One of the most influential texts in Asian studies in recent memory has been Kuan-Hsing Chen’s Asia as Method: Toward Deimperialization , which boldly claims that “Martin Heidegger was actually doing European studies, as were Michel Foucault, Pierre Bourdieu, and Jürgen Habermas.” 1 Chen’s argument is not that East Asians must acknowledge the incommensurability between Western and non-Western political thought; rather, the emphasis is on the urgent need to renew our self-understanding in the era of globalization. In his view, this reconstruction of the “Eastern self” involves utilizing Western-origin conceptual categories and theories not as universal theoretical paradigms but as comparative vantage points. Confucian Constitutionalism does precisely this—it develops a normative theory of constitutional democracy that is comparative in both methodological orientation and content. This ambitious book deftly reconstructs Confucian constitutional thought through critical dialogue with Confucian meritocratic tradition, on the one hand, and contemporary constitutional theory, on the other hand. It proposes this reconstructed Confucianism as an alternative to Western liberal democracy, one that is most suitable for East Asian communities (2).

The reception of Martin Heidegger’s philosophy within anthropology has often centred on his concept of being-in-the-world, a concept that has proven fruitful for exploring human entanglements with others and their environments. Much of this work draws on the first division of Being and Time and on Heidegger’s later writings, with relatively little attention paid to the political dimensions of his thought. While his affiliation with Nazism does not invalidate his philosophical insights, engaging more directly with the political resonances of his work can open up new avenues of inquiry. In my own research on historical trauma among children of Holocaust survivors in North America, I turn to the second division of Being and Time to suggest that, from a phenomenological perspective, certain forms of mystified historical consciousness may underwrite right-wing political imaginaries. This ethnographic case study offers one way of engaging the second division that avoids both the repetition of well-worn anthropological-phenomenological motifs—such as the centrality of intersubjectivity—and the disavowal of Heidegger’s widely acknowledged political commitments.

This study presents the multifaceted concept of "thingness" in artistic creation through the prism of the works of Meyer Schapiro and Clement Greenberg. This concept, which, according to Heidegger, defines a systemic analysis of an artistic object independent of its social and political aspects, is equivalent to a criterion for assessing the quality of an object of fine art in accordance with the principle of its manufactured, everyday nature. Heidegger's system was perceived in 20th-century art criticism in a bipolar manner, sparking controversy. The philosopher's main opponent was Meyer Schapiro, while Clement Greenberg, author of the essay "Avant-Garde and Kitsch," can be considered an apologist for "thingness." He influenced the perception of the art of Soviet artists, including Izzat Klychev of the postwar generation, as adherents of "socialist realism," a synonym for "kitsch." Heidegger's universe of "thingness" frees art historical analysis from identifying an artist's work according to ideological tendencies, including the division of artistic expression into "official" and "unofficial." The study's results lead to the conclusion that this evaluation system, as an equivalent of the artistic and aesthetic quality of an art object, is particularly relevant in a period of tolerance and cultural globalism.

ABSTRACT Engaging thinkers such as Martin Heidegger, Simone Weil, and Hans Jonas, this essay argues that Taubes offers a radical critique of modern Gnostic tendencies. Whereas Jonas and Emmanuel Levinas read Gnosticism as dualistic, Taubes interprets it as a symptom of monism—an oppressive logic of identity culminating in atheistic mysticism. She diagnoses Western theology as a totalizing logos that reduces transcendence to immanence. Through her readings of Heidegger and Weil, Taubes reveals modern theology as both culminating in and betraying its own atheistic core. Her concept of “religious atheism” seeks to move beyond both Gnosticism and theology by recovering the symbolic and performative dimensions of religion, envisioning a post—theological religiosity grounded in liturgy, holiness, and ethical rupture.

