Intersections: Continental and Analytic Philosophy – serie

In Time and Death Carol White articulates a vision of Martin Heidegger's work which grows out of a new understanding of what he was trying to address in his discussion of death. Acknowledging that the discussion of this issue in Heidegger's major work Being and Time is often far from clear, White presents a new interpretation of Heidegger which short-circuits many of the traditional criticisms. White claims that we are all in a better position to understand Heidegger's insights after fifty years because they have now become a part of the conventional wisdom of common opinion. His view shows up in accounts of knowledge in the physical sciences, in the assumptions of the social sciences, in art and film, even in popular culture in general, but does so in ways ignorant of their origins. Now that these insights have filtered down into the culture at large, we can make Heidegger intelligible in a way that perhaps he himself could not. White presents the best possible case for Heidegger, making him more intelligible to those people with a long acquaintance with his work, those with a long aversion to it and in particular to those just starting to pursue an interest in it. White places the problems with which Heidegger is dealing in the context of issues in contemporary Anglo-American philosophy, in order to better locate him for the more mainstream audience. The language and approach of the book is able to accommodate the novice but also offers much food for thought for the Heidegger scholar.

Arguably Søren Kierkegaard and Friedrich Nietzsche are the two most significant moral philosophers of the nineteenth century, their works showing a remarkably trenchant and penetrating awareness of key ethical issues, while demonstrating a stylistic flair that is rare in philosophical writing. Angier argues that, despite the perceived stylistic opacity of these thinkers, their work does admit of comparison and rigorous analytic scrutiny which in turn yields new and significant insights into their philosophy. In this book Angier expounds the view that Kierkegaard both anticipated, and subjected to detailed critique, Nietzsche's central arguments in moral philosophy, exposing the weaknesses of what were to become the core Nietzschean positions and realizing the powerful attraction for people that these ideas would have. Angier brings this critique to our modern attention and defends the prefigured Kierkegaardian critique of Nietzsche.

Based on a detailed analysis of gender in Stanley Cavell's treatment of the skeptical problem, this book addresses the relationship between gender and religion in modern skepticism. Engaging in dialogue with Julia Kristeva's philosophy, Viefhues claims that a religious problem underlies Cavell's understanding of the feminine. The feminine which the skeptic fears is construed as a placeholder for the beyond, marking the transcendence of our origins which are elusive yet at the same time part of ourselves. It is argued that a religious question of origins thus lies at the heart of the modern skeptical problem.

Arguably Søren Kierkegaard and Friedrich Nietzsche are the two most significant moral philosophers of the nineteenth century, their works showing a remarkably trenchant and penetrating awareness of key ethical issues, while demonstrating a stylistic flair that is rare in philosophical writing. Angier argues that, despite the perceived stylistic opacity of these thinkers, their work does admit of comparison and rigorous analytic scrutiny which in turn yields new and significant insights into their philosophy. In this book Angier expounds the view that Kierkegaard both anticipated, and subjected to detailed critique, Nietzsche's central arguments in moral philosophy, exposing the weaknesses of what were to become the core Nietzschean positions and realizing the powerful attraction for people that these ideas would have. Angier brings this critique to our modern attention and defends the prefigured Kierkegaardian critique of Nietzsche.