• Home
  • IDEAS
  • GROUPS
    • Classical German Philosophy and Phenomenology
    • The quarrel between the ancients and moderns
    • The quarrel between philosophy and poetry
    • Theories of Emotions
    • Philosophies of Image and Imagination
    • Utopia, the Political Myth, and Rebellion
    • The Philosophy of Nature
  • EVENTS
  • PEOPLE
  • ADMISSION
  • CONTACTS
  • CONFERENCES
    • 2016
      • Il tragico nella letteratura tedesca
      • Dialectic and the Ends of Reason
        • Schedule
    • 2015
      • CONVEGNO MELANCOLIA
        • Introduction
        • Schedule
      • CONFERENCE ON THE ANCIENTS
        • Introduction
        • Schedule
      • Immaginazione e Giudizio In Kant
        • Schedule
    • 2014
      • Hegel and the phenomenological movement
  • ODRADEK Journal

Tag Archives: Leo Strauss

Ethics & Politics CFA : Political Philosophy and the Unpolitical

26 Thursday Apr 2018

Posted by Danilo Manca in CFA-CFP

≈ Leave a comment

Tags

Apolitia, Carl Schmitt, Edmund Husserl, Friedrich Nietzsche, hannah arendt, Jacob Burckhardt, Karl Löwith, Karl Mannheim, Leo Strauss, Max Horkheimer, Paul Valéry, Political Philosophy, The Unpolitical, Thomas Mann, utopia

CFA: Ethics & Politics (www.units.it/etica)
Political Philosophy and the Unpolitical. From Jacob Burckhardt to Leo Strauss

Editors: Marco Menon, Danilo Manca

Between the 19th and the 20th century, German culture experienced a conflict between two apparently opposite tendencies. The first leads thinkers to detach themselves from the dominant ideology of the time; the second bears on the need to take a stand on the crisis of modern Western civilization.
The category of the Unpolitical is meant to interpret the former: it refers to the position of those thinkers, such as Husserl, who were more interested in investigating the things themselves rather than the historical worldview of their own time, but also the stance of those intellectuals, such as Thomas Mann or Paul Valéry, who, starting from two different aesthetics, took up Nietzsche’s idea of a transvalutation of all values through art as a way of emphasizing what is full of life at the expense of what is ill-constituted and weak.
In his Jacob Burckhardt. Der Mensch inmitten der Geschichte (1936), Löwith understands Burckhardt’s concept of “apolitia” as the original source of the perspective of the Unpolitical in modern times. In particular, Löwith believes that the approach which disdains the problem of the constitution of the State is a preliminary condition to adopt a utopian attitude, and to reflect on the way in which the State can be rebuilt from its own foundations. The way in which Löwith links the concept of the Unpolitical to the concept of utopia is more likely another way to contribute to the debate that Karl Mannheim’s Ideologie und Utopie (1929) raised. Among others, such a debate on the sociological dimension of knowledge involved Arendt, Horkheimer, and Strauss.
Just like Burckhardt, Hannah Arendt, too, traces the conflict between philosophy and politics back to Plato’s redefinition of Socratic philosophy as a view rooted in the conflict between truth and illusory appearance of it within the sphere of the doxa. This position inevitably faces – thereby clashing with – both the process of de-politicization on which Carl Schmitt shed light, and the re-evaluation of the political dimension characterizing Socratic philosophy on which Leo Strauss insisted.

This being recognized, proposals are invited that investigate the relation between the city (understood as a model embracing both society and the modern State) and the thinker (construed in a very broad way, so as to include the philosopher, the artist, the historian, the writer, etc.). The main aim is to explore the various possible ways in which the life of an individual mind can interact with the life of the historical community.

1. A non-exhaustive list of possible topics is the following:
2. The relationship between “apolitia” and utopia
3. The Greek concept of “apolitia” and the modern concept of the Unpolitical
4. Political philosophy and phenomenology
5. Historicism and politics: pro and contra
6. The role of the philosopher within the city
7. Apolitia and cosmopolitism
8. The Unpolitical and the age of technology
9. Political philosophy versus political science

Abstracts (no more than 1000 words) should be sent to Marco Menon (820034@stud.unive.it) and Danilo Manca (danilomanca30@gmail.com) by July 15, 2018. Note of acceptance will be sent out by August 30, 2018. The final papers will be due by January 31, 2019.
Languages: English, Italian, German, French, Spanish and Portuguese.

