HannahArendt.net (E-Journal)
Not a member yet
420 research outputs found
Sort by
World Is at Stake: Arendt, the Anthropocene, and “Mankind’s Earthly Immortality”
Full text linkContrary to the narratives portraying Hannah Arendt’s work as “unhelpful” with the “wicked problem” of the Anthropocene, this article has argued that her reflections on modernity and the entanglements of capital, science, and technology offer a wealth of critical insight into conditions of Anthropocene’s emergence and its political characteristics. Thinking with Arendt about her concept of “action into nature”, ideas about “process” and new geocentrism, I argued that Arendt empowers the modern humans to grapple politically with the Anthropocene, instead of succumbing to the narratives of optimism (the “good Anthropocene”) or pessimism (apocalypse). Before offering such a conclusion, this article engaged Dipesh Chakrabarty’s most recent writing from an Arendtian perspective. Arguing pace Chakrabarty’s hopes for resuscitating wonder and reverence as characteristics of a new science and “new universalism” or new “global politics”, this article posited that since these two concepts were undermined in modernity by technology, science, and capitalism, which have objectified and ‘completed’ nature (planet), they are unhelpful in the Anthropocene. Instances of nostalgia were also strongly rejected by Arendt who preferred focusing on what can be done in the moment of “non-time-space”, that is in the space of ‘non-time’ that opens itself when different temporal forces of past and future collide into one another. Instead of resigning themselves to the linear space-time of “earthly immortality”, or ever-growing progress of capitalism, technology, and science, political action can help moderns in de-anthropomorphizing politics and re-centering the world and the planet as the loci of the political.Contrary to the narratives portraying Hannah Arendt’s work as “unhelpful” with the “wicked problem” of the Anthropocene, this article has argued that her reflections on modernity and the entanglements of capital, science, and technology offer a wealth of critical insight into conditions of Anthropocene’s emergence and its political characteristics. Thinking with Arendt about her concept of “action into nature”, ideas about “process” and new geocentrism, I argued that Arendt empowers the modern humans to grapple politically with the Anthropocene, instead of succumbing to the narratives of optimism (the “good Anthropocene”) or pessimism (apocalypse). Before offering such a conclusion, this article engaged Dipesh Chakrabarty’s most recent writing from an Arendtian perspective. Arguing pace Chakrabarty’s hopes for resuscitating wonder and reverence as characteristics of a new science and “new universalism” or new “global politics”, this article posited that since these two concepts were undermined in modernity by technology, science, and capitalism, which have objectified and ‘completed’ nature (planet), they are unhelpful in the Anthropocene. Instances of nostalgia were also strongly rejected by Arendt who preferred focusing on what can be done in the moment of “non-time-space”, that is in the space of ‘non-time’ that opens itself when different temporal forces of past and future collide into one another. Instead of resigning themselves to the linear space-time of “earthly immortality”, or ever-growing progress of capitalism, technology, and science, political action can help moderns in de-anthropomorphizing politics and re-centering the world and the planet as the loci of the political
Aus dem Raum zwischen zwei Sprechenden Ingeborg Gleichauf: Hannah Arendt und Karl Jaspers. Geschichte einer einzigartigen Freundschaft. Wien/Köln/Weimar: Böhlau-Verlag 2021, 200 S., 23,00 EUR
Full text link---
Soziale Medien - Ein (kosmo-politischer) Erscheinungsraum?
