81.
|
Philosophy Today:
Volume >
47 >
Issue: 2
Chris Falzon
Sartre: Freedom as Imprisonment
|
|
|
82.
|
Philosophy Today:
Volume >
47 >
Issue: 3
Julius Simon
Benjamin's Feast of Booths
|
|
|
83.
|
Philosophy Today:
Volume >
47 >
Issue: 3
Timothy Mooney
How to Read Once Again: Derrida on Husserl
|
|
|
84.
|
Philosophy Today:
Volume >
47 >
Issue: 3
Paul Ricoeur
Sorrows and the Making of Life Stories
|
|
|
85.
|
Philosophy Today:
Volume >
47 >
Issue: 3
Adrian Johnston
The Soul of Dasein: Schelling's Doctrine of the Soul and Heidegger's Analytic of Dasein
|
|
|
86.
|
Philosophy Today:
Volume >
47 >
Issue: 3
James Luchte
Makeshift: Phenomenology of Original Temporality
|
|
|
87.
|
Philosophy Today:
Volume >
47 >
Issue: 3
Evan Selinger
The Necessity of Embodiment: The Dreyfus-Collins Debate
|
|
|
88.
|
Philosophy Today:
Volume >
47 >
Issue: 3
Sarah Roberts-Cady
Justice and Forgiveness
|
|
|
89.
|
Philosophy Today:
Volume >
47 >
Issue: 3
Kelly Oliver
Forgiveness and Subjectivity
|
|
|
90.
|
Philosophy Today:
Volume >
47 >
Issue: 4
Ramón J. Santos
Richard Rorty’s Philosophy of Social Hope
|
|
|
91.
|
Philosophy Today:
Volume >
47 >
Issue: 4
Frederick J. Crosson
Fanaticism, Politics, and Religion
|
|
|
92.
|
Philosophy Today:
Volume >
47 >
Issue: 4
Ray Brassier
Solar Catastrophe: Lyotard, Freud, and the Death-Drive
|
|
|
93.
|
Philosophy Today:
Volume >
47 >
Issue: 4
Babette E. Babich
Heidegger Against the Editors: Nietzsche, Science, and the Beiträge as Will to Power
|
|
|
94.
|
Philosophy Today:
Volume >
47 >
Issue: 4
Ronald H. McKinney, S.J.
Comedy, Chaos, and Casuistry: Tom Stoppard’s Arcadia
|
|
|
95.
|
Philosophy Today:
Volume >
47 >
Issue: 4
Stuart Dalton
Johannes Climacus as Kierkegaard’s Discourse on Method
|
|
|
96.
|
Philosophy Today:
Volume >
66 >
Issue: 2
Nicole Anderson
The Fox and the Hound:
A Double Spiral in the Work of Michael Naas
|
|
|
97.
|
Philosophy Today:
Volume >
66 >
Issue: 2
Leonard Lawlor
Persuasion and Automation:
What Philosophy Might Have Been, in the Thought of Michael Nass
|
|
|
98.
|
Philosophy Today:
Volume >
66 >
Issue: 2
Michael Naas
Thirty Years in the Pharmacy:
Response to Len Lawlor and Nicole Anderson
|
|
|
99.
|
Philosophy Today:
Volume >
66 >
Issue: 2
Erin Graff Zivin
Trans-genre Lyotard
abstract |
view |
rights & permissions
If Lyotard is correct to acknowledge the role of commentary in guarding the kernel of misunderstanding at the heart of the ethical phrase when he exclaims, “but isn’t this exactly what commentary does with ethics! It comments upon it as though it were a misunderstanding, and it thereby conserves in itself its own requirement that there be something ununderstood,” he does not account for that which a trans-generic or transmedial “commentary” might permit, what troubling, unanswerable questions it might raise, what ekphrastic or synesthetic call it might echo. This essay considers several artistic reworkings, interpretations, and distortions of the biblical scene of near sacrifice upon which Lyotard comments, arguing that the exposure of the ethical (phrase or genre) to the explicitly aesthetic (phrase or genre) would bring to the surface something that might be latent, that which is always already there, albeit spectrally.
|
|
|
100.
|
Philosophy Today:
Volume >
66 >
Issue: 2
Anthony Curtis Adler
The Catastrophe to Come:
Lyotard’s Differend and the Tragedy of the Ecological
abstract |
view |
rights & permissions
Taking its departure from The Differend’s analysis of Auschwitz as a sign for the evental character of history, I argue that the looming ecological disaster we now face reveals both the continuing relevance and limits of Lyotard’s thought. While the form of political agency of the catastrophe to come involves a differend, this differend cannot be attached to a proper name, however problematic its mode of signification. This, however, suggests the even greater relevance of Lyotard’s treatment, in the conclusion of The Differend, of capitalism in terms of temporal contradiction, as well as his theorization of oikos and ecology in subsequent works, where he distinguishes between the economic and the ecological. This distinction, I conclude, is rendered problematic by the catastrophe to come, as indeed is any attempt to draw an absolute distinction between “philosophical politics” and mere technocratic management or even to exclude speculation from the heart of philosophy.
|
|
|