ABSTRACT This paper offers a multidisciplinary critique of nudge theory by drawing on Orthodox Christian theology, Niklas Luhmann’s systems theory, and Martin Heidegger’s phenomenological ontology. While nudges are often defended as libertarian paternalism, guiding decisions without coercion, this analysis questions their ethical legitimacy when applied without transparency. Orthodox theology frames human dignity as realized through voluntary participation in divine life (theosis), a process disrupted by manipulative behaviorist interventions. Systems theory highlights how covert nudges destabilize trust, a structural necessity for communicative coherence in complex societies. Heidegger’s ontology of Being-in-the-world reveals that authentic existence is grounded in relational openness, which nudging subverts by reducing persons to predictable inputs in technocratic systems. Across these frameworks, a shared relational ontology emerges, affirming that ethical agency, spiritual development, and systemic trust all depend on disclosed, participatory engagement. This paper argues that obscured influence undoes the ontological conditions for authenticity and accountability, proposing instead a model of justice-sensitive governance grounded in transparent, dialogical reciprocity that restores ethical agency across spiritual, systemic, and existential dimensions.

This paper investigates the dynamics of electroacoustic music collaboration within complex techno- logical, social, and philosophical frameworks. Emphasizing the interplay between human creativity and technical apparatuses, it draws on theoretical concepts such as Vilém Flusser’s telematic dialogue, Jacques Attali’s notion of composition as resistance, Martin Heidegger’s ontology of art and technology, and Niklas Luhmann’s systemstheory. Through historical examples—including the WDR Electronic Music Studio—and recent works by composer Paulo C. Chagas and flutist Cássia Carrascoza, particularly Sound Imaginations: Telematic Immersion , the paper examines how electroacoustic practices generate new forms of authorship, co-presence, and symbolic ritual. These practices challenge conventional boundaries between composer, performer, audience, and machine, proposing a participatory model of creative exchange instead. Ultimately, the study argues that electroacoustic collaboration reshapes not only the process of music-making but also broader modes of technological engagement, cultural production, and social interaction in the digital era

Abstract This article highlights a shift in Hannah Arendt's intellectual development regarding the will during the 1960s, traced into the early 1970s when she focused on thinking, willing, and judging. I argue that this change was driven by reactions to her report on Adolf Eichmann's 1961 trial in Eichmann in Jerusalem (1963). By taking this change into account, I question the tendency to overlook her development in favor of extended analyses of thinking and judging, often neglecting willing. My argument underscores, accordingly, the necessity of agreeing on factual truths before engaging in interpretative disputes. The argument has three parts. First, I examine Martin Heidegger's influence on Arendt's thought, particularly his hermeneutical phenomenology as seen in her 1953 lecture, “Understanding and Politics.” Second, I explore the issue of factual truth and its threat to a shared world, as highlighted in the exchange between Arendt and critics of the Eichmann report, along with her 1967 essay, “Truth and Politics.” Finally, I discuss Arendt's concept of the will, focusing on the distinction between the life of the mind and the world of appearances in her later works, “Thinking” and “Willing” (1973–1974).

This article presents a dialogue between Martin Heidegger’s existential phenomenology of death (being-toward-death) and Bernard Suits’ utopian vision of life as ‘game-playing’. Where Heidegger frames death as the horizon that singularises Dasein and demands an authentic confrontation with finitude, Suits reimagines mortality as a lusory challenge: by voluntarily embracing self-imposed obstacles, play becomes a therapeutic means to disarm existential terror. Through an analysis of Suits’ posthumous Return of the Grasshopper (2023), we argue that his ‘lusory attitude’ mirrors Heideggerian ‘resoluteness’, recasting death not as life’s interruption but as its constitutive rule—a necessary limit that grants meaning to the ‘game’ of existence. While both thinkers converge on death as a catalyst for freedom—Heidegger through Angst and Suits through ludic reframing—we interrogate whether their approaches risk trivializing mortality: Heidegger’s existential weight may overburden death’s role, whereas Suits’ playful pragmatism could dilute its irreducibility. Ultimately, the tension between hermeneutic depth and analytic utility reveals unresolved questions about how finitude should shape human projects—whether through solemn confrontation or strategic play.

