Podcast appearances and mentions of Peter E Gordon

Existentialismen zoomade in på individen, vardagen och friheten. Filosofen Ulrika Björk reflekterar över denna tankevärld och över vad det innebär att man inte föds, utan formas, till kvinna. ESSÄ: Detta är en text där skribenten reflekterar över ett ämne eller ett verk. Åsikter som uttrycks är skribentens egna. Essän sändes för första gången den 10 september 2018. Filosofihistorien är full av ögonblick – tidpunkter som bara kan urskiljas i den plötsliga vändning med vilken något inträffar, som författaren Aris Fioretos skriver i avhandlingen ”Det kritiska ögonblicket”. Ögonblicket är en plötslig övergång har Platon sagt. Oväntat slår något om från rörelse till stillhet, från stillhet till rörelse. Ett mytomspunnet filosofiskt ögonblick är de tyska tänkarna Ernst Cassirers och Martin Heideggers möte i den schweiziska skidorten Davos våren 1929. Deras oenighet om vad det är att vara mänsklig har blivit symbolisk för en splittring inom den europeiska filosofin. Den ena riktningen, som kommit att kallas ”analytisk”, sätter (förenklat såklart) sin tilltro till människans spontanitet och förmåga att skapa sin värld. Den andra, som kommit att kallas ”kontinental”, ser människans ändlighet och historiska tillhörighet som i huvudsak bestämmande för vem hon är. En filosofi om ”förväntan, trötthet, ängslan, om en vandring uppför en kulle, passionen för en åtrådd älskare, motvilja…det kalla havet vid Le Havre om hösten, känslan av att sitta på en alltför tjock möbelstoppning Ett mindre omtalat ögonblick inträffar i slutet av 1932, då tre unga filosofer sitter på baren Gaslyktan i Paris och skvallrar över varsin aprikoscocktail. Det är den då tjugofemåriga Simone de Beauvoir, som betraktar världen ”genom sina elegant halvslutna ögon”, hennes tjugosjuåriga pojkvän Jean-Paul Sartre och hans ”charmige gamle skolkamrat” från elitskolan, Raymond Aron. I den stunden föds den moderna existentialismen, skriver Sarah Bakewell i sin internationellt hyllade bok ”Existentialisterna” som kom på svenska 2017. Boken är en sorts biografi över den kontinentala filosofin, vävd kring dess avgörande ögonblick. Simone de Beauvoir har återgett scenen i sin självbiografi. De var alla hemma över jullovet; hon själv och Sartre från lärarjobb i landsorten, Aron från filosofistudier i Berlin. Aron öppnade bådas ögon för fenomenologin. Kanske, föreställer sig Bakewell, beskrev han hur de tyska fenomenologerna gav sig i kast med livet såsom vi upplever det, ”ögonblick för ögonblick”, i den värld vi alltid redan är inkastade i. ”Till sakerna själva!”, som mästaren Edmund Husserl uttryckte det. Det kan översättas till: ödsla inte tid på tolkningar... Betrakta detta framför dig och beskriv det så noggrant som möjligt. ”Du förstår, om du är fenomenolog”, lär Aron ha sagt, ”kan du tala om denna cocktail och bedriva filosofi!” Från det ögonblicket vecklar en skarp, medryckande och underhållande biografi ut sig som varken hemfaller åt jargong, fastnar i biografiska detaljer eller förirrar sig i filosofiska diton. Historien om existentialismens intellektuella vändningar rör sig mellan kafébord och dansklubbar på den vänstra stranden i Paris, Freiburgs föreläsningssalar och obeträdda stigar i Schwartzwald, Svartskogen. Huvudgestalter är Sartre och Heidegger, tätt följda av Beauvoir. Som sinnesstämning, påminner Sarah Bakewell, kan existentialismen spåras till Bibelns missmodiga Predikare och den upproriske (men i slutändan underkastade) Job; till Augustinus självrannsakan och till 1600-talstänkaren Blaise Pascals skräck inför rymdens tystnad. Som rörelse förebådades den av 1800-talets missanpassade (tänk på ångestridna författare som Sören Kierkegaard och Friedrich Nietzsche). Sartres briljans var att han förvandlade den något skrivbordmässiga tyska fenomenologin till en filosofi om ”förväntan, trötthet, ängslan, om en vandring uppför en kulle, passionen för en åtrådd älskare, motvilja…det kalla havet vid Le Havre om hösten, känslan av att sitta på en alltför tjock möbelstoppning…en film, en jazzlåt, en glimt av två främlingar som möts under en gatlykta.” Trots att Sartre, så att säga, flyttar ut filosofin till livet där det pågår, är det ingen av hans skrifter som Bakewell utser till existentialismens mest omdanande verk, utan Simone de Beauvoirs ”Det andra könet”. Hennes chockerande budskap, för en läsare på femtiotalet, är att det inte skulle behöva vara såhär: man föds inte till (underordnad, tinglik) kvinna; man blir det ”Le Deuxième Sexe” kom 1949 men föregreps tjugo år tidigare. Vi befinner oss återigen i Paris, denna gång i Luxembourgträdgården ett par år innan existentialismens födelse och samma sommar som schismen i Davos. Beauvoir och Sartre studerar filosofi vid Sorbonne och hon utlägger för första gången sin teori om en pluralistisk etik för honom. Under tre timmar sågar han teorin. Beauvoir kommenterar nederlaget i en dagboksanteckning: ”Jag är inte längre säker på vad jag tänker eller om jag alls kan tänka”. Ögonblicket är emblematiskt