CFA: Ethica & Politica (www.units.it/etica)
L’impolitico e la filosofia politica. Da Burckhardt a Strauss
A cura di Marco Menon e Danilo Manca

A cavallo fra Ottocento e Novecento si sviluppa un conflitto fra due tendenze apparentemente contrapposte. Il bisogno dell’intellettuale tedesco di prendere le distanze dagli eventi della propria epoca e dalla sua ideologia dominante, il suo bisogno in altre parole di risultare inattuale, si scontra con l’esigenza, che si va a rafforzare dopo la prima guerra mondiale, di esprimersi sulla crisi culturale della propria epoca.
La categoria dell’impolitico designa la prima istanza. Include sia le posizioni di filosofi come Husserl che sono più interessati al ritorno alle cose che all’analisi della visione storica della propria epoca, sia intellettuali come Thomas Mann e Paul Valéry, che pur partendo da prospettive estetologiche differenti recuperano l’idea nietzschiana di una trasvalutazione di tutti i valori attraverso l’arte per valorizzare la vita a discapito della decadenza.
Nel sesto capitolo della biografia intellettuale di Jacob Burckhardt (1936), Karl Löwith individua nella nozione di apolitia la fonte originale dell’atteggiamento di fuga dal presente descritto dalla categoria dell’impolitico. Secondo Löwith l’approccio che ignora il problema della costituzione dello Stato è la condizione preliminare per adottare un atteggiamento utopico e per riflettere sul modo in cui ricostruirlo dalle fondamenta. Con queste argomentazioni, Löwith s’inserisce probabilmente in quel dibattito sollevato dalla pubblicazione di Ideologia e utopia (1929) di Karl Mannheim che coinvolse fra gli altri Arendt, Horkheimer e Strauss.
In un modo affine a quello di Burckhardt, Hannah Arendt riconduce il conflitto tra filosofia e politica al modo in cui Platone rielaborò la filosofia socratica, contrapponendo la dimensione della verità alle sue illusorie manifestazioni nel mondo della doxa. Questa posizione s’incontra e scontra inevitabilmente con la spoliticizzazione di cui parla Carl Schmitt e con il recupero di Strauss della filosofia politica classica in contrapposizione alla moderna scienza politica.

Alla luce di questo panorama teorico di posizioni che s’intersecano, a volte si incontrano, altre si sovrappongono, altre ancora provano a confutarsi, invitiamo a pensare al rapporto che intercorre fra la città (intesa come modello che include sia lo Stato sia la società) e l’intellettuale (filosofo, ma anche uomo di cultura, storico o artista che sia, nelle loro diverse peculiarità). Invitiamo a ragionare sulla dimensione in cui l’istinto apolide e cosmopolitico dell’intellettuale filosofo si scontra con il suo bisogno di far parte della comunità in cui opera e prende parola. Invitiamo a riflettere sulla funzione protrettrica e paideutica della filosofia politica e a interrogarsi sulla misura in cui il conflitto fra i diversi istinti dell’intellettuale filosofo abbia definito i diversi paradigmi che hanno contraddistinto le epoche dell’umanità europea.
Forniamo di seguito un elenco non esaustivo dei possibili temi:

1. Il rapporto fra apolitia e utopia
2. L’apolitia greca e l’impolitico moderno
3. Filosofia politica e fenomenologia
4. Storicismo e politica: pro e contra
5. Il ruolo del filosofo nella città
6. Apolitia e cosmopolitismo
7. L’impolitico e l’età della tecnica
8. Filosofia politica versus scienza politica

Inviare un abstract di non oltre 1000 parole a Marco Menon (820034@stud.unive.it) e Danilo Manca (danilomanca30@gmail.com) entro il 15 luglio 2018. Eventuale notifica di accettazione sarà inviata entro il 30 agosto 2018. L’articolo completo dovrà essere inviato entro il 31 gennaio 2019.
Lingue: italiano, inglese, tedesco, francese, spagnolo e portoghese

Share this:

  • Email
  • Facebook
  • Print
  • Twitter

Like this:

Like Loading...