Full text linkDer Beitrag betrachtet soziale Medien entlang Hannah Arendts Begriffsgerüst eines Erscheinungsraums und widmet sich der Frage, was für eine Form des Miteinanderseins sozialen Medien eignet und ob eine Pluralität im Sinne Arendts in sozialen Medien möglich ist. Arendt wird hier im Ausgang einer phänomenologischen Lesart weitergedacht, wodurch das intersubjektive ‚Zwischen‘ des Welthaften in den Fokus gerät. Zunächst nimmt sich der Beitrag des Weltbegriffs Arendts an, der, so die Argumentation, erst in Anlehnung an ihre Philosophie des Erscheinens und ihrer Intersubjektivitätstheorie zu seiner vollen Reife gelangt. Anschließend wird die Tendenz zur Selbstdarstellung in sozialen Medien daraufhin geprüft, ob sie einen pluralen Erscheinungsraum sozialer Medien von Beginn an verschließt. Es wird die These vertreten, dass soziale Medien zwar die Möglichkeit eines pluralen Erscheinungsraums implizieren, ihre Aktualität und Infrastruktur jedoch oftmals das In-Erscheinung-Treten des Arendtschen ‚Wer-einer-ist‘ verdecken und somit das virtuelle Handeln und Sprechen von Personen der stetigen Gefahr von Anonymität ausgesetzt sind, was in der Folge die Versperrung einer gelebten Pluralität in öffentlichen Erscheinungsräumen bedeuten würde.The article considers social media along Hannah Arendt’s conceptual framework of a space of appearance and addresses the question of what form of togetherness is suitable for social media and whether plurality in Arendt’s sense is possible in social media. Here, Arendt is further thought through in the light of a phenomenological reading, whereby the intersubjective ‘in-between’ of worldliness comes into focus. First, the contribution takes on Arendt’s concept of world, which, according to the argumentation, only reaches its full maturity following her philosophy of appearance and her theory of intersubjectivity. Subsequently, the tendency toward self-representation in social media is examined to determine whether it closes off a plural space of appearance of social media from the outset. It is argued that while social media imply the possibility of a plural space of appearance, their actuality and infrastructure often obscure the emergence of the Arendtian ‘who’ of someone and thus the virtual actions and speech of persons are exposed to the constant danger of anonymity, which would consequently mean the obstruction of a lived plurality in public appearance spaces
Marie Luise Knott: 370 Riverside Drive, 730 Riverside Drive. Hannah Arendt und Ralph Ellison - 17 Hinweise, Berlin: Matthes & Seitz, 2022.: Siebzehn Exkursionen zu komplexen Lagen. Arendt und die People of Color in den USA.
No full textEs gibt bekanntlich zwei Texte von Hannah Arendt, die immer wieder kontrovers diskutiert werden und welche die Emotionen hoch kochen lassen. Der eine ist Arendts Gerichtsbericht über die Verurteilung von Adolf Eichmann, der im Buch „Eichmann in Jerusalem“ zusammengefasst wurde. Der andere ist der Essay „Reflections on Little Rock“ mit dem Arendt sich im Winter 1958/59 in die rassistische Segregationspolitik der USA einmischt und sich gegen eine gesetzlich verordnete Aufhebung der Rassentrennung in Schulen ausspricht. Beide Texte wurden harsch kritisiert. Das Eichmann Buch beschädigte Arendts Reputation nachhaltig und zerstörte Freundschaften. Dennoch hat Arendt zu keiner Zeit ihre darin formulierten Thesen widerrufen. Anders sieht das im Falle von „Little Rock“ aus. Hier gesteht sie sieben Jahre nach der Veröffentlichung einen fundamentalen Fehler ein. Sie schreibt dem schwarzen Schriftsteller Ralph Waldo Ellison einen zwanzigzeiligen Brief, der als Durchschlag in der Washingtoner Library of Congress aufbewahrt wird und nun auch digital einsehbar ist. Anlass war ein Interview, das Ellison dem Journalisten Robert Penn Warren für sein Buch „Who Speaks for the Negro?“ (1965) gegeben hatte, indem er Arendt ein Unverständnis für das „Ideal des Opfers“ der schwarzen Bevölkerung vorwirft, dass diese täglich in den USA bringen müssen. Arendt bestätigt das knapp: „Sie haben völlig Recht […] ich wusste immer, dass ich irgendwie falsch lag, und hatte das Gefühl, ich hatte die nackte Gewalt, die elementare körperliche Angst nicht begriffen. Aber ihre Bemerkungen scheinen mir so zu treffend, dass ich jetzt erkenne, dass ich die Komplexität der Lage schlicht nicht verstanden habe“. Dieses bemerkenswerte Eingeständnis ist der Ausgang der siebzehn Exkursionen zur „Komplexität der Lage“, die Marie Luise Knott in ihrem jüngsten Buch zu Arendt, Ellison und dem Rassismus in den USA unternommen hat
Caroline Ashcroft: Violence and Power in the Thought of Hannah Arendt. Philadelphia, Pennsylvania: University of Pennsylvania Press, 2021, 320 p., 74.54 EUR