för vad det innebär att vara en kvinnlig intellektuell, menar litteraturvetaren Toril Moi. Beauvoirs tvivel rör inte bara det tänkta, utan det egna tänkandet. Det återkommer också indirekt i ”Det andra könet”, där Beauvoir frågar sig varför kvinnor och det feminina vart hon än vänder sig verkar underordnas män och det maskulina. Finns ens ”kvinnan”? Och vad är i så fall en kvinna? Lika lite som mannen är kvinnan något givet, resonerar Beauvoir, men genom historien har hon blivit den andre, objektet, i förhållande till mannen, subjektet. Som när något i rörelse tvingas till stillhet. På åttahundra sidor visar hon hur underordningen har motiveras vetenskapligt, gestaltats litterärt och iscensatts historiskt. Hennes chockerande budskap, för en läsare på femtiotalet, är att det inte skulle behöva vara såhär: man föds inte till (underordnad, tinglik) kvinna; man blir det. Just de orden har blivit ett avgörande ögonblick i Beauvoirs text. Kanske är påståendet ”Man föds inte till kvinna, man blir det” existentialismens mest bevingade mening. Den dyker upp i verkets andra del, där Beauvoir visar hur underordningen levs, ögonblick för ögonblick, men har sedan färdats över kontinenter och språk och inspirerat generationer av kvinnor i deras kamp för frihet. Precis som existentialismen har påståendet viktiga biografiska ögonblick; tidpunkter då det har tolkats i en ny och oväntad riktning. Vi kanske tror att vi föds till kvinnor och män som av naturen begär varandra, skrev till exempel författaren Monique Wittig 1981, men i själva verket skapas begäret av ett förtryckande socialt system. Det finns inget naturligt, stämde filosofen Judith Butler in 1986. Vi föds inte till ”naturliga kvinnor” eller män med ”naturliga begär”. Snarare är det som om vi deltog i en sorts kulturell teater, där vi repeterar – alltså upprepar – begärets handlingar så att de verkar naturliga. En situation, på existentialismens språk, rymmer sådant som är givet – det jag inte kan ändra på – men också friheten att i varje ögonblick välja Wittig och Butler citerar den bristfälliga engelska översättningen av ”Det andra könet” från 1953: ”One is not born, but rather becomes a woman”. När en ny engelsk översättning kom 2010 löd meningen: ”One is not born, but rather becomes woman”. Vad är skillnaden? Jo, de nya översättarna har utelämnat den obestämda artikeln ”a” (en) framför kvinna. På det sättet, försvarar de sig, har de tolkat den på franska tvetydiga satsen i enlighet med Beauvoirs övertygelse: kvinnan är en social konstruktion. I juni 2011 möttes en grupp filosofer för att tala om översättningen, på en vinbar i Eugen i det amerikanska pinot-noir-distriktet Oregon. Debatten blev lika engagé som på existentialisternas tid och utmynnade i en antologi: ”'On ne naît pas femme: on le devient…' The Life of a Sentence” (2017). I den kan man läsa hur den socialkonstruktivistiska tolkningen, enligt kritikerna, förutsätter ett motsatspar som Beauvoir redan har övergett, nämligen indelningen i något naturligt och något kulturellt. Som fenomenolog utgår Beauvoir istället från livet såsom det upplevs; som existentialist från villkoret att vara kastad in i en situation. En situation, på existentialismens språk, rymmer sådant som är givet – det jag inte kan ändra på – men också friheten att i varje ögonblick välja vad jag vill göra av denna ”givenhet”. Det låter nästan som en försoning av splittringen i Davos: den mänskliga tillvaron är tvetydig. Med Sarah Bakewells ord är den ”på en och samma gång innesluten av gränser och gränsöverskridande”. I ”Det andra könet”, kan man konstatera när man läser boken idag, skildrar Beauvoir inte bara vad som måste ha varit uppenbart för var och en redan på femtiotalet: att kvinnor underordnas män. Med elegant halvsluten blick förutser hon också ögonblick av förvandling: oväntade tidpunkter då gränser faktiskt överskrids, stillhet slår om till rörelse, förtryck vänds till frihet. Ulrika Björk, lektor i filosofi vid Södertörns högskola Litteratur Simone de Beauvoir, ”Le Deuxième Sexe”, del 1 och II (Paris: Gallimard, 1949) Simone de Beauvoir, ”Det andra könet”, övers. Åsa Moberg och Adam Inczèdy-Gombos i samarbete med Eva Gothlin (Stockholm: Norstedts, 2002) Sarah Bakewell, ”Existentialisterna. En historia om frihet, vara och aprikoscocktails” (Stockholm: Albert Bonniers förlag, 2017) Judith Butler, ”Sex and Gender in Simone de Beauvoir's Second Sex”, Yale French Studies nr 72 (1986) Aris Fioretos, ”Det kritiska ögonblicket: Hölderlin, Benjamin, Celan (Stockholm: Norstedts, 1991) Peter E. Gordon, ”Contintental Divide: Heidegger, Cassirer, Davos” (Cambridge: Harvard University Press, 2010) Bonnie Mann & Martina Ferrari, utg., ”'On ne naît pas femme: on le devient…' The Life of a Sentence” (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2017) Toril Moi, ”Simone de Beauvoir: hur man skapar en kvinnlig intellektuell”, övers. Lisa Wilhelmsson (Eslöv: Brutus Östlings förlag Symposion, 1996) Monique Wittig, ”One is Not Born a Woman”, Feminist Studies 1, nr 2 (1981)

