WHY DO WE CARE ABOUT POST‐HUMANISM? A CRITICAL NOTE

What is disclosed in the questioning of the human being in post‐humanism? Addressing this question in congruence with Heidegger's questioning of being in Being and Time, we end up with two discoveries: first, that the characteristic of Dasein, as the being of the questioning, already carries the same implications as the post‐human figure, and second, that questioning in this sense is indicative of the effort of realizing anew scientific space for conceptualizing the human being as non‐substantialist. Conceived of in this way, however, post‐humanism is a result of a very human effort indeed.     

LÖWITH,LÖWITH'S HEIDEGGER,AND THE UNITY OF HISTORY

This article is about the problem of the unity of history as seen through the writings of Karl Löwith. By “unity of history” I understand the notion that all history constitutes one and only one range of kinds of objects and/or one field of knowledge. The article argues that the problem of the unity of history—though often neglected as a matter of mere argumentative infrastructure—is central to a number of wider problems, most prominently the possibility of a plural understanding of historicity and the possibility of ultimately avoiding a unified historical teleology. The article revisits Löwith's writings and proposes a variety of novel interpretations with the aim of evincing the centrality, and of exploring diverse aspects, of the problematic of the unity of history. This problematic is shown to have informed Löwith's work on the secularization thesis as well as his debate with Hans Blumenberg. The foundations of Löwith's discussion of the problem are pursued across his ambivalent critique and appropriation of Heidegger's model of an ontology of historicity as marked by inevitable internal conflict and thus disunity. The paper reconstructs the manner in which, after the Second World War, Löwith's philosophy of history sought to salvage basic traits of the Heideggerian model when it tried to establish the possibility of plural historicity from a notion of the natural cosmos. It is demonstrated that the motives for this salvage operation ultimately extended beyond the problem of Löwith's reception of Heidegger and concerned the possibility of continuing any debate on the philosophy of history.     

Democratic Civility and the Dangers of Niceness

Contemporary debates about the virtue of civility oscillate between anxious calls for more of it in contemporary politics, as a panacea for all manner of religious-political conflict, and wholesale debunkings of civility talk, as an ideological fog intended to induce conformity to the terms of unjust social arrangements. I argue that this oscillation should come as no surprise, given the term's fraught theological and political associations in the history of modern ethical thought. This history left civility with an ambivalent legacy, one associated with democratic respect on the one hand, and hypocrisy and deception, on the other. Through a reading of Martin Luther King Jr.’s “Letter from Birmingham Jail,” I try to rescue civility from this oscillation, by explicating it as an ancillary virtue: the part of justice that disposes citizens to confront unjust relationships in ways that leave open the possibility of relational repair. When explicated with due care and set in an interactive context of other virtues – including courage, prudence and toleration – civility can be distinguished from its semblance, niceness. This distinction helps us understand civility, properly understood, as neither a cure-all for democratic conflict nor an ideological device of conflict suppression, but rather as an ancillary, but important, excellence of character helping to sustain democratic relationships of mutual recognition.     

Heidegger's Pragmatism: Understanding,being, and the critique of metaphysics

In many ways, the 1707 Act of Union encouraged various practices of literary nation-building and the search for authentic ’British’ voices. In their desire to assert the politeness of this newly constituted British identity, writers such as Joseph Addison, Thomas Blackwell and James Macpherson shared a preoccupation with a quality which Addison termed ‘majestick Simplicity’. The implicit codification of polite manners and taste in the Spectator might at first appear to contradict this literary fascination with the search for exemplars of native British simplicity. This article explores the continuity of these concerns in the writings of Addison, Blackwell and Macpherson, suggesting some of the ways that authenticity and politeness exerted conflicting demands on the eighteenth-century literary culture of Britishness.     

From Berlin to Beijing

In late 1900, while foreign troops occupied Beijing in the wake of the Boxer Rebellion, alarming news reached the German government from China: High-quality works of art were on sale in Beijing and would soon be displayed in museums in London and Paris without having a comparable display in Berlin. The Ethnological Museum in Berlin immediately sent the Orientalist Friedrich Wilhelm Karl Müller (1863–1930) as an envoy to Beijing to buy works of art. Müller was in Beijing between 6 April and 13 September 1901. This article contains a partially annotated translation of Müller’s report, including his packing lists of 117 crates he sent to Berlin in 1901. The original German text is included as an addendum.     

