El sol y la muerte

by Peter Sloterdijk, Hans-Jürgen Heinrichs

«Hay que mirar, pues, en el rayo de la catástrofe si se quiere apreciar lo que está realmente en liza en el asunto del ser y del hombre. “El sol y la muerte no se pueden mirar fijamente”, se dice en un conocido texto de La Rochefoucauld. Nuestra mirada no puede detenerse, fijamente, ni en el sol ni en la muerte. Según Heidegger, cabría añadir que tampoco puede fijarse ni en el hombre ni en el claro.» Las conversaciones del filósofo Peter Sloterdijk con el antropólogo Hans-Jürgen Heinrichs, agrupadas bajo el título de El sol y la muerte, no sólo lanzan una atrevida mirada a nuestro tiempo eclipsado, son también una inmejorable introducción a la obra y el pensamiento del autor de Esferas.

Genres: Philosophy, Theory

368 pages

First published January 1, 2001

About the author

Peter Sloterdijk is a German philosopher, cultural theorist, television host and columnist. He is a professor of philosophy and media theory at the University of Art and Design Karlsruhe.

Peter Sloterdijk studied philosophy, Germanistics and history at the University of Munich. In 1975 he received his Ph.D. from the University of Hamburg. Since 1980 he has published many philosophical works, including the Critique of Cynical Reason. In 2001 he was named president of the State Academy of Design, part of the Center for Art and Media in Karlsruhe. In 2002 he began to co-host Das Philosophische Quartett, a show on the German ZDF television channel devoted to discussing key issues affecting present-day society.

The Kritik der Zynischen Vernunft (Critique of Cynical Reason), published by Suhrkamp in 1983, became the best-selling philosophical book in the German language since the Second World War and launched Sloterdijk's career as an author.

The trilogy Spheres is the philosopher's magnum opus. The first volume was published in 1998, the second in 1999, and the last in 2004.

Reviews

[Dionysius the Areopagite · Rating 1 out of 5]

This is, alas, a lot of ideological mildew. The doctored interview, or Nabokovian interview, or "Interview" is best employed with at least a bit sardonic humor tucked away here and there in little pockets. If you are seeking an encyclopedic knowledge the Index here shall serve thee much more than the content of the content(s). This is sort of like the philosophical equivalent of purchasing bootleg albums of rare concerts in that the object is better framed on one's wall or tucked neatly within one's personal library. Sloterdijk's fleeting reference to "The God we've had for 2,000 years" is beyond flaccid for even the freshest student to the historical realm of religion. The incessant references to Nietzsche make one cringe the way one cringes every single time Patti Smith mentions Rimbaud. If I were Sloterdijk I'd let this 5hing go into publication as I'm sure it gained traction in the light of his prior works and their proximity. In dismissing this work I dismiss not Sloterdijk, who I am definitely interested in and intend to read several of books as soon as I can, but this one is not-much-doing.

Thank you all,

I love you all, you're great,

Sincerely,

Baron Fellows

[Christopher Gontar · Rating 4 out of 5]

In this series of dialogues between Sloterdijk and the anthropologist Hans-Jürgen Heinrichs, the attitude and purpose of contemporary philosophy (presumably with the continental species in mind) are critically examined. The critique eventually proposes that philosophy in our time is out of touch with life and the practical sphere. This is a banal observation, however, unless it can be further unpacked and its modern sense made more distinct. Even Thales exuded, in proverbial fashion (by falling into a well as the story goes), the incommensurable relation of the contemplative to everyday life. Sloterdijk might have instead distinguished two levels of asociality or isolation. There is the kind exhibited by a type who combines philosophy with neurotic or autistic tendencies--traits which are inherently related to powers of insight and intellectual adventure. And there is the more generally impractical stance of philosophy; clearly these two classes are related, yet not identical.

[Andrew · Rating 3 out of 5]

Unsure if Sloterdijk is just operating on a higher philosophical plane than me, or if this was just an Emperor Wears No Clothes bag of po-mo word salad. I think it's probably a bit of both. What I got was good.