A beautifully written exploration of religion's role in a secular, modern politics, by an accomplished scholar of critical theory, Migrants in the Profane: Critical Theory and the Question of Secularization (Yale University Press, 2020) takes its title from an intriguing remark by Theodor W. Adorno, in which he summarized the meaning of Walter Benjamin's image of a celebrated mechanical chess-playing Turk and its hidden religious animus: "Nothing of theological content will persist without being transformed; every content will have to put itself to the test of migrating in the realm of the secular, the profane." In this masterful book, Peter Gordon reflects on Adorno's statement and asks an urgent question: Can religion offer any normative resources for modern political life, or does the appeal to religious concepts stand in conflict with the idea of modern politics as a domain free from religion's influence? In answering this question, he explores the work of three of the Frankfurt School's most esteemed thinkers: Walter Benjamin, Max Horkheimer, and Theodor W. Adorno. His illuminating analysis offers a highly original account of the intertwined histories of religion and secular modernity. Ryan Tripp is an adjunct for universities and California community colleges. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

A beautifully written exploration of religion's role in a secular, modern politics, by an accomplished scholar of critical theory, Migrants in the Profane: Critical Theory and the Question of Secularization (Yale University Press, 2020) takes its title from an intriguing remark by Theodor W. Adorno, in which he summarized the meaning of Walter Benjamin's image of a celebrated mechanical chess-playing Turk and its hidden religious animus: "Nothing of theological content will persist without being transformed; every content will have to put itself to the test of migrating in the realm of the secular, the profane." In this masterful book, Peter Gordon reflects on Adorno's statement and asks an urgent question: Can religion offer any normative resources for modern political life, or does the appeal to religious concepts stand in conflict with the idea of modern politics as a domain free from religion's influence? In answering this question, he explores the work of three of the Frankfurt School's most esteemed thinkers: Walter Benjamin, Max Horkheimer, and Theodor W. Adorno. His illuminating analysis offers a highly original account of the intertwined histories of religion and secular modernity. Ryan Tripp is an adjunct for universities and California community colleges. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices Support our show by becoming a premium member! https://newbooksnetwork.supportingcast.fm

A beautifully written exploration of religion's role in a secular, modern politics, by an accomplished scholar of critical theory, Migrants in the Profane: Critical Theory and the Question of Secularization (Yale University Press, 2020) takes its title from an intriguing remark by Theodor W. Adorno, in which he summarized the meaning of Walter Benjamin's image of a celebrated mechanical chess-playing Turk and its hidden religious animus: "Nothing of theological content will persist without being transformed; every content will have to put itself to the test of migrating in the realm of the secular, the profane." In this masterful book, Peter Gordon reflects on Adorno's statement and asks an urgent question: Can religion offer any normative resources for modern political life, or does the appeal to religious concepts stand in conflict with the idea of modern politics as a domain free from religion's influence? In answering this question, he explores the work of three of the Frankfurt School's most esteemed thinkers: Walter Benjamin, Max Horkheimer, and Theodor W. Adorno. His illuminating analysis offers a highly original account of the intertwined histories of religion and secular modernity. Ryan Tripp is an adjunct for universities and California community colleges. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices Support our show by becoming a premium member! https://newbooksnetwork.supportingcast.fm

A beautifully written exploration of religion's role in a secular, modern politics, by an accomplished scholar of critical theory, Migrants in the Profane: Critical Theory and the Question of Secularization (Yale University Press, 2020) takes its title from an intriguing remark by Theodor W. Adorno, in which he summarized the meaning of Walter Benjamin's image of a celebrated mechanical chess-playing Turk and its hidden religious animus: "Nothing of theological content will persist without being transformed; every content will have to put itself to the test of migrating in the realm of the secular, the profane." In this masterful book, Peter Gordon reflects on Adorno's statement and asks an urgent question: Can religion offer any normative resources for modern political life, or does the appeal to religious concepts stand in conflict with the idea of modern politics as a domain free from religion's influence? In answering this question, he explores the work of three of the Frankfurt School's most esteemed thinkers: Walter Benjamin, Max Horkheimer, and Theodor W. Adorno. His illuminating analysis offers a highly original account of the intertwined histories of religion and secular modernity. Ryan Tripp is an adjunct for universities and California community colleges. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

A beautifully written exploration of religion's role in a secular, modern politics, by an accomplished scholar of critical theory, Migrants in the Profane: Critical Theory and the Question of Secularization (Yale University Press, 2020) takes its title from an intriguing remark by Theodor W. Adorno, in which he summarized the meaning of Walter Benjamin's image of a celebrated mechanical chess-playing Turk and its hidden religious animus: "Nothing of theological content will persist without being transformed; every content will have to put itself to the test of migrating in the realm of the secular, the profane." In this masterful book, Peter Gordon reflects on Adorno's statement and asks an urgent question: Can religion offer any normative resources for modern political life, or does the appeal to religious concepts stand in conflict with the idea of modern politics as a domain free from religion's influence? In answering this question, he explores the work of three of the Frankfurt School's most esteemed thinkers: Walter Benjamin, Max Horkheimer, and Theodor W. Adorno. His illuminating analysis offers a highly original account of the intertwined histories of religion and secular modernity. Ryan Tripp is an adjunct for universities and California community colleges. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