Contemporary literature increasingly becomes a medium for exploring philosophical and existential transformations of human nature in the age of technological acceleration. Within the framework of posthumanist thought, the figure of the posthuman, a being that transcends the limits of traditional anthropocentrism, has gained particular theoretical significance. This article examines the literary representation of the posthuman in Dan Simmons’s science fiction novel Ilium through the lens of ontoaesthetics, emphasizing the intersection of narrative form, intertextuality, and posthumanist philosophy.The study aims to identify how Simmons constructs posthuman subjectivity and how the novel’s aesthetic strategies embody philosophical reflection on human-machine hybridity, embodiment, and cultural memory. Drawing on the works of Rosi Braidotti, N. Katherine Hayles, Jean-Luc Nancy, and Martin Heidegger, as well as narratological frameworks by Mieke Bal and Gérard Genette, this paper integrates literary and philosophical methods to analyze the novel’s aesthetic mechanisms.The findings demonstrate that Ilium enacts posthuman ontology not only thematically but formally, through fragmented narration, distributed focalization, and intertextual dialogue with Homeric and modernist texts. The study argues that Simmons’s narrative transforms classical myth into a speculative meditation on the nature of being and consciousness in the posthuman era.The research contributes to the development of posthumanist literary studies and ontoaesthetic methodology as a framework for interpreting speculative fiction.The results can be used in the analysis and teaching of posthumanist and science-fiction literature, as well as in interdisciplinary courses combining literature, philosophy, and digital humanities.

The educational landscape in Norway is increasingly shaped by an instrumental understanding of competence, one that influences how learning is framed and valued within contemporary schooling. Drawing on recent curricula and policy documents, this article examines how educational aims and expectations have come to be structured by a language of efficiency, applicability, and measurable outcomes. From a hermeneutic and existential orientation inspired by Martin Heidegger and Hans-Georg Gadamer, the analysis explores how such utilitarian framings may weaken students’ experiential relation to the present and, with it, their participation in their own lives. Against this background, aesthetics is introduced not as a theory of art or a pedagogical method, but as a mode of being through which perception, reflection, and participation are held together. Approaching learning and teaching in this way allows the concept of competence to be reconsidered beyond instrumental reasoning, toward an orientation attentive to existential depth and relational resonance. The article concludes by arguing for the significance of hermeneutic openness in education, particularly in relation to what cannot be fully anticipated, measured, or brought under control.

For Martin Heidegger’s quest to understand the meaning of being, Aristotle’s repeated claim that being “is spoken of in many ways” was both an inspiration and a provocation. Yet the places where Heidegger directly confronts and seeks to understand Aristotle’s claim are surprisingly few, with the most extensive and open-ended reflection now to be found in the recently published volume 91 of the Gesamtausgabe. Heidegger here, unlike too many others and himself elsewhere, does full justice to the radicality of Aristotle’s claim that refers not only to the different senses of being according to the categories (‘substance’, ‘quality’, ‘quantity’, etc.), but also to non-categorial senses (‘truth’, ‘accidental being’, ‘dunamis and energeia’) and sub-senses and refuses to reduce this plurality within plurality of senses to a unity. The Aristotle highlighted here is not the systematic but rather the ‘broken’ one. In the notes, Heidegger furthermore considers the possibility that this indeterminacy and darkness at the heart of Aristotle’s ontology, rather than a limitation due to an understanding of being as presence from the perspective of logos, reflects the indeterminacy and darkness at the heart of being itself. Heidegger’s ‘broken’ and even contradictory reading of Aristotle in these notes thus becomes his own attempt to think through the meaning of being in its withdrawal.

This article critically examines Martin Heidegger’s conception of language as the “house of being”, a phrase that has become central to his later philosophy. Through an advanced, scholarly analysis, the article explores six major themes: the philosophical context of Heidegger’s statement, the ontological structure of language, the interplay of language and world-disclosure, the poetic dimension of language, the critique of representational models, and the implications for contemporary philosophy. Drawing on thirty scholarly sources, the discourse situates Heidegger’s thought within broader debates in continental philosophy, hermeneutics and phenomenology. The article demonstrates how Heidegger’s understanding of language challenges traditional views, emphasizing language’s world-forming power and its role in human dwelling. The conclusion synthesizes the main arguments and reflects on the enduring significance of Heidegger’s insights for the philosophy of language, ontology and linguistics.

