artefact

artefact inventory: about artefact t&t: artefact in Germany: further links:	This is a site of independent philosophical thinking, free from all institutional strictures. It is also Heidegger territory — but not Heidegger for the sake of Heidegger. His thinking is here the gateway to a critical engagement with the entire Western tradition of thinking. The focus is not an exposition of Heidegger's own questioning deconstruction of metaphysics, but the critical reassessment of that very deconstruction. Does Heidegger's "step back" to a thinking of Ereignis have to be completmented by a side-step? Does Heidegger's diagnosis of the times, that the consummation of Western metaphysics culminates in a constellation of being he terms the Gestell, itself remain captive to productionist metaphysics? Does the essence of capitalism have to be rethought in a way different from both Marx's Kapital and Heidegger's thinking of the essence of technology as Gestell? Although Sein und Zeit provides a place for Mitdasein, can it be said that Heidegger's phenomenology genuinely includes a social ontology? Above all, do we have an adequate ontology of social and political power? Do the questions concerning the constitution of you-and-me, I-and-we, remain, to the present day, inadequately grounded and unfolded in phenomenological thinking? If metaphysics has always been concerned with the question of What, hasn't the question of our standing in selfhood as Who remained more or less dormant in philosophy since Plato and Aristotle?

This is a site of independent philosophical thinking, free from all institutional strictures.
It is also Heidegger territory — but not Heidegger for the sake of Heidegger.
His thinking is here the gateway to a critical engagement
with the entire Western tradition of thinking.
The focus is not an exposition of Heidegger's own questioning deconstruction
of metaphysics, but the critical reassessment of that very deconstruction.
Does Heidegger's "step back" to a thinking of Ereignis have to be completmented by a side-step?
Does Heidegger's diagnosis of the times, that the consummation of Western
metaphysics culminates in a constellation of being he terms
the Gestell, itself remain captive to productionist metaphysics?
Does the essence of capitalism have to be rethought in a way different from both
Marx's Kapital and Heidegger's thinking of the essence of technology as Gestell?
Although Sein und Zeit provides a place for Mitdasein, can it be said that
Heidegger's phenomenology genuinely includes a social ontology?
Above all, do we have an adequate ontology of social and political power?
Do the questions concerning the constitution of you-and-me, I-and-we, remain, to the
present day, inadequately grounded and unfolded in phenomenological thinking?
If metaphysics has always been concerned with the question of What,
hasn't the question of our standing in selfhood as Who
remained more or less dormant in philosophy since Plato and Aristotle?

artefact — A Site of Philosophy