Volume on “The Wisdom of the Ancients” is out!

17 Monday Jul 2017

Posted by Danilo Manca in Senza categoria

≈ Leave a comment

Tags

Anna Romani, Antiquity, Aristophanes, Catherine Zuckert, David Janssens, disputa fra antichi e moderni, Eduardo Zazo Jiménez, Elad Lapidot, Fabio Fossa, Ferdinand Deanini, filosofia politica, German Philosophy, Gnosticism, hannah arendt, Hans Jonas, historicism, history of science, Iacopo Chiaravalli, Jacob Klein, Jewish Studies, Karl Löwith, Kuzari, Leo Strauss, Luca Timponelli, Marco Menon, Marco Sgarbi, Modernity, natura, nature, Nietzsche, Philipp von Wussow, Plato, Political Philosophy, Quarrel between Ancients and Moderns, Roots, Socrates, storia della scienza, storicismo

The volume “The Wisdom of the Ancients. The German-Jewish Revaluation of Ancient Philosophy”, edited by Fabio Fossa and Anna Romani, is now out!
It is readable on the website of the International Journal “Philosophical Readings” (editor in chief: Prof. M. Sgarbi) on the following link: https://zenodo.org/record/826367#.WWyc5f_ygza

Here the Table of Contents:

Platos’ Republic: The Limits of Politics

Catherine H. Zuckert …………………………………………………………………………1

A Lesson in Politics: Some Remarks on Leo Strauss’ Socrates and Aristophanes

Marco Menon …………………………………………………………………………6

Plato, Arendt and the Conditions of Politics

Luca Timponelli……………………………………………………………….12

Leo Strauss on Returning: Some Methodological Aspects

Philipp von Wussow…………………………………………………………………..18

Back to the Roots. The Correspondence Between Leo Strauss and Jacob Klein

David Janssens…………………………………………………………………25

Repetition of Antiquity at the Peak of Modernity as Phenomenological Problem

Iacopo Chiaravalli………………………………………………………………31

Progress as a Problem:

Strauss and Löwith in Dialogue between Antiquity and Modernity

Anna Romani ………………………………………………………………………..37

Naturalness and Historicity:

Strauss and Klein on the Quarrel between the Ancients and the Moderns

Danilo Manca…………………………………………………………………..44

Löwith’s Nietzschean Return to the Ancient Conception of Nature

Eduardo Zazo Jiménez ………………………………………………………………………..50

Ancient Wisdom and the Modern Temper. On the Role of Greek Philosophy and the

Jewish Tradition in Hans Jonas’s Philosophical Anthropology

Fabio Fossa …………………………………………………………………..55

Hans Jonas’ Work on Gnosticism as Counterhistory

Elad Lapidot………………………………………………………………….61

The Law and the Philosopher. On Leo Strauss’ “The Law of Reason in the Kuzari”

Ferdinand Deanini …………………………………………………………………69

Share this:

  • Email
  • Facebook
  • Print
  • Twitter

Like this:

Like Loading...

ODRADEK, Vol. I, no. 2: The Quarrel between Poetry and Philosophy

16 Thursday Jun 2016

Posted by Stella Ammaturo in Odradek

≈ Leave a comment

Tags

aesthetics, albert camus, Alessandra Aloisi, Andrew Benjamin, Danilo Manca, David Roochnik, Edoardo Raimondi, Franco D'Intino, Grace Whistler, Leo Strauss, Leopardi, logique de la philosophie, Lorenzo Serini, Marco Menon, Marco Piazza, Nietzsche, novel, Odradek rivista online, Paolo Godani, philosophical self-criticism, Plato, Political Philosophy, quarrel poetry philosophy, reflection, rhetoric, rivista filosofia e letteratura, Walter Benjamin

È con immenso piacere che segnaliamo la pubblicazione del secondo numero della nostra rivista online Odradek sul tema

The Quarrel between Poetry and Philosophy

 

Di seguito trovate l’indice degli articoli con il link diretto alla pagina della rivista.

