Pavesich 2008 Blumenberg's Phil Anthrop- Heidegger and Cassirer

8/4/2019 Pavesich 2008 Blumenberg's Phil Anthrop- Heidegger and Cassirer

1/29

Hans Blumenberg's Philosophical Anthropology: After Heidegger

and Cassirer

Vida Pavesich

Journal of the History of Philosophy, Volume 46, Number 3, July 2008, pp.

421-448 (Article)

Published by The Johns Hopkins University Press

DOI: 10.1353/hph.0.0031

For additional information about this article

Access Provided by Harvard University at 05/06/10 11:23PM GMT

http://muse.jhu.edu/journals/hph/summary/v046/46.3.pavesich.html
http://muse.jhu.edu/journals/hph/summary/v046/46.3.pavesich.htmlhttp://muse.jhu.edu/journals/hph/summary/v046/46.3.pavesich.html


2/29

Journal o the History o Philosophy, vol. 46, no. 3 (2008) 42148

[421]

Han BlumnbrgPhloophcal Anthropology:

Atr Hggr an Carr

V i d A P A V e s i C H

d a v o s : p h i l o s o p h i c a l s t a r t i n g p o i n t s a n d g o a l s

between1928 and 1931, davos, switzerland wa th t o a colloquum r

cat to promotng coopraton btwn naton an popl n pot-war eu-

rop. Th colloquum rmmbr prmarly or th amou conrontaton n

1929 btwn Martn Hggr an ernt Carr ovr th propr ntrprtaton

o Kant an no-Kantanm,a conrontaton that alo rgtr th acnanc

o Hggr tructon o mtaphyc an th valuaton o Carr mor

tratonally enlghtnmnt vw o cvlzaton a progr rom mythosto logos.Carr wa th lat rprntatv o th Marburg chool o no-Kantanm, an

Hggr wa th rng tar who ha rcntly publh Being and Time. WhnHggr count th mpha plac by th Marburg no-Kantan on th

tructurng rol play by raon n xprnc an Carr ntnc on th

objctvty o ymbolc orm, h challng vrythng th rprnt. Th

davo putaton wa on mor orum or Hggr to launch h unamntal

ontology an to publcly art h plac to th youngr gnraton o phloo-

phr ovr agant a no-Kantanm n cln. For many, th ncountr wa an

abolut watrh: t o htorcal an phloophcal mportanc, an t hapoltcal, thcal, an xtntal ramcaton ba on vry rnt ntrprta-

ton o Kant.1

L wly tu ar Carr an Hggr vrgnt atttu towar

phloophcal anthropology, whch wa a ubthm at davo, an n thr work

gnrally urng th pro. in th 1920 an 1930, th Grman phloophcal

Vida Pavesich Lcturr n Phloophy at Calorna stat Unvrty, eat Bay.

1s, or xampl, Mchal Frman, A Parting o the Ways: Carnap, Cassirer, and Heidegger(Chcago,iL: Opn Court, 2000), 1; Gory Wat, On eotrcm: Hggr an/or Carr at davo,

Political Theory26 (1998), 610; an Wayn Crtauo, Hggr an Carr: Bng, Knowng, anPoltc, Kant-Studien82 (1991): 46983.


3/29

422 journal of the history of philosophy 46 :3 july 2008

anthropologt, uch a Max schlr, Hlmuth Plnr, an Arnol Ghln,

mantan that anthropology, unrtoo a a tuy o th nvarant con-

ton o human xtnc, houl b th cntral concrn o phloophy. A uch,

phloophcal anthropology wa tnguh rom mprcal cpln uch

a thnology an phycal anthropology. Phloophcal anthropology not

am or an ntalt concpton o human natur, but ocu on orntaton

problm ac by all mmbr o th human pc. in 1928, n Mans Place inNature, Max schlr t th ton or phloophcal anthropology by proclamngthat man mor o a problm to hml at th prnt tm than vr bor

n rcor htory.2 Th anthropologt clam that olvng crtcal ocal an

poltcal problm ntal rolvng unamntal phloophcal quton about

th typ o cratur a human bng . in varyng way, th anthropologtan

Hggrwr nfunc by dlthy phloophy o l an avanc n th

cnc, partcularly bology. At davo an n Being and Time(10), Hggrclam that phloophcal anthropology wa anthropocntrc an ructv, b-

cau t ma man th cntr o phloophy.3 An vn though h not wholly

rjct th a o a phloophcal anthropology, Hggr cauton agant

unrtanng Daseinanthropologcally. Furthrmor, h rgar Carrormalt phloophy o ymbolc orm a an anthropocntrc anthropology. Al-

though Carr n th charg o anthropocntrm, h ha no quarrl wth

th labl phloophcal anthropologt.4 in, n The Philosophy o SymbolicForms(vol. 4), wrttn urng th am pro,h arm that th unamntal

anwr to th quton o th ntal concpt o mankn . . . can com onlyrom a phloophy o ymbolc orm.5 Th ubthm at davo concrn th

rlaton btwn th quton What man? an phloophcal nqury, a lgacy

o Kant amou ourth quton. in Lectures on Logic,Kant ha art that allu n ptmology, thc, an mtaphyc ultmatly la back to th qu-

ton, although h wa kptcal about ormulatng a utabl anwr.