Full text linkIn her book, by looking through the conception of violence in Arendt’s works, Caroline Ashcroft attempts to illuminate what politics is according to Arendt. Ashcroft’s main project is to argue that there is a type of violence that is political and even necessary for politics in Arendt’s opinion. She argues that the conception of violence and how to approach it, is an essential key to understand Arendt’s political philosophy and to differentiate her philosophy from other contemporary understandings of the political, and even to distinguish between different interpretation of Arendt by authors such as Chantal Mouffe, Bonnie Honig and Seyla Benhabib. In “On Violence,” Arendt claims that there is an inverse proportionality between violence and political power. Power, according to her, arises if there is a free space for action, or sharing of perspectives, creating the common sense necessary for people’s common worlds, and in other words, a coherent force of the political action. Violence is exactly what disturbs freedom, which is the raison d’être of politics and so violence is anti-political according to a typical reading of Arendt’s “On Violence”. But, as Ashcroft notes, taking this reading seriously, and overlooking Arendt’s other writings leads many philosophers to interpret Arendt as a strict pacifist who “builds on an ideal of politics which is, indeed, absolutely free of violence” (p.6). Some others think that Violence in Arendt’s eye is always “unpolitical” and instrumental. But in contrast to all of these simplistic readings of Arendt, Ashcroft argues that “some forms of violence can indeed be reasonably considered political and even politically essential for Arendt” (p. 13). But how, in Arendt’s framework, can violence be political?In her book, by looking through the conception of violence in Arendt’s works, Caroline Ashcroft attempts to illuminate what politics is according to Arendt. Ashcroft’s main project is to argue that there is a type of violence that is political and even necessary for politics in Arendt’s opinion. She argues that the conception of violence and how to approach it, is an essential key to understand Arendt’s political philosophy and to differentiate her philosophy from other contemporary understandings of the political, and even to distinguish between different interpretation of Arendt by authors such as Chantal Mouffe, Bonnie Honig and Seyla Benhabib. In “On Violence,” Arendt claims that there is an inverse proportionality between violence and political power. Power, according to her, arises if there is a free space for action, or sharing of perspectives, creating the common sense necessary for people’s common worlds, and in other words, a coherent force of the political action. Violence is exactly what disturbs freedom, which is the raison d’être of politics and so violence is anti-political according to a typical reading of Arendt’s “On Violence”. But, as Ashcroft notes, taking this reading seriously, and overlooking Arendt’s other writings leads many philosophers to interpret Arendt as a strict pacifist who “builds on an ideal of politics which is, indeed, absolutely free of violence” (p.6). Some others think that Violence in Arendt’s eye is always “unpolitical” and instrumental. But in contrast to all of these simplistic readings of Arendt, Ashcroft argues that “some forms of violence can indeed be reasonably considered political and even politically essential for Arendt” (p. 13). But how, in Arendt’s framework, can violence be political
Kimberly Maslin: The Experiential Ontology of Hannah Arendt, Lanham/Boulder/New York: Lexington Books 2022. : Being-with Others in Liberal Democracies: Heidegger, Arendt and Identity Politics
No full textTouching some of the most important questions in the scholarly study of Hannah Arendt’s political thought, Maslin’s The Experiential Ontology of Hannah Arendt is an attempt not only to tell the story of Arendt’s debt to her teacher from the University of Marburg but to illustrate the importance of reading both thinkers for the present political situation in liberal democracies. In this way, Maslin’s book takes us on a journey beyond both Heidegger and Arendt and asks us to try to think together, with others and with ourselves, the meaning of our Being through our own experience of the world.Touching some of the most important questions in the scholarly study of Hannah Arendt’s political thought, Maslin’s The Experiential Ontology of Hannah Arendt is an attempt not only to tell the story of Arendt’s debt to her teacher from the University of Marburg but to illustrate the importance of reading both thinkers for the present political situation in liberal democracies. In this way, Maslin’s book takes us on a journey beyond both Heidegger and Arendt and asks us to try to think together, with others and with ourselves, the meaning of our Being through our own experience of the world
Héla Hecker: Berührbarkeit als conditio humana. Emotionale Phänomene in Hannah Arendts politischem Denken, Bielefeld: Transcript 2021. : Zur emotionalen Bedingtheit des Politischen
No full textObwohl sich mit der Woge des affective turns auch in der Politischen Theorie der Zusammenhang von Emotionen und Politik zu einem intensiv bespielten Forschungsgebiet entwickelte und traditionelle Konfliktlinien aufgeweicht wurden, bleibt nach wie vor ein Traditionsbestand dominant, der zwischen primär rationalistischen und tendenziell emotionssensiblen Politikverständnissen unterscheidet. Nach dieser sehr schematischen Unterscheidung bilden sich liberale Politikverständnisse unter der Prämisse einer dualistischen Trennung von Gefühlen und Rationalität aus, wobei sowohl das interessenbasierte Politik- wie das rationalistische Rechtsverständnis die Grundlagen einer tendenziell emotionsaversen Theorieströmung bilden. Republikanische Theorien unterstreichen demgegenüber wesentlich deutlicher die emotionale Grundierung des Politischen und unterstreichen deren Gewicht auch in normativer Hinsicht, etwa – so der klassische Rousseausche Topos – in Bezug auf den emotionalen Gehalt des Gemeinsinns