Vol I, no 2 (2015):
The Quarrel between Poetry and Philosophy,quarrel-poetry-phil-ct
edited by Alessandra Aloisi and Danilo Manca

Table of contents

Introduction
Alessandra Aloisi and Danilo Manca

 

The Quarrel between poetry and philosophy Poetry as Philosophical Self-Criticism
David Roochnik

Leopardi and Plato (Drama and Poetry vs Philosophy)
Franco D’Intino

Furor Divinus: Creatuvity in Plato’s Ion
Andrew Benjamin

From Rhetoric to Reflection: Albert Camus and the «Ancient Quarrel»
Grace Whistler

Where Philosophy Meets Poetry in Nietzsche’s Writings from 1872-1873
Lorenzo Serini

An Unpolitical Political Philosophy? Some Remarks on Leo Strauss’ «Notes on Lucretius»
Marco Menon

Poesia e Filosofia nella Logique de la Philosophie
Edoardo Raimondi

The Individual between Aesthetics and the Novel
Paolo Godani

Walter Benjamin tra redenzione e rammemorazione, via Proust
Marco Piazza

Share this:

  • Email
  • Facebook
  • Print
  • Twitter

Like this:

Like Loading...

CFP: ODRADEK, vol. I, no. 2: The Quarrel between Poetry and Philosophy

13 Sunday Sep 2015

Posted by Danilo Manca in CFA-CFP

≈ Leave a comment

Tags

Aristotle, Borges, Dante, dichtende Vernunft, imagination, intellectual poetry, Leo Strauss, Leopardi, logos, Metaphernbildung, myth, Nietzsche, Omero, philosophy of literature, philosophy of poetry, Plato, politics, prose, Quarrel between Poetry and Philosophy, Rancière, rhetoric, Schiller, Schlegel, sentimental poetry, Shakespeare, style of philosophy, thought, transcendental poetry, Valéry

Siamo lieti di annunciare l’uscita della call for paper per il secondo numero di Odradek, che sarà dedicato al tema “The Quarrel between Poetry and Philosophy” e curato da Danilo Manca e Alessandra Aloisi.

Submission open: 13th September 2015

Submission deadline: 15th December 2015

Call for papers

 The Quarrel between Poetry and Philosophy

Editors: Danilo Manca and Alessandra Aloisi

 

When in Book Ten of The Republic Plato proscribes poetry from the city and refers to a long-standing quarrel between poetry and philosophy, he raises an issue that has since made its mark in the history of Western thought. The aim of this call for papers is to delve deeper into the original meaning of this quarrel, to evaluate the implications it has had for the Western way of thinking and writing, and to explore the different forms the quarrel has assumed, between poetry and philosophy, between literature and philosophy.

Plato’s treatment of poetry looks as resolute as ambiguous. Plato claims that the mimetic art is essentially an imitation of imitation. Accordingly, the work of art is a mere copy of the ideal model that nature already reproduces. Art is therefore seen as twofold far from the truth, whereas philosophy is the love for truth. Nevertheless, this does not hinder Plato from expressing his philosophical arguments by means of dialogues and myths. Could this ambiguity be solved? Is poetry, in Plato’s view, just an extrinsic aspect that the philosopher has at disposal to have a talk with the ordinary people, namely with the men who are still in the cave? Or, rather, is poetry a fundamental dimension belonging to philosophy itself?

Throughout history of Western thought many thinkers took a position on the Quarrel. For instance, Hegel claimed that Plato’s mode of representation belongs to an earlier stage of the concept’s development. By contrast, by employing the notions of “dichtende Vernunft” and “dichtende Denken” respectively, Nietzsche and Heidegger endorsed the idea that philosophy is essentially connected with the poetic production, that is with Metaphernbildung. Another way of understanding the Quarrel is to consider philosophy one of the tools the poet and the writer employ in order to reflect upon their artistic activity. Philosophy plays an important role in the compositional activity of the poet: such role would consist in making possible a meta-literature, that is, a poetry whose point at issue is its own nature. Examples of this are Schiller’s “sentimental poetry”, Schlegel’s “transcendental poetry”, and Borges’s “intellectual poetry”.