A beautifully written exploration of religion's role in a secular, modern politics, by an accomplished scholar of critical theory, Migrants in the Profane: Critical Theory and the Question of Secularization (Yale University Press, 2020) takes its title from an intriguing remark by Theodor W. Adorno, in which he summarized the meaning of Walter Benjamin's image of a celebrated mechanical chess-playing Turk and its hidden religious animus: "Nothing of theological content will persist without being transformed; every content will have to put itself to the test of migrating in the realm of the secular, the profane." In this masterful book, Peter Gordon reflects on Adorno's statement and asks an urgent question: Can religion offer any normative resources for modern political life, or does the appeal to religious concepts stand in conflict with the idea of modern politics as a domain free from religion's influence? In answering this question, he explores the work of three of the Frankfurt School's most esteemed thinkers: Walter Benjamin, Max Horkheimer, and Theodor W. Adorno. His illuminating analysis offers a highly original account of the intertwined histories of religion and secular modernity. Ryan Tripp is an adjunct for universities and California community colleges. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

A beautifully written exploration of religion's role in a secular, modern politics, by an accomplished scholar of critical theory, Migrants in the Profane: Critical Theory and the Question of Secularization (Yale University Press, 2020) takes its title from an intriguing remark by Theodor W. Adorno, in which he summarized the meaning of Walter Benjamin's image of a celebrated mechanical chess-playing Turk and its hidden religious animus: "Nothing of theological content will persist without being transformed; every content will have to put itself to the test of migrating in the realm of the secular, the profane." In this masterful book, Peter Gordon reflects on Adorno's statement and asks an urgent question: Can religion offer any normative resources for modern political life, or does the appeal to religious concepts stand in conflict with the idea of modern politics as a domain free from religion's influence? In answering this question, he explores the work of three of the Frankfurt School's most esteemed thinkers: Walter Benjamin, Max Horkheimer, and Theodor W. Adorno. His illuminating analysis offers a highly original account of the intertwined histories of religion and secular modernity. Ryan Tripp is an adjunct for universities and California community colleges. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

This episode has Mark Sadler and Jörg Heiser sharing pearls of wisdom concerning the grammar of painting, architecture of philosophy and notions of freedom. And suddenly, the horizon is opening up wide. A series of chapters from Disputaziuns Susch, an annual conference scheme hosted by Art Stations Foundation CH and Grazyna Kulczyk. In spring 1929, just a glimpse before the Great Depression and the Great Crash to come soon, the Cassirer-Heidegger debate takes place in Davos; Ernst Cassirer pulls his arguments for a broader conception of humanity, his counterpart is Martin Heidegger and his relativism. The quest of a universal truth drives a ‘continental divide’ (Peter E. Gordon) or ‘Weggabelung der Philosophie’ (Henning Ritter), anticipating major philosophical debates to come. 90 years ahead, in Susch, 40 minutes away from Davos, once again in times of disorientation, disillusion, with radical movements on the rise, we were repeating the question that led the historical debate: What is it to be human?

This episode has Elisabeth Bronfen looking at Virginia Woolf’s ‘Breaking the Waves’ and comparing Woolf's feeling of ‘walking a tightrope over nothingness’ to Heidegger’s notion of individual existences as 'being thrown' into the world. Also the horizon (see episode two) is returning to the debate. A series of chapters from Disputaziuns Susch, an annual conference scheme hosted by Art Stations Foundation CH and Grazyna Kulczyk. In spring 1929, just a glimpse before the Great Depression and the Great Crash to come soon, the Cassirer-Heidegger debate takes place in Davos; Ernst Cassirer pulls his arguments for a broader conception of humanity, his counterpart is Martin Heidegger and his relativism. The quest of a universal truth drives a ‘continental divide’ (Peter E. Gordon) or ‘Weggabelung der Philosophie’ (Henning Ritter), anticipating major philosophical debates to come. 90 years ahead, in Susch, 40 minutes away from Davos, once again in times of disorientation, disillusion, with radical movements on the rise, we were repeating the question that led the historical debate: What is it to be human?

This episode has Timotheus Vermeulen analyzing opposing positions: Where Cassirer believes that his point of view projects the horizon; Heidegger believes that we are thrown into a horizon, which means the horizon is there before us or rather, in his terms, with us. A series of chapters from Disputaziuns Susch, an annual conference scheme hosted by Art Stations Foundation CH and Grazyna Kulczyk. In spring 1929, just a glimpse before the Great Depression and the Great Crash to come soon, the Cassirer-Heidegger debate takes place in Davos; Ernst Cassirer pulls his arguments for a broader conception of humanity, his counterpart is Martin Heidegger and his relativism. The quest of a universal truth drives a ‘continental divide’ (Peter E. Gordon) or ‘Weggabelung der Philosophie’ (Henning Ritter), anticipating major philosophical debates to come. 90 years ahead, in Susch, 40 minutes away from Davos, once again in times of disorientation, disillusion, with radical movements on the rise, we were repeating the question that led the historical debate: What is it to be human?