At davo, an mmatly atr n Kant and the Problem o Metaphysics(1929),Hggr xplctly connct h projct wth a rntrprtaton o Kant ourth

qutona quton that n h vw ha bcom qutonabl, but mut not

b anwr anthropologcally.6

Th qutonabln o man wa alo a thmor th phloophcal anthropologt, but Hggr nt that h qutonng

wa mor unamntal. Gvn Hggr ubqunt nfunc on th cour o

morn phloophy an contmporary upcon about kng normatv con-

cpton o human natur, t bhoov u to tak a rh look at davo rom th

prpctv. Th wll b th ntrng wg or xamnng Han Blumnbrg

pobl contrbuton to th u. i contn that th davo bat obcur a

2Max schlr, Mans Place in Nature, tran. Han Myrho (Nw York: Noonay, 1961), 4.3

Martn Hggr, Being and Time, tran. John Macquarr an ewar Robnon (Nw York:Harpr & Row, 1962).4davo Lctur [davo] rprnt a Appnx iii to Kant and the Problem o Metaphysics[KPM],

tran. Rchar Tat (Bloomngton: inana Unvrty Pr, 1997), 199, 202, 204, 205 / Kant und dasProblem der Metaphysik[GA3] (Frankurt: Vttoro Klotrmann, 1973), 283, 288, 291, 292.

5ernt Carr, The Philosophy o Symbolic Forms, vol. 4, tran. John Mchal Kro, ., John MchalKro, donal Vrn (Nw Havn: Yal Unvrty Pr, 1966), 3738.

6davo, 202 / GA3, 288.


4/29

423b lumenb er gs a nt hr opology

ml poton that can mat btwn Hggran grounln, on th

on han, an Carr clam that cultur an ymbolc orm ully xpr a

gvn human natur, on th othr han. in my vw, Blumnbrg pot-Hgg-

ran rntrprtaton o Carr thory o ymbolc orm upport an argumnt

or a mnmalt, cntr anthropology that ha th potntal to prov a

normatv rrnc pont organcally root n human n. Th mportant

not olly to mat btwn Hggr an Carr, but to or an altrnatv

to anthumant an pragmatt (Rorty) rpuaton o concpton o human

natur, a wll a to contmporary cnttc ructonmall o whch ar

rghtly upcou o nfat, quton-bggng noton o human natur, om

o whch may b mplcat n prncou thnocntrm.

du to lngth conraton, i mut omt th htorcal contxtualzaton o

th anthropologcal thm, whch woul la back to put btwn Kant

an Hrr, or whom th problm o human orntaton aro a a practcal,

moral, ntllctual, an or Hrr, alo a bologcal problm. Ghln clar

that h wa mrly upatng Hrr wth th tool o morn cnc. Hr i

wll ocu on a mall porton o th ntrchang btwn Hggr an Carr

that go to th hart o th rnc btwn th two a t rlat to th lnk

btwn concpton o human xtnc an th tartng pont an goal o

phloophy.

Atr much krmhng btwn Hggr an Carr about th manng

o no-Kantanm, rom, an thc urng th rt hal o th bat, th

dutch phloophr Hnrk Po ntrjct that th two mn wr pakng n-trly rnt languag.7 sympathtc to Carr, Po uggt nng trm

or Dasein, ontc, an Bng that coul b tranlat nto Carr languagto acltat communcaton. it hr that Hggr rw attnton to thr

confctng a about th tartng pont an goal o phloophy: or Carr

th terminus ad quem[goal] th whol o a phloophy o cultur n th no an lucaton o th wholn o th orm o th hapng concoun.

That , Carr phloophcal goal a trmnaton o th logc o ymbolc

orm (how on acqur a worl-vw an th pcc logc o myth, languag,

cnc, an o on). Hggr go on to ay that Carr concrn wth onlya crtan mnon o th hapng powr o concoun, all o whch lav

th quton o h terminus a quo[th tartng pont, whch Hggr clam -ntally connct wth human ntu] uttrly problmatcal. Hggr a:

My poton th rvr: Th terminus a quo my cntral problmatc, th oni vlop. For m, th occur not n th whol o a Phloophy o Cultur, but n

th quton ti to on, or rathr: what n gnral call Bng?8 Hggr wll

mphatcally rtrat th am vw n Kant and the Problem o Metaphysics.

No anthropology whch unrtan t own partcular qutonng an th prup-

poton thro can vn clam to vlop th problm o a layng o th groun ormtaphyc, lt alon carry t out. Th ncary quton or a layng o th groun o

mtaphyc, namly, that o what man , takn ovr by a mtaphyc oDasein.9

7davo, 202 / GA3, 287.8davo, 202 / GA3, 288.9Hggr, KPM, 162 / GA3, 231.


