A subreddit for really great, insightful articles and discussion. Please follow the sub's rules and reddiquette, read the article before posting, voting, or commenting, and use the report button if you see something that doesn't belong.
Maxwellsdemon17
u/Maxwellsdemon17
Intelligent and thought-provoking commentaries on life and culture with an emphasis on longform articles and essays that stimulate intellectual discourse.
Forum for economy, business, politics, stocks, bonds, product releases, IPOs, advice, news, investment, videos, predictions, government, money, politics, debate, capitalism, current trends, and more.
A subreddit for really great, insightful articles and discussion. Please follow the sub's rules and reddiquette, read the article before posting, voting, or commenting, and use the report button if you see something that doesn't belong.
A subreddit for really great, insightful articles and discussion. Please follow the sub's rules and reddiquette, read the article before posting, voting, or commenting, and use the report button if you see something that doesn't belong.
Phenomenology’s First Lady: Hedwig Conrad-Martius and Phenomenological Realism
"So, in conclusion, given the resurgent interest in her thought, what can Conrad-Martius provide contemporary readers and scholars? Why ought we to look towards a forgotten twentieth-century phenomenologist beyond simply filling in the cracks of the history of continental thought? First and foremost, I would say that, with the possible exceptions of Edith Stein, Dietrich von Hildebrand, and Roman Ingarden, she had the longest, most prolific, and, overall, most consistent body of work of any early phenomenologist. Her defense of phenomenological realism is rigorous and pointed, explicitly defending the method in a way rarely seen outside the likes of her teacher Reinach. Additionally, from a historical perspective, her work offers a very compelling realist response to Heidegger’s phenomenological ontology. She utilizes many of the same concepts and realms of concern such as Being itself, the world, the abyss, etc. and as such, it is worth comparing closely their respective analyses. This reaches a deeper point regarding the significance of objectivity and the tenuous relationship between metaphysics and phenomenology. Conrad-Martius, as we have seen, was anxious about the implications of an overreliance on subjectivity which risks losing the world. As much of today’s world becomes digitized, compartmentalized on social media—and as the very notions of truth, fiction, and reality become blurred—Conrad-Martius offers a persuasive alternative to keep ourselves grounded on the firm bedrock of our being. Her “rediscovery” in the last five years gives us the opportunity to revisit an all too neglected philosophy that is just waiting to be mined for its invaluable insights."
A subreddit for really great, insightful articles and discussion. Please follow the sub's rules and reddiquette, read the article before posting, voting, or commenting, and use the report button if you see something that doesn't belong.
Welcome to the subreddit for the study of the history of ideas, including the histories of philosophy, of literature and the arts, of the natural and social sciences, of religion, and of political thought!
A subreddit for really great, insightful articles and discussion. Please follow the sub's rules and reddiquette, read the article before posting, voting, or commenting, and use the report button if you see something that doesn't belong.
A subreddit for really great, insightful articles and discussion. Please follow the sub's rules and reddiquette, read the article before posting, voting, or commenting, and use the report button if you see something that doesn't belong.
Welcome to the Anderscene
"I want to try and read Anders in a new context, not atomic war, but dangerous climate change, or, what has been called—incorrectly—the Anthropocene. What happens if we switch out the word “atom” for “climate” in his texts? What does “End times or time of the end” look like when it is not (only) the bomb but pandemics, water scarcity, deforestation, and global heating that pose major threats to a flourishing human civilization? How should we read The Obsolescence of Human Beings today, nearly seventy years after the first volume, in which current technological developments have eclipsed whatever Anders already thought then was a sign of total domination? Do we still experience Promethean shame, or have we now become shameless? Anders’s reflection on the atomic inauguration of a real apocalyptic era, one which rendered humanity perpetually at the edge of extinction, was tied to a specific Cold War context in which mutually assured destruction kept apocalypse permanently at the door. The atomic threat has by no means gone away—perhaps it is closer than ever before, given the number of nuclear-powered states currently at war—but we are so used to it now that it doesn’t really register as a concern in everyday consciousness. What has changed since Anders’s time is not simply the increased quantity of planetary threats but the new quality of them as well. We live not in a post-apocalyptic world but a poly-apocalyptic one, where catastrophe no longer takes the form of a singular event in time but that of time’s unfolding itself. The slow creep of heat, of drought, of species loss, of plagues, of storms, floods, air pollution, and soil degradation is regularly punctuated by extreme interruptions that remind us of the downward slope we are on. Let us see if Anders can help us navigate this runway of despair."
A subreddit for really great, insightful articles and discussion. Please follow the sub's rules and reddiquette, read the article before posting, voting, or commenting, and use the report button if you see something that doesn't belong.