THE DIALECTICS OF JAMESON'S DIALECTICS

This review essay attempts to understand the book under review against the background of Jameson's previous writings. Failing to do so would invite misunderstanding since there are few contemporary theorists whose writing forms so much of a unity. Jameson's book can be divided into three parts. The first and most important part deals with dialectics, the second with politics, and the third with philosophy of history. In the first part Jameson argues that dialectics best captures our relationship to the sociocultural and historical world we are living in. The second part makes clear that Jameson is not prepared to water down his own Marxist politics in order to spare the liberal sensibilities of his political opponents. In the third part Jameson develops his own philosophy of history, mainly in a dialogue with Ricoeur. Dialectics is his main weapon in his discussion with Ricoeur, and it becomes clear that the Spinozism of dialectics allows for a better understanding of history and of historical writing than does Ricoeur's phenomenological approach. The book is an impressive testimony to the powers of dialectical thought and to its indispensability for a proper grasp of historical writing.     

三杨庄聚落遗址与汉代户籍问题

三杨庄聚落遗址发现的庭院内的房屋建筑,符合汉代一般民户建筑的"一堂二内"的记载,也与汉代"五口之家"的家庭规模相适应;张家山汉简《二年律令·户律》规定"一宅"的面积是"大方卅步",约相当于今天1700多平方米。三杨庄聚落遗址中庭院面积近2000平方米,基本符合《二年律令·户律》中普通民户"一宅"的面积。这表明汉代关于住宅大小的规定,可能是一项长期实行的比较稳定的制度。汉代人所抨击的"田宅逾制"问题,是说"田"、"宅"都不能"逾制",其中"宅"的面积大小的规定必定是长期存在的;三杨庄庭院遗址,可能就是《二年律令·户律》中"民宅园户籍"中"宅园"的真实再现,"民宅园户籍"应是记载民户家庭人口情况、住宅及其附属物"园"情况的综合簿籍。     

Economic Imperialism and Financial Citizenship: Reconsidering British Subjectivity in Martin Chuzzlewit and Lawrie Todd

During the tumultuous time of financial and colonial expansion between 1825 and 1855, both Charles Dickens and John Galt published picaresque novels depicting transatlantic travel and land speculation. If emigration is the act of permanently leaving one's homeland and living in another, then neither novels' eponymous protagonist Martin Chuzzlewit nor Lawrie Todd is an emigrant. By reading Martin Chuzzlewit (1843–44) and John Galt's Lawrie Todd (1830) alongside nineteenth-century developments of the geo-political and financial spheres, this article shows how these works form a counter-narrative to traditional novels of emigration. Both protagonists leave Britain with the explicit intent to seek their fortune in America through engagement with land speculation companies. Though the characters' experiences of transatlantic financial speculation is dichotomous (with Todd becoming rich and Chuzzlewit losing all he has), both characters ultimately return to Britain. In these counter-narratives, we argue that America is deployed as Britain's financial periphery, rather than an alternative imperial centre, working to entrench British nationalism through transatlantic financial speculation. It is through the act of returning from America that Dickens and Galt counter typified emigration narratives that represent the choice to emigrate to America as synonymous with abandoning the Empire for the ‘Great Republic’. Instead, Dickens and Galt show how America can be exploited as a financial extension of Empire where Britons can maintain national loyalty while simultaneously responding to an unstable global financial market that was increasingly dependent upon speculation and foreign investment practices.     

Solomon’s Table Talk: Martin Luther on the Authorship of Ecclesiastes

ABSTRACT

Martin Luther’s comments in a section of Table Talk continue to be used as evidence that he denied the Solomonic authorship of Ecclesiastes. A comparison of the passage with Luther’s “Preface” to Jesus Sirach demonstrates that the majority of Luther’s comments in that section of Table Talk pertain to Sirach. However, the passage also has clear parallels in Luther’s “Preface to Solomon’s ‘The Preacher,’” suggesting that it is a mixture of Luther’s comments on Ecclesiastes and Sirach. The portions of Table Talk which do pertain to Ecclesiastes have commonly been misinterpreted. Luther does not deny that Solomon was the author of Ecclesiastes; he denies that Solomon was the scribe. He thought that Ecclesiastes was written down by students on the basis of the oral teachings of their master, much like his own Table Talk.