Between the Philosophy of Science and Philosophical Anthropology. Gernot Böhme’s Critical Philosophy of Technology

2014 ◽  
Vol 24 (4) ◽  
pp. 125-145
Author(s):  
Stanisław Czerniak ◽  
Keyword(s):  
Philosophy Of Science ◽  
Philosophy Of Technology ◽  
Philosophical Anthropology ◽  
Critical Philosophy

Human—Technology—World

2008 ◽  
Vol 12 (2) ◽  
pp. 110-119
Author(s):  
Dennis M. Weiss ◽  
Keyword(s):  
Human Nature ◽  
Philosophy Of Technology ◽  
Philosophical Anthropology ◽  
Human Being

This essay examines Don Ihde’s postphenomological philosophy of technology through the lens of philosophical anthropology, that sub-discipline of philosophy concerned with the nature and place of the human being. While Ihde’s philosophical corpus and its reception in Postphenomenology: A Critical Companion to Ihde indicate rich resources for thinking about human nature, several themes receive too little attention in both, including the nature of the human being, the emergence of the posthuman, and the place of the human being in our contemporary pluriculture.

The Parliament of Things and the Anthropocene

2017 ◽  
Vol 21 (2) ◽  
pp. 150-174 ◽  
Author(s):  
Massimiliano Simons ◽  
Keyword(s):  
Philosophy Of Science ◽  
Philosophy Of Technology ◽  
Bruno Latour ◽  
Michel Serres ◽  
The World ◽  
Thing In Itself ◽  
Isabelle Stengers ◽  
Own Name ◽  
Common Understanding ◽  
The Way

Among the contemporary philosophers using the concept of the Anthropocene, Bruno Latour and Isabelle Stengers are prominent examples. The way they use this concept, however, diverts from the most common understanding of the Anthropocene. In fact, their use of this notion is a continuation of their earlier work around the concept of a ‘parliament of things.’ Although mainly seen as a sociology or philosophy of science, their work can be read as philosophy of technology as well. Similar to Latour’s claim that science is Janus-headed, technology has two faces. Faced with the Anthropocene, we need to shift from technologies of control to technologies of negotiations, i.e., a parliament of things. What, however, does a ‘parliament of things’ mean? This paper wants to clarify what is conceptually at stake by framing Latour’s work within the philosophy of Michel Serres and Isabelle Stengers. Their philosophy implies a ‘postlinguistic turn,’ where one can ‘let things speak in their own name,’ without claiming knowledge of the thing in itself. The distinction between object and subject is abolished to go back to the world of ‘quasi-objects’ (Serres). Based on the philosophy of science of Latour and Stengers the possibility for a politics of quasi-objects or a ‘cosmopolitics’ (Stengers) is opened. It is in this framework that their use of the notion of the Anthropocene must be understood and a different view of technology can be conceptualized.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document