The first one in a series of episodes from Disputaziuns Susch - an annual multi-disciplinary endeavor, bringing together scholars, artists and scientists in Susch to exploring a timely subject. In spring 1929, just a glimpse before the Great Depression and the Great Crash to come soon, the Cassirer-Heidegger debate takes place in Davos; Ernst Cassirer pulls his arguments for a broader conception of humanity, his counterpart is Martin Heidegger and his relativism. The quest of a universal truth drives a ‘continental divide’ (Peter E. Gordon) or ‘Weggabelung der Philosophie’ (Henning Ritter), anticipating major philosophical debates to come. 90 years ahead, in Susch, 40 minutes away from Davos, once again in times of disorientation, disillusion, with radical movements on the rise, we were repeating the question that led the historical debate: What is it to be human? This episode has Aleksandra Mir imagining an artist and a scientist sitting on a train where a conversation ensues about objective realities, space exploration, negative space and belief.

This episode has Mark Sadler and Jörg Heiser sharing pearls of wisdom concerning the grammar of painting, architecture of philosophy and notions of freedom. And suddenly, the horizon is opening up wide. Disputaziuns Susch, from the beginning in 2017, has been a multi-disciplinary annual endeavor, bringing together scholars and artists, philosophers and authors, neuroscientists and historians – thinkers who will be asking questions and counter questions – in its 2019's editions circling around the possibilities for universal truths versus a relative view of human temporality and finitude, rational thinking and the notion of men as ‘symbolic animals', creating a universe of symbolic meanings, versus our being-in-the-world, perceiving the world via our relationship to time. Taking the Davos disputation in 1929, between Ernst Cassirer and Martin Heidegger, as a starting point, this ‘continental divide' (as Peter E. Gordon called it) or ‘Weggabelung der Philosophie' as per Henning Ritter – 90 years ahead, in Susch, 40 minutes away from Davos, once again in times of disorientation, disillusion, with radical movements on the rise, we are repeating the question that led the historical debate: Was ist der Mensch? What is it to be human? This vast theme is broken down into several more specific discourses, concerning especially the relationship of philosophy, politics and art. Diputanziuns Susch 2019 speakers were: Grażyna Kulczyk (founder and president of the board, Art Stations Foundation CH), Mareike Dittmer (director Art Stations Foundation CH & chair Disputaziuns Susch), Aleksandra Mir (Poland-born artist, Swedish-American citizen based in London), Timotheus Vermeulen (Dutch scholar and critic, associate professor in Media, Culture and Society at the University of Oslo, Norway), Tadeusz Slawek (Polish lyricist, essayist, translator, literary critic and professor), Elisabeth Bronfen (Swiss/German/American literary and cultural critic, professor and chairholder for English literature at the University of Zurich and global distinguished professor at New York University), Marcus Steinweg (French-German philosopher, professor at Kunstakademie Karlsruhe), Mark Sadler (Scottish artist & writer, guest professor at UdK, Berlin), Jörg Heiser (German philosopher and art historian, director Institut für Kunst im Kontext, Berlin)

The third episode in the series of chapters from Disputaziuns Susch, an annual conference scheme hosted by Art Stations Foundation CH and Grazyna Kulczyk, has Elisabeth Bronfen looking at Virginia Woolfe's ‘Breaking the Waves' and comparing Woolfe's feeling of ‘walking a tightrope over nothingness' to Heidegger's notion of individual existences as 'being thrown' into the world. Also the horizon (see episode two) is returning to the debate. Disputaziuns Susch, from the beginning in 2017, has been a multi-disciplinary annual endeavor, bringing together scholars and artists, philosophers and authors, neuroscientists and historians – thinkers who will be asking questions and counter questions – in its 2019's editions circling around the possibilities for universal truths versus a relative view of human temporality and finitude, rational thinking and the notion of men as ‘symbolic animals', creating a universe of symbolic meanings, versus our being-in-the-world, perceiving the world via our relationship to time. Taking the Davos disputation in 1929, between Ernst Cassirer and Martin Heidegger, as a starting point, this ‘continental divide' (as Peter E. Gordon called it) or ‘Weggabelung der Philosophie' as per Henning Ritter – 90 years ahead, in Susch, 40 minutes away from Davos, once again in times of disorientation, disillusion, with radical movements on the rise, we are repeating the question that led the historical debate: Was ist der Mensch? What is it to be human? This vast theme is broken down into several more specific discourses, concerning especially the relationship of philosophy, politics and art. Diputanziuns Susch 2019 speakers were: Grażyna Kulczyk (founder and president of the board, Art Stations Foundation CH), Mareike Dittmer (director Art Stations Foundation CH & chair Disputaziuns Susch), Aleksandra Mir (Poland-born artist, Swedish-American citizen based in London), Timotheus Vermeulen (Dutch scholar and critic, associate professor in Media, Culture and Society at the University of Oslo, Norway), Tadeusz Slawek (Polish lyricist, essayist, translator, literary critic and professor), Elisabeth Bronfen (Swiss/German/American literary and cultural critic, professor and chairholder for English literature at the University of Zurich and global distinguished professor at New York University), Marcus Steinweg (French-German philosopher, professor at Kunstakademie Karlsruhe), Mark Sadler (Scottish artist & writer, guest professor at UdK, Berlin), Jörg Heiser (German philosopher and art historian, director Institut für Kunst im Kontext, Berlin)