5/29


Or, a h tat n on o h davo lctur: th tartng pont o phloophy n-

volv pong th quton o th nc o human bng n a way that pror

to all phloophcal anthropology an cultural phloophy.10

Although Hggr uggt that h own terminus ad quem, or goal, may not bclar, h unrtan h projct a amng or lbratng anwr to th quton

o Bng, rnt nDasein ntu rathr than th progr o prt unttrby a boy or t ntu. Th lattr rmark wa rct to Carr vw that

ymbolc orm uch a languag, myth, an cnc ar vhcl o progrv

lbraton. Hggr clar h poton by rawng on Kant: n th Critique oPure Reason, Kant, n h ubjctv ucton, wa pr n a way that makth propr ounaton [o mtaphyc] an aby.11 For Hggr, t not at

all l-vnta h ay t mut m to Carrthat w houl tart rom a

concpt o raon an groun mtaphyc uncrtcally n a concpt ologos. FromHggr prpctv, Carr can only b ollowng a phloophcal tnncy

that bgan wth dcart an contnu n no-Kantanm o paratng th

knowr rom th worl an thn ntrprtng vrythng rom th pont o vw,

.., anthropocntrcally. Conquntly, Hggr ru Po attmpt at rc-

onclaton: i blv that what i crb byDasein[a nothngn, or terminusa quo] o not allow tranlaton nto a concpt o Carr. 12 For Hggr,Carr xcluv ocu on xprvn an cultur prclu thorzng a

propr terminus a quo.Hggr tr th ontologcal mportanc o anxty or ntyng th

terminus a quo. earlr n th bat Carr ha clam that th path to nn-tu through th ralm o orm: man mut tranorm everythingn hm whch lv xprnc nto om objctv hap.13 Th aum that thr a human

natur that can b xpr unproblmatcally, an t alo man that Carr

ha no room or th lmnt o our makup that mght thr motvat or rt

th tranormaton. Hggr challng uggt that t may not b pobl to

xpr vrythng n languag, myth, or any o th othr ymbolc orm. Pacal,

Krkgaar, Ntzch, an Japr ha alray rawn attnton to lmt tua-

ton or xtrm (gnal n tat o anxty). evn Carr acknowlg th

n volum our oThe Philosophy o Symbolic Forms, porton o whch wr wrttnurng th lat 1920. For xampl, h rcognz that human bng hav a bac

capacty or tancng thmlv rom thr rv.14 Yt, Carr mol or

tancng rawn rom Kant Critique o Judgment: t athtc tancngatachmnt rom pnnc on [our] acton an urng.15 At davo, Ca-

rr rt whn Hggr ak whthr th tak o phloophy not to urrnr

man racally to anxty. Carr rpon that anxty throw th arthly away

rom u an that phloophy houl r man rom anxty a a mr poton

a part o th proc o progrv tranormaton. in volum our o Symbolic

10KPM, 192 / GA3, 273.11davo, 202 / GA3, 288.12davo, 203 / GA3, 289.13davo, 201 (mpha a) / GA3, 286.14Carr, The Philosophy o Symbolic Forms, vol. 4, 208.15ib.,45.


6/29

425blumenbergs anthropology

Forms, Cassirers response to Heidegger is more ascerbic: the antidote to anxiety

is Stoic ethics, which liberates us rom the dread o death and raises lie above

the realm o mere care.16

In my view, despite Heideggers reticence about anthropology, he has claried

its task by linking the terminus a quo(in the double sense o philosophical start-

ing point and eature o human existence) with anxiety and nothingness, and

by drawing attention to a blind spot in Cassirers position.17 At Davos, ollowing

the Pos interjection, Heidegger asserted that what man is must be posed as the

central question o philosophy, even though it must not be posed anthropo-

centrically. He also grants that this central question couldyield a philosophical

anthropology, but it must be one in which the philosopher disregards himsel

and sees the eccentric character o man at the same time as standing within

the totality o beings in general.18 In this context, Heidegger seemsto be equating

his ontology oDaseinwith a kind o philosophical anthropology, and yet he has

claimed that the question o what man is must be prior to all philosophical an-

thropology. In The Metaphysical Foundations of Logic(1928), a lecture course that

Heidegger gave between the publication oBeing and Timeand Kant and the Problem

of Metaphysicswhere Heidegger once again cautions against understandingDa-

seinanthropologicallyhe introduces the controversial idea o a metontology,

which proposes a study o the ontic oundations o undamental ontology.19In

other words, Heidegger considers a study o howDaseins understanding o being,

which presupposes the actical existence oDasein, is in turn entangled in nature

empirically. Metontology would take beings as a whole as the object o study in ametaphysics or a philosophical cosmology rom the perspective oDasein. Even

though Heidegger drops this idea, the question o how to understand such a

16Davos, 201 / GA3, 286.17Since nishing revisions to this article, a posthumous book by Blumenbergpart o the copious

writings in the Nachlasshas appeared, entitled Beschreibung des Menschen[BM],(Frankurt: Suhrkamp,