This paper explores the ontological relationship between descriptive and normative by drawing on the perspectives of Ludwig Wittgenstein and Martin Heidegger. Through Wittgenstein’s concept of “grammar” and Heidegger’s notion of das Man, we see that normativity shapes human perception and interpretation, making descriptive neutrality unattainable. Descriptions are always informed by norms and norms evolve by descriptions. This intertwined relationship has significant implications for business ethics, since ethical conflicts can now be reframed as lack of normative references. Ultimately, the paper proposes a perspective of moral perspectivism.

Often, the medical humanities are framed as a corrective to various instrumental inclinations within biomedicine. The humanities, according to this formulation, represent a point of departure from instrumental thinking, a means by which the arts intervene to combat biomedicine's more technological tendencies. Drawing from philosophers of technology Bernard Stiegler and Martin Heidegger, I challenge this formulation, arguing that narrative-a multidisciplinary tool of the medical humanities-is itself a tool and therefore a technology. Rather than asking if narrative is a technology, scholars within the medical humanities would be better served by asking what kind of technology we wish narrative to be. The answer that I forward-explicitly instrumental-is that narrative is a constitutive technology, a tool by which humans reinstantiate order in the wake of technological disruption. Rather than resisting technology, narrative provides a tool for responding to technological change. As biomedicine continues its own technological turn-consider, for example, the rapid development of medical applications of generative artificial intelligence and the emergence of precision medicine-such a lens has become increasingly necessary, equipping the medical field with tools to expand analysis of emerging technologies beyond the twin lenses of costliness and effectiveness.

Public consciousness today oscillates between secular rationalisation, accelerating digital economies, and a renewed desire for spiritual and ethical depth. Mythologemes and symbols mediate religious knowing, they also stabilise ethical horizons when informational noise rises. Building on Ernst Cassirer’s theory of symbolic forms, where myth and language are foundational cultural expressions, and Martin Heidegger’s view of language as world forming, not merely expressive, this article investigates how religious-ethical values are encoded in Kazakh mythologemes and symbols, and how these values are being reinterpreted in the digital age. Through hermeneutic, cognitive linguistic and cultural semiotic methods, we analyse cosmological metaphors in Khoja Ahmed Yassawi’s Hikmet and Abai Kunanbayev’s Words of Edification. We show that Yassawi’s four elements, earth, water, fire, air, constitute a semiotic system that maps to humility, purity, love, transformation, while Abai’s “full person” reframes these archetypes into modern ethical categories. In dialogue with Jungian psychology on archetypes, Ricoeur’s symbol-thought dialectic, and Baudrillard’s hyperreality, we argue that revitalising mythologemes can ground ethical reflection against the flattening forces of digital simulation. Pedagogical and design implications for digital culture follow.

This essay explores the metaphysical and philosophical implications of Artificial Intelligence (AI) and Machine Learning (ML) through the intersecting insights of René Guénon (ʿAbd al-Wāḥid Yaḥiā), Martin Heidegger, and Ibn al-ʿArabī. It argues that modern AI systems, particularly in their statistical and data-centric forms, are not merely instrumental tools but expressions of a deeper metaphysical worldview-one rooted in quantification, abstraction, and utility. Guénon’s critique of the “reign of quantity” and Heidegger’s notion of Enframing (Gestell) converge in diagnosing the loss of qualitative and sacred dimensions in modern life. While Heidegger’s phenomenology provides a powerful immanent critique of technological reductionism from within the Western philosophical tradition, Guénon’s metaphysical traditionalism articulates a diagnosis of modernity that resonates with Islamic metaphysics, especially as articulated by Ibn al-ʿArabī. The essay includes Heidegger in the argument as a representative of a critique of modern technology issuing from the Western tradition itself, and by emphasizing his shared concerns with Guénon, whose metaphysics resonates with Ibn al-ʿArabī’s metaphysics. Through a comparative metaphysical framework, this paper proposes an Islamic response to AI that avoids both technophilia and technophobia, insisting instead on a spiritually grounded ethic of technology that preserves human’s dignity and mission. Methodologically, the essay restores a prior order often inverted in contemporary AI ethics: ontology (what AI is) grounds epistemology (what it can know), and only then can ethical evaluation be coherent.