The third episode in the series of chapters from Disputaziuns Susch, an annual conference scheme hosted by Art Stations Foundation CH and Grazyna Kulczyk, has Elisabeth Bronfen looking at Virginia Woolfe’s ‘Breaking the Waves’ and comparing Woolfe's feeling of ‘walking a tightrope over nothingness’ to Heidegger’s notion of individual existences as 'being thrown' into the world. Also the horizon (see episode two) is returning to the debate. Disputaziuns Susch, from the beginning in 2017, has been a multi-disciplinary annual endeavor, bringing together scholars and artists, philosophers and authors, neuroscientists and historians – thinkers who will be asking questions and counter questions – in its 2019’s editions circling around the possibilities for universal truths versus a relative view of human temporality and finitude, rational thinking and the notion of men as ‘symbolic animals’, creating a universe of symbolic meanings, versus our being-in-the-world, perceiving the world via our relationship to time. Taking the Davos disputation in 1929, between Ernst Cassirer and Martin Heidegger, as a starting point, this ‘continental divide’ (as Peter E. Gordon called it) or ‘Weggabelung der Philosophie’ as per Henning Ritter – 90 years ahead, in Susch, 40 minutes away from Davos, once again in times of disorientation, disillusion, with radical movements on the rise, we are repeating the question that led the historical debate: Was ist der Mensch? What is it to be human? This vast theme is broken down into several more specific discourses, concerning especially the relationship of philosophy, politics and art. Diputanziuns Susch 2019 speakers were: Grażyna Kulczyk (founder and president of the board, Art Stations Foundation CH), Mareike Dittmer (director Art Stations Foundation CH & chair Disputaziuns Susch), Aleksandra Mir (Poland-born artist, Swedish-American citizen based in London), Timotheus Vermeulen (Dutch scholar and critic, associate professor in Media, Culture and Society at the University of Oslo, Norway), Tadeusz Slawek (Polish lyricist, essayist, translator, literary critic and professor), Elisabeth Bronfen (Swiss/German/American literary and cultural critic, professor and chairholder for English literature at the University of Zurich and global distinguished professor at New York University), Marcus Steinweg (French-German philosopher, professor at Kunstakademie Karlsruhe), Mark Sadler (Scottish artist & writer, guest professor at UdK, Berlin), Jörg Heiser (German philosopher and art historian, director Institut für Kunst im Kontext, Berlin)

This episode has Mark Sadler and Jörg Heiser sharing pearls of wisdom concerning the grammar of painting, architecture of philosophy and notions of freedom. And suddenly, the horizon is opening up wide. Disputaziuns Susch, from the beginning in 2017, has been a multi-disciplinary annual endeavor, bringing together scholars and artists, philosophers and authors, neuroscientists and historians – thinkers who will be asking questions and counter questions – in its 2019’s editions circling around the possibilities for universal truths versus a relative view of human temporality and finitude, rational thinking and the notion of men as ‘symbolic animals’, creating a universe of symbolic meanings, versus our being-in-the-world, perceiving the world via our relationship to time. Taking the Davos disputation in 1929, between Ernst Cassirer and Martin Heidegger, as a starting point, this ‘continental divide’ (as Peter E. Gordon called it) or ‘Weggabelung der Philosophie’ as per Henning Ritter – 90 years ahead, in Susch, 40 minutes away from Davos, once again in times of disorientation, disillusion, with radical movements on the rise, we are repeating the question that led the historical debate: Was ist der Mensch? What is it to be human? This vast theme is broken down into several more specific discourses, concerning especially the relationship of philosophy, politics and art. Diputanziuns Susch 2019 speakers were: Grażyna Kulczyk (founder and president of the board, Art Stations Foundation CH), Mareike Dittmer (director Art Stations Foundation CH & chair Disputaziuns Susch), Aleksandra Mir (Poland-born artist, Swedish-American citizen based in London), Timotheus Vermeulen (Dutch scholar and critic, associate professor in Media, Culture and Society at the University of Oslo, Norway), Tadeusz Slawek (Polish lyricist, essayist, translator, literary critic and professor), Elisabeth Bronfen (Swiss/German/American literary and cultural critic, professor and chairholder for English literature at the University of Zurich and global distinguished professor at New York University), Marcus Steinweg (French-German philosopher, professor at Kunstakademie Karlsruhe), Mark Sadler (Scottish artist & writer, guest professor at UdK, Berlin), Jörg Heiser (German philosopher and art historian, director Institut für Kunst im Kontext, Berlin)

