdote and the surrealist’s aphorism extend the conception of the human body beyond its ordinary boundary. Literally, Artaud’s culture is no bodily organ, nor is Zeno’s hermeneutically active mind a body which, flouting the law, mixes with the corpus of ancient authors, and experiences, at one Phaedrus-like remove, forbidden pleasures of dialectics.If Russon is a Zenonic reader and Hegel an ancient, then his book enacts the oracle’s advice correctly spun. However, it is clear, despite its title, that this is not Russon’s only aim. At the outset Russon distinguishes his project from that of Hegel’s 1807 Phenomenology of Spirit (PS); whereas Hegel presents the experience of consciousness, Russon’s project is to develop a “phenomenology of the body” or “science of the embodiment of consciousness” (3), whose central concepts are the “three logical determinations of … phusis, hexis, and logos” (8). Despite this contrast, Russon claims to follow the method he takes Hegel to have adopted in PS, intending “by rigorous argument to comprehend … the human body” (3), to “display the self-development of the internal dynamism of the concept of the body” (4). Yet, while initially insisting on the difference between his and Hegel’s projects, he actually holds that PS is “implicitly” such a phenomenology of the body; hence, he wants to extract from it “the philosophy of the body that is there implied” (3) and to show how it rationally comprehends human embodiment. If making the implicit explicit describes the work of interpretation, then his book is as much an essay in Hegel interpretation as it is a self-standing phenomenology of the body. Russon mixes his interpretive with his Hegelian systematic aim, but these are distinct, and he grants the latter priority. If one rejects his interpretive claim about Hegel’s project, Russon’s systematic claims about the body should remain unaffected, and assessable in their own right, even if not implicit in PS. What are these claims?Russon’s central gambit is to understand the human body in terms of embodiment, and embodiment in turn via the activities of the self-conscious self. Since he argues that these activities essentially involve recognition, thus are inherently social, the “whole [End Page 636] functioning world of social, cultural life will have to be recognized as the body of the properly human self,” while the natural body “of mere human life” is “not yet the body of the human proper” (9). Accordingly, Russon organizes his systematic claims about the human body into three parts: A. treats propaedeutically the “Hegelian concept of self-conscious selfhood” (8), B. handles the body as social institution; and C. deals with the culminating “absolution of the body” in which the self knows itself in its embodiment as self-conscious self.Russon’s project prompts questions about his Hegel interpretation and his conception of the human body. PS is skeptical, but preparatory: its immanent critique of interrelated knowledge claims serves to expose and undermine the principle of the opposition of consciousness which they assume; acceptance of that principle, Hegel argues, is the chief obstacle blocking the way to systematic philosophical knowledge, precisely because it leaves philosophy defenseless against skeptical challenges to the very possibility of such knowledge. This construal of PS conflicts with Russon’s interpretive claim that it is implicitly a science of the... (shrink)

This essay explores Heidegger’s “The Origin of the Work of Art” and Andrew Goldsworthy’s artworks. Both Heidegger and Goldsworthy can be seen as refashioning our ontological bearings towards nature through the work of art. After introducing a set of distinctions (e.g., world/earth) in the context of Heidegger’s conception of the artwork as the event of truth, I argue that Heidegger’s releasing of the work of art from metaphysical notions of “the thing” illuminates the ambiguous status of Goldsworthy’s artworks as things. (...) Goldsworthy’s crafting of artworks from natural materials exemplifies Heidegger’s concept of technē as the bringing forth of a work in the midst of phūsis, or beings that arise of their own accord. (shrink)

El propósito de este trabajo es ofrecer una reconstrucción de los usos que se pueden encontrar de la analogía entre phúsis y tékhne en el libro II de la Física de Aristóteles. Intentaré mostrar que el filósofo griego recurre a ella con fines tanto ilustrativos como argumentativos, lo cual revela una visión muy original acerca del orden de la realidad. En aras de atender a lo propuesto, explicaré primero el uso de la analogía que aparece en el contexto de la (...) definición de la naturaleza. En segundo lugar, revisaré los pasajes en los que nuestro autor aclara los sentidos en los que cabe hablar de la noción de phúsis y, finalmente, presentaré el uso de la comparación mencionada en la argumentación de Física II 8, en donde Aristóteles defiende la existencia de causas finales en la naturaleza. (shrink)