Abstract This article is a comparative study of Fedor Dostoevskii and Martin Heidegger’s messianic nationalism as understood in terms of their conceptualization of primordialism and racial purity. It offers, and further invites, a critical lens especially on Dostoevskii’s prejudices, viewing them as systematic rather than isolated. This article endeavors to offer a comprehensive exploration of the novelist’s essentialist premises through Heidegger’s philosophical framework of similar views on the “other.” Both authors claim that certain “truths” could only spring from the people, whether narod or das Volk . I argue that Dostoevskii and Heidegger arrive at similar warped visions of national destiny due to their formulation of the so-called primordial “call of conscience” and its attachment to their preferred poets. The point of my interdisciplinary effort here is to demonstrate that their racial bias is not limited to incidental remarks but that these biases are deeply embedded in the authors’ broader intellectual projects.

Abstract Among the different themes that occupy John Sallis’s works, the development of a logic of imagination is central to his oeuvre. Following some of the traces in Sallis’s works to the plays of William Shakespeare and the thought of Martin Heidegger, this essay aims to show, first, that his logic of imagination offers an alternative logic that is no longer in the orbit of metaphysics; second, that in his logic of imagination an enlarged but ambiguous receptivity is at stake, beyond the confines of the concept of traditional logic; and, third, that this enlarged receptivity is concerned with a particular but ambivalent truth-claim, suggesting that dreams, plays, and translations are engaged in bearing witness.

This article explores Lou Andreas-Salomé's (1992) interpretation of Friedrich Nietzsche’s work in her “Friedrich Nietzsche in His Works,” focusing on her psychological and existential reading of Nietzsche's central concepts. Salomé proposes a profound connection between life and work, arguing that Nietzsche developed his philosophy as a personal response to the crisis of Western values. The article examines Salomé’s three main interpretative axes: a) the relationship between Nietzsche's personal experiences and his philosophy, seen as a kind of “involuntary self-confession”; b) Nietzsche’s multifaceted writing style, revealing a fragmented spirit resulting from the conflict and attempted reconciliation of various distinct identities (the musician, the poet, the philosopher, the philologist, the religious), in perpetual metamorphosis and self-overcoming; c) the mystical dimension of Nietzsche’s final “system,” exposing a divine ideal of transcendence projected in concepts like Eternal Recurrence, Overman, and Will to Power. Ultimately, these analyses are situated within the broader Nietzschean interpretive community, drawing panoramic comparisons with commentators like Walter Kaufmann, Martin Heidegger, Karl Jaspers, Gilles Deleuze, Michel Foucault, Gianni Vattimo, and Alexander Nehamas, revealing the originality and influence of Salomé’s perspective in Nietzschean studies.

This article focuses on Martin Heidegger's little read travel journal, Sojourns (1962), and explores how it yields surprisingly fruitful insights into our contemporary era of neoliberal globalization via its implicit exploration of the complex interconnections between travel, phenomenology, and ethics. Specifically, I posit that Sojourns contains an implicit praxis-oriented phenomenological methodology and ethics of global travel that together gesture towards a coherent practice of "deep travel," which American literature scholar Cinzia Schiavini aptly defines as "a vertical movement in a closed space which starts from the surface of the land and goes backward in time, searching for the hidden social and cultural dynamics embedded in that [given] geographical context." Author Biography Andrew Urie, York University Andrew Urie recently completed his PhD in Social and Political Thought at York University (Canada). He specializes in American intellectual history and popular culture, and his research interests include cultural political economy, literary studies, and textual sociology. His dissertation is entitled Turning Japanese: Japanization Anxiety, Japan-Bashing, and Reactionary White American Heteropatriarchy in Reagan-Bush Era Hollywood Cinema. He has also published in Dialogue: The Interdisciplinary Journal of Popular Culture and Pedagogy.