The first episode in a series of chapters from Disputaziuns Susch, an annual conference scheme hosted by Art Stations Foundation CH and Grazyna Kulczyk, has Aleksandra Mir imagining an artist and a scientist sitting on a train where a conversation ensues about objective realities, space exploration, negative space and belief.In spring 1929, just a glimpse before the Great Depression and the Great Crash to come soon, the Cassirer-Heidegger debate takes place in Davos; Ernst Cassirer pulls his arguments for a broader conception of humanity, his counterpart is Martin Heidegger and his relativism. The quest of a universal truth drives a ‘continental divide' (Peter E. Gordon) or ‘Weggabelung der Philosophie' (Henning Ritter), anticipating major philosophical debates to come. 90 years ahead, in Susch, 40 minutes away from Davos, once again in times of disorientation, disillusion, with radical movements on the rise, we were repeating the question that led the historical debate: What is it to be human? Disputaziuns Susch, from the beginning in 2017, has been a multi-disciplinary annual endeavor, bringing together scholars and artists, philosophers and authors, neuroscientists and historians – thinkers who will be asking questions and counter questions – in its 2019's editions circling around the possibilities for universal truths versus a relative view of human temporality and finitude, rational thinking and the notion of men as ‘symbolic animals', creating a universe of symbolic meanings, versus our being-in-the-world, perceiving the world via our relationship to time. Taking the Davos disputation in 1929, between Ernst Cassirer and Martin Heidegger, as a starting point, this ‘continental divide' (as Peter E. Gordon called it) or ‘Weggabelung der Philosophie' as per Henning Ritter – 90 years ahead, in Susch, 40 minutes away from Davos, once again in times of disorientation, disillusion, with radical movements on the rise, we are repeating the question that led the historical debate: Was ist der Mensch? What is it to be human? This vast theme is broken down into several more specific discourses, concerning especially the relationship of philosophy, politics and art.Diputanziuns Susch 2019 speakers were: Grażyna Kulczyk (founder and president of the board, Art Stations Foundation CH), Mareike Dittmer (director Art Stations Foundation CH & chair Disputaziuns Susch), Aleksandra Mir (Poland-born artist, Swedish-American citizen based in London), Timotheus Vermeulen (Dutch scholar and critic, associate professor in Media, Culture and Society at the University of Oslo, Norway), Tadeusz Slawek (Polish lyricist, essayist, translator, literary critic and professor), Elisabeth Bronfen (Swiss/German/American literary and cultural critic, professor and chairholder for English literature at the University of Zurich and global distinguished professor at New York University), Marcus Steinweg (French-German philosopher, professor at Kunstakademie Karlsruhe), Mark Sadler (Scottish artist & writer, guest professor at UdK, Berlin), Jörg Heiser (German philosopher and art historian, director Institut für Kunst im Kontext, Berlin)

The second episode of the series of chapters from Disputaziuns Susch, an annual conference scheme hosted by Art Stations Foundation CH and Grazyna Kulczyk, has Timotheus Vermeulen analyzing opposing positions: Where Cassirer believes that his point of view projects the horizon; Heidegger believes that we are thrown into a horizon, which means the horizon is there before us or rather, in his terms, with us. In spring 1929, just a glimpse before the Great Depression and the Great Crash to come soon, the Cassirer-Heidegger debate takes place in Davos; Ernst Cassirer pulls his arguments for a broader conception of humanity, his counterpart is Martin Heidegger and his relativism. The quest of a universal truth drives a ‘continental divide' (Peter E. Gordon) or ‘Weggabelung der Philosophie' (Henning Ritter), anticipating major philosophical debates to come. 90 years ahead, in Susch, 40 minutes away from Davos, once again in times of disorientation, disillusion, with radical movements on the rise, we were repeating the question that led the historical debate: What is it to be human?  Disputaziuns Susch, from the beginning in 2017, has been a multi-disciplinary annual endeavor, bringing together scholars and artists, philosophers and authors, neuroscientists and historians – thinkers who will be asking questions and counter questions – in its 2019's editions circling around the possibilities for universal truths versus a relative view of human temporality and finitude, rational thinking and the notion of men as ‘symbolic animals', creating a universe of symbolic meanings, versus our being-in-the-world, perceiving the world via our relationship to time. Taking the Davos disputation in 1929, between Ernst Cassirer and Martin Heidegger, as a starting point, this ‘continental divide' (as Peter E. Gordon called it) or ‘Weggabelung der Philosophie' as per Henning Ritter – 90 years ahead, in Susch, 40 minutes away from Davos, once again in times of disorientation, disillusion, with radical movements on the rise, we are repeating the question that led the historical debate: Was ist der Mensch? What is it to be human? This vast theme is broken down into several more specific discourses, concerning especially the relationship of philosophy, politics and art.   Diputanziuns Susch 2019 speakers were: Grażyna Kulczyk (founder and president of the board, Art Stations Foundation CH), Mareike Dittmer (director Art Stations Foundation CH & chair Disputaziuns Susch), Aleksandra Mir (Poland-born artist, Swedish-American citizen based in London), Timotheus Vermeulen (Dutch scholar and critic, associate professor in Media, Culture and Society at the University of Oslo, Norway), Tadeusz Slawek (Polish lyricist, essayist, translator, literary critic and professor), Elisabeth Bronfen (Swiss/German/American literary and cultural critic, professor and chairholder for English literature at the University of Zurich and global distinguished professor at New York University), Marcus Steinweg (French-German philosopher, professor at Kunstakademie Karlsruhe), Mark Sadler (Scottish artist & writer, guest professor at UdK, Berlin), Jörg Heiser (German philosopher and art historian, director Institut für Kunst im Kontext, Berlin)