In Praise of the Terrestrial Condition
Full text linkThe scientific and philosophical revolution of the 16th and 17th centuries was described by Alexandre Koyré as the passage «from the closed world to the infinite universe», which meant the unification of the celestial and the terrestrial under the same physical-mathematical laws, the conversion of the Earth into a planet like any other and the ontological division between the physical order and the human order. However, in the 20th century, the human race acquired for the first time in its history the power to destroy itself, either through nuclear weapons or through a global ecological crisis. At the same time, there has been a paradigm shift in the scientific and philosophical conception of nature and, in particular, of the Earth as the original dwelling place of human beings and other living beings. In this article, all these transformations are analyzed through the ideas of five very different authors: Husserl, Arendt, Lovelock, Margulis and Latour.The scientific and philosophical revolution of the 16th and 17th centuries was described by Alexandre Koyré as the passage «from the closed world to the infinite universe», which meant the unification of the celestial and the terrestrial under the same physical-mathematical laws, the conversion of the Earth into a planet like any other and the ontological division between the physical order and the human order. However, in the 20th century, the human race acquired for the first time in its history the power to destroy itself, either through nuclear weapons or through a global ecological crisis. At the same time, there has been a paradigm shift in the scientific and philosophical conception of nature and, in particular, of the Earth as the original dwelling place of human beings and other living beings. In this article, all these transformations are analyzed through the ideas of five very different authors: Husserl, Arendt, Lovelock, Margulis and Latour
Circular Politics. Nature, Boundaries and Arendt
No full textThe pressing problems we face in light of the environmental crisis, which poses an imminent threat to the basal conditions of actions and politics, urge us to find a sustainable model of Nature-Politics. Therefore, I shall introduce the concept Circular Politics that describes an approach of politics that is oriented towards the circularity of nature. Not only does this seemingly refute the meaning of politics, that is freedom, and hamper action. Circular Politics, moreover, crosses the boundaries Arendt drew between the World and Nature as well as between the political, social, and private. Instead of replicating Arendt’s sharp conceptual boundaries I shall introduce a sustainable ecological concept into her theoretical framework: Planetary Boundaries. Circular Politics is a response to these boundaries that are suitable to demarcate what Arendt hoped to protect with her boundaries, which is a safe space for action. Thus, despite its aim for circularity and appeal to Nature’s urgency, Circular Politics pursues to ensure the conditions and meaning of politics. This requires refraining from domination and exploitation of Nature’s resources and instead to focus on our coexistence with and in Nature. Connected to this concept is the promise for more participatory, non-hierarchical and collective practices and a call to relate to our surrounding with care and respect.The pressing problems we face in light of the environmental crisis, which poses an imminent threat to the basal conditions of actions and politics, urge us to find a sustainable model of Nature-Politics. Therefore, I shall introduce the concept Circular Politics that describes an approach of politics that is oriented towards the circularity of nature. Not only does this seemingly refute the meaning of politics, that is freedom, and hamper action. Circular Politics, moreover, crosses the boundaries Arendt drew between the World and Nature as well as between the political, social, and private. Instead of replicating Arendt’s sharp conceptual boundaries I shall introduce a sustainable ecological concept into her theoretical framework: Planetary Boundaries. Circular Politics is a response to these boundaries that are suitable to demarcate what Arendt hoped to protect with her boundaries, which is a safe space for action. Thus, despite its aim for circularity and appeal to Nature’s urgency, Circular Politics pursues to ensure the conditions and meaning of politics. This requires refraining from domination and exploitation of Nature’s resources and instead to focus on our coexistence with and in Nature. Connected to this concept is the promise for more participatory, non-hierarchical and collective practices and a call to relate to our surrounding with care and respect