Thus, what is at stake in the quarrel between poetry and philosophy is the distinction between myths and logos, thinking in images and thinking in concepts, between the picturing and the inferential arguing, between the imitation of and the reflection upon reality.

To what extent could the poet’s activity be distinguished from the philosopher’s one? To put it in Aristotle’s terms, what does it mean to say that poetry is more philosophical than history because it deals with the universals? And, consequently, what is the relationship between the universals used by philosophy and the ones used by poetry?

In Phaedo, Socrates admits to have often been suggested in dreams to cultivate the art of the Muses. Even though he had always taken it to be an exhortation to do philosophy, only at the end of his life he understands that he was required «to compose myths, not simply to elaborate arguments». On a similar note is Giacomo Leopardi who claims that the greatest poets are also philosophers (e.g. Omero, Dante and Shakespeare) and that the greatest philosophers are poets (e.g. Plato), since imagination is an essential component of poetry as well as of philosophy.

Thus, if poetry and philosophy are activities that stand on the same footing, one may argue that Plato’s thesis against art and poetry, far from dealing with the problem of truth and its representation, has nothing but a political meaning.

By banishing poetry from the polis that is ruled according to philosophical principles, Plato was trying to prevent a free circulation of words and discourses that may divert bodies from their social and intellectual destination. As Jacques Rancière would put it, the reason why Plato himself told stories and invented myths was to justify a hierarchical order and to provide a foundation for a distribution of knowledge and positions which has no foundation itself. From this point of view, the “ancient quarrel” between poetry and philosophy, between falsehood and truth, appears to be nothing but the expression of the never-ending quarrel between equality and inequality, between democracy and hierarchical order. Not differently from philosophy, poetry is a way of using language and of “making” the truth; in other words, a way of thinking and of organizing reality that can rival the one that philosophy promotes.

Consider otherwise the political issue in Strauss’s terms: the genuine quarrel between philosophy and poetry is not concerned with “the worth of poetry” as such, but with the order in which philosophy and poetry should be ranked. According to Socrates, poetry is legitimate only as ministerial to the user par excellence, namely to the king who is a philosopher, and not as an autonomous enterprise. In this sense, the greatest example of ministerial poetry would be the Platonic dialogue because of its capacity to present the non-philosophical life as ministerial to the philosophical one.

The topic of the proposals might include, but need not to be restricted to:

  1. Any philosophical and/or poetic experience which has nourished and/or questioned the distinction between imagination and thought, myths and logos, and so on.
  2. The problem of the style of philosophy and the role of rhetoric in philosophy
  3. Limits and potentialities of a philosophy of poetry
  4. Features of a literature aiming to be philosophical
  5. Any political aspects entailed in the Quarrel.
  6. The distinction between verse and prose as decisive or not to distinguish poetry from philosophy.

Languages: English, French, German, Italian, Portuguese, Spanish.

The paper can be submitted online via OJS – Open Journal System:

http://zetesis.cfs.unipi.it/Rivista/index.php/odradek/index

Authors can find submission guidelines at the following link:

http://zetesis.cfs.unipi.it/Rivista/index.php/odradek/about/submissions#onlineSubmissions

All papers will be reviewed according to our peer review process policy:

http://zetesis.cfs.unipi.it/Rivista/index.php/odradek/about/editorialPolicies#peerReviewProcess

 

Share this:

  • Email
  • Facebook
  • Print
  • Twitter

Like this:

Like Loading...