The second episode of the series of chapters from Disputaziuns Susch, an annual conference scheme hosted by Art Stations Foundation CH and Grazyna Kulczyk, has Timotheus Vermeulen analyzing opposing positions: Where Cassirer believes that his point of view projects the horizon; Heidegger believes that we are thrown into a horizon, which means the horizon is there before us or rather, in his terms, with us. In spring 1929, just a glimpse before the Great Depression and the Great Crash to come soon, the Cassirer-Heidegger debate takes place in Davos; Ernst Cassirer pulls his arguments for a broader conception of humanity, his counterpart is Martin Heidegger and his relativism. The quest of a universal truth drives a ‘continental divide’ (Peter E. Gordon) or ‘Weggabelung der Philosophie’ (Henning Ritter), anticipating major philosophical debates to come. 90 years ahead, in Susch, 40 minutes away from Davos, once again in times of disorientation, disillusion, with radical movements on the rise, we were repeating the question that led the historical debate: What is it to be human?   Disputaziuns Susch, from the beginning in 2017, has been a multi-disciplinary annual endeavor, bringing together scholars and artists, philosophers and authors, neuroscientists and historians – thinkers who will be asking questions and counter questions – in its 2019’s editions circling around the possibilities for universal truths versus a relative view of human temporality and finitude, rational thinking and the notion of men as ‘symbolic animals’, creating a universe of symbolic meanings, versus our being-in-the-world, perceiving the world via our relationship to time. Taking the Davos disputation in 1929, between Ernst Cassirer and Martin Heidegger, as a starting point, this ‘continental divide’ (as Peter E. Gordon called it) or ‘Weggabelung der Philosophie’ as per Henning Ritter – 90 years ahead, in Susch, 40 minutes away from Davos, once again in times of disorientation, disillusion, with radical movements on the rise, we are repeating the question that led the historical debate: Was ist der Mensch? What is it to be human? This vast theme is broken down into several more specific discourses, concerning especially the relationship of philosophy, politics and art.     Diputanziuns Susch 2019 speakers were: Grażyna Kulczyk (founder and president of the board, Art Stations Foundation CH), Mareike Dittmer (director Art Stations Foundation CH & chair Disputaziuns Susch), Aleksandra Mir (Poland-born artist, Swedish-American citizen based in London), Timotheus Vermeulen (Dutch scholar and critic, associate professor in Media, Culture and Society at the University of Oslo, Norway), Tadeusz Slawek (Polish lyricist, essayist, translator, literary critic and professor), Elisabeth Bronfen (Swiss/German/American literary and cultural critic, professor and chairholder for English literature at the University of Zurich and global distinguished professor at New York University), Marcus Steinweg (French-German philosopher, professor at Kunstakademie Karlsruhe), Mark Sadler (Scottish artist & writer, guest professor at UdK, Berlin), Jörg Heiser (German philosopher and art historian, director Institut für Kunst im Kontext, Berlin)

The first episode in a series of chapters from Disputaziuns Susch, an annual conference scheme hosted by Art Stations Foundation CH and Grazyna Kulczyk, has Aleksandra Mir imagining an artist and a scientist sitting on a train where a conversation ensues about objective realities, space exploration, negative space and belief. In spring 1929, just a glimpse before the Great Depression and the Great Crash to come soon, the Cassirer-Heidegger debate takes place in Davos; Ernst Cassirer pulls his arguments for a broader conception of humanity, his counterpart is Martin Heidegger and his relativism. The quest of a universal truth drives a ‘continental divide’ (Peter E. Gordon) or ‘Weggabelung der Philosophie’ (Henning Ritter), anticipating major philosophical debates to come. 90 years ahead, in Susch, 40 minutes away from Davos, once again in times of disorientation, disillusion, with radical movements on the rise, we were repeating the question that led the historical debate: What is it to be human? Disputaziuns Susch, from the beginning in 2017, has been a multi-disciplinary annual endeavor, bringing together scholars and artists, philosophers and authors, neuroscientists and historians – thinkers who will be asking questions and counter questions – in its 2019’s editions circling around the possibilities for universal truths versus a relative view of human temporality and finitude, rational thinking and the notion of men as ‘symbolic animals’, creating a universe of symbolic meanings, versus our being-in-the-world, perceiving the world via our relationship to time. Taking the Davos disputation in 1929, between Ernst Cassirer and Martin Heidegger, as a starting point, this ‘continental divide’ (as Peter E. Gordon called it) or ‘Weggabelung der Philosophie’ as per Henning Ritter – 90 years ahead, in Susch, 40 minutes away from Davos, once again in times of disorientation, disillusion, with radical movements on the rise, we are repeating the question that led the historical debate: Was ist der Mensch? What is it to be human? This vast theme is broken down into several more specific discourses, concerning especially the relationship of philosophy, politics and art. Diputanziuns Susch 2019 speakers were: Grażyna Kulczyk (founder and president of the board, Art Stations Foundation CH), Mareike Dittmer (director Art Stations Foundation CH & chair Disputaziuns Susch), Aleksandra Mir (Poland-born artist, Swedish-American citizen based in London), Timotheus Vermeulen (Dutch scholar and critic, associate professor in Media, Culture and Society at the University of Oslo, Norway), Tadeusz Slawek (Polish lyricist, essayist, translator, literary critic and professor), Elisabeth Bronfen (Swiss/German/American literary and cultural critic, professor and chairholder for English literature at the University of Zurich and global distinguished professor at New York University), Marcus Steinweg (French-German philosopher, professor at Kunstakademie Karlsruhe), Mark Sadler (Scottish artist & writer, guest professor at UdK, Berlin), Jörg Heiser (German philosopher and art historian, director Institut für Kunst im Kontext, Berlin)