I want to take up some of the most familiar texts in Aristotle, and I want to approach them in what I think is an Aristotelian fashion, but the conclusions I will reach are not, I think, the familiar ones. I will begin, in Section 1, with Aristotle’s conception of phusis—of nature—and lead from here into a discussion of the nature of life, which will lead us to the themes of soul and body. I will find the principle of (...) desire to be the core of phusis, and I will produce from this analysis a doctrine of self-moving wholes which actively organize relations of opposite bodies according to a desire for self-maintenance. I will then move, in Section 2, to Aristotle’s discussion of epagoge—induction—in the last chapter of the Posterior Analytics and argue for the empirical and conceptual accuracy of his account of the development of cognitive capacities. I will conclude by showing how the logical relations which characterize a situation of knowing as described in the Posterior Analytics are precisely the relations which we will already have seen to characterize a situation of life in Section 1. This will allow us to draw the conclusion, in Section 3, that knowing is a kind of bringing to life of a situation and I will discuss the situation which best exemplifies this, and also how we should try to understand the significance of this. In general, I think that recent moves in philosophy have allowed us to appreciate for the first time the significance of Aristotle’s philosophy, and this account of Aristotle’s animative epistemology should tie in nicely with modern discussions about emergence, interpretation, and other themes. I begin, then, with the basic story of what there is in the world. (shrink)

La pace non e un argomento ma un sogno evolutivo della coscienza umana. Un sogno timido che sopravvive al dramma della storia e alle sue smentite piu derisorie. Un sogno che e cruciale custodire, dunque, come gesto di resistenza a fronte del cinismo di ogni epoca e in particolar modo davanti alle derive piu subdole e inquietanti della contemporaneita. Un'esplorazione evocativa dei quattro modi in cui l'umanita, da sempre e non senza contraddizioni, prova a sognare la pace: attraverso la natura (...) (phusis), il pensiero (logos), la legge (nomos), l'amore (eros). Quattro dimensioni esistenziali che l'autrice sorvola in compagnia di alcune figure della filosofia, del mito, della letteratura, della poesia, della psicoanalisi e della storia che hanno rappresentato, nella sua esperienza autobiografica, una fonte generosa di fiducia e orientamento. Muovendo dall'intuizione comune a tante saggezze secondo cui la vera pace non elude la tragedia umana ma la denuncia e la interroga, il libro ci conduce in un viaggio meditativo che costeggia, senza negarlo, l'abisso della distruttivita, sia sul piano individuale sia su quello sociale e collettivo. L'abisso nel quale ripetutamente sprofonda il sogno di vivere insieme e amichevolmente su questa Terra. Ma proprio a partire da questa confidenza con la tragicita della vicenda umana si dipana quel filo sottile dell'etica che e risorsa elettiva della sensibilita femminile e che riconduce l'intelligenza all'intimita con la vita. E il sogno desto della pace, per desiderare ancora.". (shrink)

A ‘pious pessimism’ pervaded much of archaic Greek poetry: ‘It is for the gods to know and men merely to opine’ was the prevailing sentiment. However, in the late 6th century a set of independent-minded individuals began to move away from the older pessimism to embrace a more optimistic and secular outlook. In various ways they maintained that mere mortals could, if they were prepared to undertake the appropriate inquiries, achieve a clear and sure understanding of the entire cosmos. Heraclitus (...) and Parmenides offered the most detailed lines of investigation, but both Pythagoras and Empedocles presented themselves as savants able and willing to impart their wisdom to all those prepared to listen to and embrace their teachings. Among the most important elements in this transition were the concepts of phusis or the essential nature of a th’ing, and the logos or rational account in which that nature could be formulated. -/- . (shrink)

Heidegger’s discussion about the rise of the arbitrary power of “machination” in his late 1930s writings does not just echo his well-known later thinking on technology, but also affords a profound insight to the ontological mechanism of oblivion behind the history of Western thinking of being. The paper shows how this rise of the coercive power of ordering signifies an emergence of historically and spatially significant moment of completion: outgrowth of the early Greek notions of tekhne and phusis in (...) terms of globally expanding systems of calculative orderings. The paper thus aims to show how the condition of machination marks a fundamental implementation of the hidden consummation of the mechanism of oblivion now being re-adopted into the operational clarity of calculative rationality. It is argued that the rise of machination became possible through the historical process of replacing the early Greek disposition of existence, the wonder, with calculative rationality of ordering. (shrink)

In this paper, I will discuss the need for a theory of essences within Object-Oriented Ontology (OOO) and then formulate one. I will do so by drawing on Graham Harman’s work on OOO and Martin Heidegger’s thought on the essence of being, presented in his Introduction to Metaphysics. Harman touches on essences, describing them as the tension between a withdrawn object and its withdrawn qualities, but fails to distinguish between essential and inessential qualities within this framework. To fill in the (...) gaps, I will turn to Heidegger’s explication of phusis in order to show that an essential aspect of being is how one enters into causal relations and continually reveals oneself to other beings. In bringing OOO and Heidegger together, I will find that each object has a unique way of exerting itself in the world and that the domestic relations that make up this unique profile are essential to it, while other domestic relations, those that do not influence its particular way of exerting itself, are inessential. Thus, the essence will be found to be the set of domestic relations that make up the determinate form, or unique causal profile, of the object. (shrink)