The Wisdom of the Ancients 5

25 Thursday Jun 2015

Posted by Danilo Manca in convegni

≈ Leave a comment

Tags

Danilo Manca, David Janssens, Entstehung der Algebra, Greek Mathematical Thought, Griechische Logistik, hegel, Iacopo Chiaravalli, Jacob Klein, Jakob Klein, Leo Strauss, Origin of Algebra, Phenomenology, philosophy of the history of philosophy, Quarrel between the Ancients and the Moderns, rizomata panton, Roots, theory of history, Theory of the Modernity

Domani, venerdì 26 giugno, si concluderà il secondo convegno del giugno filosofico di Zetesis con una sessione dedicata al rapporto tra due vecchi amici: Leo Strauss e Jakob Klein.

Il primo a intervenire sarà Iacopo Chiaravalli, allievo della Scuola Normale di Pisa, con un intervento dal titolo “The Repetition of Antiquity at the Peak of Modernity as a Phenomenological Problem”. 

Seguirà un contributo del Prof. David Janssens, docente all’Università di Tilburg, autore della monografia Between Athens and Jerusalem. Philosophy, Prophecy and Politics in Strauss’s Early Writings, co-editore del volume Leo Strauss: a quoi sert la philosophie politique? Janssens ha scritto anche numerosi sul rapporto tra filosofia e poesia, e tra filosofia e legge. In questa occasione parlerà del carteggio tra Strauss e Klein, titolo del suo intervento è “Back to the Roots. The Correspondence between Leo Strauss and Jacob Klein“.

A concludere il convegno sarà l’intervento del coordinatore di Zetesis, Danilo Manca, dottorando all’Università di Pisa, con un progetto di ricerca su Husserl e Hegel, tema su cui è appena uscito per ETS il libro “Hegel e la fenomenologia trascendentale” di cui Danilo Manca è curatore con Elisa Magrì e Alfredo Ferrarin. Il suo intervento è intitolato: “Philosophy and its History. Strauss and Klein on the Quarrel between the Ancients and the Moderns“.

Share this:

  • Email
  • Facebook
  • Print
  • Twitter

Like this:

Like Loading...
← Older posts

Archivio notizie

Menu

  • ADMISSION
  • Una testimonianza per il futuro dopo la tragedia del coronavirus
  • GROUPS
    • Classical German Philosophy and Phenomenology
    • Philosophies of Image and Imagination
    • The Philosophy of Nature
    • The quarrel between philosophy and poetry
    • The quarrel between the ancients and moderns
    • Theories of Emotions
    • Utopia, the Political Myth, and Rebellion
  • CONFERENCES
    • 2019
      • Gli spazi e i tempi della forma: storia naturale delle rovine
    • 2018
      • Sellars e la filosofia post-kantiana
    • 2017
      • Dialettica della ragione, teleologia e idea di mondo in Kant.
      • La filosofia e il tragico
      • La leggibilità della natura
    • 2016
      • Dialectic and the Ends of Reason
        • Schedule
      • Il tragico nella letteratura tedesca
    • 2015
      • Immaginazione e Giudizio In Kant
        • Schedule
      • MELANCOLIA. Metamorfosi dell’umor nero
        • Introduction
        • Schedule
      • THE WISDOM OF THE ANCIENTS. The German-Jewish Revaluation of Ancient Philosophy
        • Introduction
        • Schedule
    • 2014
      • Hegel and the phenomenological movement
  • CONTACTS
  • EVENTS
  • IDEAS
  • ODRADEK Journal
  • PEOPLE
  • PRESS REVIEW
  • RICORDANDO BARALE

Zetesis FanPage

Zetesis FanPage

Seguiteci su Twitter

My Tweets

I nostri eventi

This slideshow requires JavaScript.

Create a free website or blog at WordPress.com.

Privacy & Cookies: This site uses cookies. By continuing to use this website, you agree to their use.
To find out more, including how to control cookies, see here: Cookie Policy
  • Follow Following
    • zetesisproject.com
    • Join 26 other followers
    • Already have a WordPress.com account? Log in now.
    • zetesisproject.com
    • Customize
    • Follow Following
    • Sign up
    • Log in
    • Report this content
    • View site in Reader
    • Manage subscriptions
    • Collapse this bar
 

Loading Comments...
 

    %d bloggers like this: