Пожалуйста, используйте этот идентификатор, чтобы цитировать или ссылаться на этот ресурс: http://hdl.handle.net/11701/43743
Полная запись метаданных
Поле DCЗначениеЯзык
dc.contributor.authorCHERNAVIN, GEORGY-
dc.date.accessioned2023-08-10T22:04:56Z-
dc.date.available2023-08-10T22:04:56Z-
dc.date.issued2023-03-
dc.identifier.citationCHERNAVIN G. A PHENOMENOLOGICAL AND A POSTSTRUCTURALIST READING OF BEING AND TIME (SECTIONS 54–60). Horizon. Studies in Phenomenology, 2023, vol. 12 issue 1, pp. 159–172.en_GB
dc.identifier.otherhttps://doi.org/10.21638/2226-5260-2023-12-1-159-172-
dc.identifier.urihttp://hdl.handle.net/11701/43743-
dc.description.abstractThe article builds on Husserl’s “trivial” observations from the manuscript Reason — Science. Reason and Morality — Reason and Metaphysics on the topic of conscience, to then question the neglect of the topic of misguided conscience or self-deception in Heidegger’s model of conscience from §§ 54–60 of Being and Time. In Heidegger’s conception of conscience (as a silent call appealing to the authenticity of Dasein) we will not find a number of points important to the Husserlian understanding of conscience: neither the unrevealed horizons of prior life, nor the relativity of intersubjective contexts, nor a misguided (and doubting) conscience, still less a search for (presumed) evidence. That said, the way Heidegger axiomatically sets up the original culpability of Dasein creates a number of dead ends or blind spots in this model. It is to these that Mark Richir addresses in his interpretation (or, more precisely, two alternative interpretations), speaking of the “original symbolic mishap” that befell Dasein, and then of the “symbolic tautology” in which it has become a prisoner. Richir’s critique is not aimed at “overcoming” Heidegger’s model of conscience, but at demonstrating a transcendental illusion — probably inevitable for one who is guided by “authenticity” and the “inner voice.” This is a kind of critical phenomenology of “authenticity”, which manages to avoid the closedness of phenomenology in itself by “grafting” in it poststructuralism. This is why both the first and the second interpretation by the Belgian phenomenologist focus on the problem of symbolic structures: “original symbolic mishap” in the first case and “symbolic tautology” in the second.en_GB
dc.description.sponsorshipThe publication was prepared within the framework of the Academic Fund Program at HSE University in 2021–2022 (grant no. 21-04-052 “On a Phenomenological Revolution: Origins of Marc Richir’ philosophical Project”).en_GB
dc.language.isoruen_GB
dc.publisherSt Petersburg State Universityen_GB
dc.relation.ispartofseriesHorizon. Studies in Phenomenology;Volume 12; Issue 1-
dc.subjectcall of conscienceen_GB
dc.subjectguilten_GB
dc.subjectEdmund Husserlen_GB
dc.subjectMartin Heideggeren_GB
dc.subjectMarc Richiren_GB
dc.subjectphenomenologyen_GB
dc.subjectpoststructuralismen_GB
dc.titleA PHENOMENOLOGICAL AND A POSTSTRUCTURALIST READING OF BEING AND TIME (SECTIONS 54–60)en_GB
dc.typeArticleen_GB
Располагается в коллекциях:Issue 1

Файлы этого ресурса:
Файл Описание РазмерФормат 
08_Чернавин.pdf638,65 kBAdobe PDFПросмотреть/Открыть


Все ресурсы в архиве электронных ресурсов защищены авторским правом, все права сохранены.