2006). Here Blumenberg arms this insight when he reers directly to Heideggers destruction o

traditional metaphysics and traditional anthropology, which he claims paved the way or a renewal o

philosophical anthropology (217). Presumably, he is reerring to a renewal that addresses Heideggers

criticisms.18Davos, 204 / GA3, 291.19Martin Heidegger, The Metaphysical Foundations of Logic[MFL], trans. Michael Heim (Blooming-

ton: Indiana University Press, 1984), 140, 144, 15459 / Metaphysische Anfangsgrnde der Logik[GA26]

(Frankurt: Klostermann, 1978),176,184, 196203. Steven Galt Crowell provides a clear, concise review

o the debates over the status o metontology among Heideggers commentators. He also presents his

view o its placeor lack o placein Heideggers work during this period in Metaphysics, Meton-

tology, and the End oBeing and Time, in his Husserl, Heidegger, and the Space of Meaning: Paths toward

Transcendental Phenomenology(Evanston: Northwestern University Press, 2001), 22243. Crowell claims

that metontology refects how Heidegger was stimulated by Max Schelers questions about mans place

in the cosmos and so developed an interest in philosophical cosmology. However, Crowell argues that

as a metaphysical inquiry, metontology is inconsistent with the phenomenological project oBeing and

Time, which seeks to bracket the ontic. See also Jean Grondin, Prolegomena to an Understanding oHeideggers Turn, in Sources of Hermeneutics(Albany: SUNY Press, 1995), 7273. Grondin also links

metontology to a metaphysics o existence, to ontologys return to the ontical metaphysics in which

it was already implicitly located. It was to make up or the deciencies o undamental ontology,

which had remained too ormal or schematic. Otto Pggeler connects metontology to Schelers

infuence on Heidegger as well and likens it, suggestively, to a met-anthropology in Heidegger on

Art, in Martin Heidegger: Politics, Art, and Technology, ed. Karsten Harries and Christoph Jamme (New

York: Holmes and Meyer), 116.


7/29


tuy ha om barng on concptualzng a phloophcal anthropology n Blu-

mnbrgan trm, on that or a countrmol to Hggr unamntal

ontology. Gvn th uggtv clutr o a, th quton now how to mn

thm, lnk Hggr nght that Carr ha al to aquatly account or

h own terminus a quo, an artculat an anthropology that not ructv, rla-tvtc, or anthropocntrc. Th urthr quton concrn whthr t pobl

to alvag a logc o ymbolc orm that ncorporat Hggr nght an yt

rtan an rthnk th ratonalty an objctvty valu by Carr. Obvouly,

i cannot rcontruct ully Blumnbrg logc n a br papr or conr n -

tal Hggr complx rlatonhp to phloophcal anthropology. My ocu

wll b on artculatng Blumnbrg anthropologcal prm, fhng out th

concpton o human xtnc that ollow rom h aumpton, an ktchng

n th logc o orntaton pnant on tho aumpton. i wll a hr that

Blumnbrgknown prmarly a a phloophr o htory or The Legitimacy othe Modern Age,20 an a a thort o mtaphor an myth or Paradigmen zu einerMetaphorologie(Paradigms or a Metaphorology) an Work on Myth21o not prnta ytmatc workng out o h anthropology, vn though t th mthoologcal

ky to unrtanng h argumntatv pont o vw gnrally, pcally n h

matur work.22 But how t ky alo an u or a parat tuy. Bor con-

20Han Blumnbrg, The Legitimacy o the Modern Age, tran. Robrt M. Wallac (Cambrg: MiTPr, 1983) /Die Legitimitt der Neuzeit(Frankurt: suhrkamp, 1966). For th mot complt bblog-

raphy o Blumnbrg progou output, at lat up to 1999, Die Kunst des berlebens: Nachdenkenber Hans Blumenberg[Die Kunst des berlebens], . Franz Jo Wtz an Hrmann Tmm (Frankurt:suhrkamp, 1999), 42751. snc Blumnbrg ath n 1996, many work hav bn publh, an

accorng to Flx Hnrch (Mensch und Moderne bei Hans Blumenberg[Mnchn: Wlhlm Fnk,2005], 20), thr ar tll 20,000 pag o unpublh matral.

21Han Blumnbrg, ParagmnzunrMtaphorolog, Archiv r Begrisgeschichte6 (1960):7142; Work on Myth[WM], tran. Robrt M. Wallac (Cambrg: MiT Pr, 1985) / Arbeit am Mythos[AM](Frankurt: suhrkamp, 1979).

22Blumnbrg commntator uually rr to th act that Blumnbrg ha bn nfunc

by phloophcal anthropology, but th magntu o t mportanc ha not bn ully apprcat

or vlop by mot o h rar. dav Aam mnal artcl, Mtaphor or Mankn: Th

dvlopmnt o Han Blumnbrg Anthropologcal Mtaphorology [Mtaphor or Mankn]

(Journal o the History o Ideas52 [1991]: 15266) th bt ort n englh at lnkng anthropol-ogy to Blumnbrg ovrall phloophcal von. Commntator wrtng n Grman, untl rcntly,mply tak Blumnbrg anthropology or grant a th pont o partur or h hrmnutc.

s, or xampl, th collcton,Die Kunst des berlebens: Nachdenken ber Hans Blumenberg, ., FranzJo Wtz an Hrmann Tmm (Frankurt: suhrkamp, 1999). A i wa nhng th rvon to th

artcl, i covr two valuabl rcnt book on Blumnbrg, both o whch prov ntrprtaton

o Blumnbrg anthropology that convrg wth mn. Olvr Mllr Sorge um die Vernunt: HansBlumenbergs phnomenologische Anthropologie[Sorge um die Vernunt] (Parborn: Mnt, 2005) covr ma-tral rom Blumnbrg rtaton (Btrg zum Problm r Urprnglchkt r mttlaltrlch-

cholatchn Ontolog, 1947) an Habilitationsschrit(Ontologchn dtanz: en Untruchungbr Kr r Phnomnolog Hurl, 1950), an many othr work that nclu crtcm o

both Hurl an Hggr. Mllr (Sorge um die Vernunt, 41415, 32124) mphaz how anthro-

pology prmarly a mthoologcal pont o vw or Blumnbrg, on who unamntal pont opartur our ongong n to tanc ourlv rom abolut. Flx Hnrch Mensch undModerne bei Hans Blumenbergnclu two cton on phloophcal anthropology: en anthropolo-gch phnomnolog, an dr Mnch al dtanzwn. Nthr book rcontruct a nton

o human xtnc. (s my cton nttl Blumnbrg dnton o Human extnc: Lmt

Concpt an Lmt Conton blow.) Mot mportant th rcnt publcaton o Blumnbrg

BM, probably h mot xplct n o phloophcal anthropologyalthough, agan, thr noxplct nton. i hav oun no crpanc n my contructon o Blumnbrg phloophcal

anthropology an th vw prnt n BM.


8/29


rng Blumnbrg anthropology, t wll b hlpul to prov om htorcal

contxt by brfy xamnng th contrbuton to th topc ma by th Grman

phloophcal anthropologt mnton arlr.

m a x s c h e l e r a n d h e l m u t h p l e s s n e r :t h e n e e d f o r o r i e n t a t i o n 2 3

schlr an Plnr xplctly thmatz phloophcal anthropology a a prob-

lm o human orntaton, whch thy unrtan a thecntral phloophcalproblmatc. Morn contonth collap an lack o tratonal upport

an th ncrang ratonalzaton o th worlmak phloophcal anthropol-

ogy npnabl bcau th lo la u to quton our plac n th worl.

Th ntrvnng work n bology an thnology nc Kant an th compllng

nfunc o th phloophy o l conton how th anthropologt wr to

concptualz th phloophcal anthropology. All, to varyng gr, took up

th u o bologcal nonvablty that Hrr ha rt mphaz. Thy mov

away rom a o x human nc an hghlght th human n or

orntaton by mphazng human platcty an copng mchanm, whch wr

to bcom cntral or Blumnbrg a wll.

in Mans Place in Nature, publh n 1928, Max schlr bgan by ayngthat w ar problm to ourlv a nvr bor. H alo obrv that w hav

nhrt a numbr o ncompatbl a o human natur rawn rom phloo-

phy, thology, an th cnc, a multplcty that concal rathr than rval

man natur. schlr ar th problm by rt plottng a trajctory rom

plant to anmal to human bng, contrung th a a vlopmntal proc

but harply tnguhng man rom anmal by clamng that only man can ay

no to h mpul an act an bcom prt.24 schlr rjct naturalm

vn though h acknowlg a contnuum wth natur, bcau h argu that

man plac not gvn; th prtual rult rom trancnng l n th mot

gnral n. echong Hggr, schlr a towar th n o th book that

man paraton rom natur la to anxty, th awarn o nothngn.25

Th worl-opnn that accompan anxty an th capacty or trancnnc

mak human bng mtaphycally unqu; t man that thy ar capabl oobjctyng th worl, o rfxv l-concoun, rom, choc, lov, an

knn, a wll a l-tructon.26 sprt a trancnnc rqur or t actual-

zaton a voluntary nhbton uch that mpul can b ublmat an rrct

n lght o th mag human bng choo. Copng wth th lo o tratonal

upport ntal lctng mag approprat or channlng th nrgy gnrat

23schlr, Plnr, an Ghln ar th mot wll known o th phloophcal anthropologt, but

a Honnth an Joa pont out, many othr work wthn th ramwork o phloophcal anthropol-

ogy, uch a Blumnbrg pot-war collagu, erch Rothckr, an Paul Luwg Lanbrg, Vktorvon Wzckr, an ernt Carr (Social Action and Human Nature, 47). drawng on Blumnbrgtxtual ntrlocutor, Wayn Huon (Atr Blumnbrg: htorcm an phloophcal anthropol-

ogy, History o the Human Sciences6 [1993], 11011) nclu othr wth clo t to th anthropolo-gt: Blumnbrg long tm rn Han Jona, Aol Portman, Paul Albrg, Hannah Arnt, erc

Vgln, Kurt Goltn, an Oo Marquar.24schlr, Mans Place in Nature, 4, 6, 7, 40, 46.25ib., 89.26ib., 36.


9/29

428 journal of th e h is tory of ph il os oph y 46 :3 july 2008

by sublimation.27 With the aid o philosophical anthropology, Scheler attempts

to reute mechanistic, reductively naturalistic, and purely ormal accounts o hu-

man nature and to reconcile lie-philosophy with phenomenology, but he ends

up with a radical, uneasy disjunction between answers to the problem o human

orientation that could be given by the empirical sciences and transcendentally

oriented philosophy.

Helmuth Plessner accepts Schelers diagnosis o the modern condition, but he

rejects Schelers idealism o spirit. InDie Stufen des Organischen und der Mensch(The

Levels of Organic Being and Man), published in 1928, Plessner ormulates the biologi-

cal deciency thesis as humanitys eccentricity or positionality. That is, human

beings are distinct rom animals in that they are simultaneously embedded in and

discontinuous rom nature and their socio-historical setting. Whereas animals

have a centric existence, guided by instinct, human beings are underdetermined

(instinctually poor) and must compensate, which means always trying to strike a

balance between embodiment and the lack o pre-given orientation. For Plessner,

this constitutional rupture is the dening characteristic o the human being. To

achieve balance, human beings become conscious, enlanguaged, and expressive

in speech and gesture. Thus, the phenomenological method will be a naturalistic

hermeneutics that describes the human being and its behavioral possibilities as it

tries to negotiate its environment in relation to bodily constraints.28 Conficts with

corporeality reveal the limitswhich dey all spiritual and historical changethat

prescribe this behavioral latitude, limits experienced especially in the distinctly hu-

man experiences o laughing and crying that are breakdowns o customary modeso orientation (e.g., language).29 To the charges o reductionism, which stemmed

largely rom Heidegger, Plessner argues that philosophical anthropology emerges

rom an overlap between a comprehensive philosophy and a comprehensive

anthropology. Unlike Heidegger, we must not abstract rom mans organismal

embodiment.30 Heidegger would ask whether this view reduces all philosophical

questions to a study o man or a subdiscipline o biology and thereore renders

the relation between anthropology and ontology problematic.

a r n o l d g e h l e n : t h e c r e a t u r e o f d e f i c i e n c i e s

To proceed urther, one more conceptual element is necessary: philosophical

anthropologist Arnold Gehlens notion o the Mngelwesen, or creature o decien-

cies, an idea that originated with Herder, resuraced in Scheler and Plessner, and

will be taken up by Blumenberg. In Man: His Nature and Place in the World(1940),

Gehlen oers his most complete account o his anthropology. Unlike Scheler

27Ibid., 54, 68.28Helmuth Plessner,Die Stufen des Organischen und der Mensch. Gesammelte Schriften, vol. 4 (Frankurt

am Main: Suhrkamp, 1981), 18183.29Helmuth Plessner, Laughing and Crying: A Study of the Limits of Human Behavior, trans. James

Spencer Churchill and Marjorie Green (Evanston: Northwestern University Press, 1970), 10.30Herbert Schndelbach, Philosophy in Germany:18311933, trans. Eric Matthews (Cambridge:

Cambridge University Press), 221. Because o this abstraction, Plessner argued that Heideggers

analysis oDaseinwas too narrow. More biting is the criticism that Heideggers philosophy takes no

more notice o the human beings nature than it needs or dying (quoted in Honneth and Joas, Social

Action and Human Nature, 73, 45).


10/29


an Plnr, Ghln propo contructng an mprcal phloophy o human

natur ba on th obrvaton that human bng ar cratur o ntnctual

ct: thy ar ncomplt, worl opn, an thror ovrburn wth

tmul rom whch thy n rl. Anmal hav nvronmnt, but man needsaworl an mutactrathr than ract to achv th.31 To hav a ba or acton,human bng vlop what Ghln call nttuton, or cultural contant that

ruc th arbtrarn o human xtnc. For Ghln, th trm nttuton

o not rr to concouly t up orum uch a a congr or a jucary, but to

habtual pattrn o thought an bhavor an munan orm o ocal organza-

ton, nclung languag, mannr, an moral, that can upply a platorm or a

l-rct proc o vlopmnt. Th ncary bcau tmulu-rpon

bhavor o not olv th problm o worl opnn. Ghln argu that nttu-

ton rtablh th lot lnk btwn ntnct an rpon-trggrng tmulu

on th hghr plan o bhavoral pattrn that [bcom] o routnz that thy

hav bcom analogou to ntnctual bhavor.32 Acton rqur omthng akn

to th rlablty aor by ntnct.

Blumnbrg approprat Ghln a o unrtrmnaton, acton, an

nttuton, but h rjct what h call Ghln abolutm o nttuton, an

a connct wth th contmporanou rvval o Hobb. Ghln racal

cultural conrvatm upport contc poltcal thor that bln a-

ly wth Natonal socalm. Although Blumnbrg agr wth Ghln that con-

tmporary nttuton hav bn gra by th acclrat pac o chang n

mornty, h o not thnk that thy houl b prrv ncrmnatly anat all cot. From Blumnbrg prpctv, Ghln conm prclu

ratonally tnguhng btwn nttuton that contnu to rv u wll an

tho that o not an thror abolv u o rponblty to thnk or ourlv.

Furthrmor, Ghln not athul to h own prm: human xtnc -

ntally rky an th rk a prconton o th poblty o concou choc

an autonomy.

h a n s b l u m e n b e r g : t h e t e r m i n u s a q u o

Blumnbrg put to nw u th ky nght that human contngncy mut bunrtoo a a racal needororientation. Focung on th contracton btwn

31in an unpublh manucrpt, Lnny Mo (dtachmnt, Gnomc, an th Natur o B-

ng Human) mploy th trm tachmnt n h work on th warrant or an mprcally upat

phloophcal anthropology that account or human fxblty n th prt o th arly twntth-

cntury anthropologt. For Mo, th trm rr to th rlatv npnnc o an ntty rom a

largr mlu . . . [ncatng ncrang] ntrnal gr o rom n an organm a t bcom

mor complx. Mo ntrpr to track th ncrang tachmnt rom a molcular to a human

lvl. To ay that human ar th mot tach ntt n natur to uggt that human ar l

at th bck an call o any partcular tmulu. A a rult, human attnton can b rct towara multplcty o objct. A a rult o th pan o tachmnt, human contruct cultural nch

(Ghln nttuton), or a normatvly tructur oco-cultural l-worl, whch tl th rult

o tructur partcpaton n proc o har attnton. Cultural nch ar a hg agant worl

opnn. Mo argu agant volutonary pychologt who locat th capacty or human kll

thr n oman pcc unctonal moul or gn that prcrpt uch moul.32Arnol Ghln, Man: His Nature and Place in the World, tran. Clar McMllan an Karl Pllmr

(Nw York: Columba Unvrty Pr, 1988), 76.


11/29


worl opnn an contnu xtnc, Blumnbrg tat: Th rt propo-

ton o an anthropology woul thn b [that t] cannot b takn or grant that

man abl to xt . . . [man] natural conton contract th conton o

th poblty o phycal xtnc.33 in othr wor, human xtnc not l-

vnt. Blumnbrg plac Ghln noton o unrtrmnaton, whch can

b unrtoo a a crtan amount o loo play, n th concptual lot mark

out by Hggr terminus a quo, an lnk t to th ormaton o cultur throughan account o th human n or proth, uch a mtaphor, an nttuton

uch a myth an languag (.., a l-worl).34 it houl b not hr that

Blumnbrg trm or th ntr contllaton o ymbolc man, whch nclu

mtaphor, myth, an all nttuton that mak up what phloophr commonly

trm th l worl, an whch thror mak human xtnc pobl,

rhtorc. i wll u th trm rhtorc a horthan to rr to th contllaton.

Anothr not: mtaphor a ky lmnt o rhtorc an a unamntal ornt-

ng vhcl or Blumnbrg; th n or mtaphor a conqunc o th act

that human bng hav nthr a vocabulary aquat to ralty nor ntv

prgvn orntaton. i wll rturn to a cuon o mtaphor an rhtorc at a

latr pont.

Th uphot a concpton o human xtnc that rrnc a unvral

problm: th acto human tachmnt an unrtrmnaton. Th nghtha ntrtng phloophcal conqunc: t man that l (dlthy), Bng-

n-th-Worl, (Hggr), a l-worl (Hurl, Habrma, tc.), or a ull-blown

thory o ymbolc orm (Carr) cannot b takn or grant bcau thar alreadyorm o orntaton, whch or Blumnbrg concealanxty-provokngthrat to vablty. evn though, or all practcal purpo, w bgn wth om-

thng lk a l-worl, orntaton not part o th prconton o xtnc.

in what may b a rpon to Hggr charg, Blumnbrg pont out that

Carr o not account or whyymbolc orm ar t up whn h aum anunquton bologcal upport or h thory o ymbolc orm.35 Th cncy

33

Blumnbrg, An Anthropologcal Approach to th Contmporary sgncanc o Rhtorc[AC], n Ater Philosophy: End or Transormation, tran. Robrt M. Wallac (Cambrg: MiT Pr,1987),438 / Anthropologch Annhrung an Aktualtt r Rhtork [AR], n Rhetorik,Band2: Wirkungsgeschichte der Rhetorik (darmtat: Wnhatlch Buchgllchat, 1991), 294.Th work wa orgnally publh n Wirklickeiten, in denen wir leben: Austze und eine Rede(stuttgart:Phlpp Rclam, 1981).

34i o not ny that human bng may hav mor gntcally-conton harwrng than

thr Ghln cu or Blumnbrg rr to n th arlr work. Howvr, th bac pont that

human bng ar worl opn, or mor tach rom th nvronmnt, tll tan. Approach

rom th prpctv o volutonary bology, w mght ay that human bng ar harwr to b

fxbl. Th quton rman: how o w cop wth th platcty, whch th ourc o both our

cratvty an our propnty to l-truct? in BM(p. 49091, 53949), Blumnbrg lv mor

ply nto volutonary bology, palontology, cogntv pychology, an varou othr cnc rl-vant to unrtanng th orgn an vlopmnt ohomo sapiens. H contnu to mantan thatth l-worl, raon, an cultural achvmnt ar ort o th human organm to compnat

or t organcally-ba platcty. H alo contnu to rt ructv naturalm a wll a Hurl

an Hggr attmpt to vacuat phloophcal anthropology rom phloophy. Blumnbrg

xploraton o pobl mprcal corroboraton or h anthropologcal aumpton woul b a tuy

n t own rght.35AC, 438 / AR, 294.


12/29


th allow Blumnbrg to ak how, gvn our lack o l-vnc, t pobl

to account or xtnc an what rol cultur an cutomary practc (..,

rhtorc) play n upportng t. Th animal symbolicummatr th ralty thatwa orgnally lthal or hm by lttng t b rprnt; h look away rom what

uncanny or uncomortabl or hm an towar what amlar.36 A a rult,

human bng urvv through nrcton, by ormng a compnatory cultur,

a Carr mght hav t, ha h thought through th mplcaton o h aump-

ton. O cour, th -alz (an htorcz) th thory o ymbolc orm,

whch ar now gvn a tnctly pragmatc turn, a w hall .

Blumnbrg, unlk Ghln, not ntrt n ormulatng an mprcal

phloophy o human natur or n makng anthropology th cntral concrn o

phloophy. To lav thng at th lvl woul aor no mmunty rom Hggr

charg o anthropocntrm, an Blumnbrg woul b no mor than an anachro-

nm. Rathr, Blumnbrg oprat wth what mght b call an anthropologcal

optc ba on h ormulaton o a terminus a quoa mnmalt, fatonaryanthropology that tral th pac btwn a concpt o human natur an an

ontology o human xtnc. For Blumnbrg, th optc ba on atur o

human xtnc, but t uncton to lmt a phr o nqury by rmnng

human bng o thr lmtaton an capact both a actor an a phloophr:

thr ar no nal acton or ntv truth, jut a thr no x human -

nc. evn o, t pobl to ay mor about h mpl concpton o human

xtnc by xamnng th lmnt o th optc bor rturnng brfy to th

quton o ratonalty, objctvty, an anthropocntrm.

b l u m e n b e r g s d e f i n i t i o n o f h u m a n e x i s t e n c e :l i m i t c o n c e p t s a n d l i m i t c o n d i t i o n s

Lt m bgn wth th rcontruct nton: human xtnc a potentiallysel-assertive [intentional or emergent] autonomy that is constrained by anthropologicallimits and stabilized and humanized by institutions, which by orming a livable worldlimit arbitrariness and make action and refection possible. Th nton a rulto parng Blumnbrg terminus a quo, whch rr to racal contngncy on

th on han an what h call th abolutm o ralty on th othr. 37 Thcountrpart to a total lack o orntaton woul b a wholly nrnt ralty

byon our control.38 At th lmt o xtnc, ralty po an abolut thrat to

36AC, 440 / AR, 296.37WM, 35 / AM, 910.38For Blumnbrg, mtaphor an myth ar th nablng vhcl o human thought; hnc h

rcour to thought mol, whch Joph Lo Kornr lkn to phloophcal abl (ia About

th Thng, Not th Thng itl: Han Blumnbrg tyl, History o the Human Sciences6 [1993], 2).in many o h book, Blumnbrg work wth thought mol that rmn u o our contngncy. For

xampl, n The Genesis o the Copernican World(Cambrg: MiT Pr, 1987), human bng conrontthr orntaton n n nnt pac.in Work on Myth, to b cu n th papr, Blumnbrg tlla tory o anthropogn n rlaton to th abolutm o ralty. in Lebenszeit und Weltzeit(Lietimeand Worldtime) (Frankurt: suhrkamp, 1986), th xtntal lmma play out a th contractonbtwn l tm an worl tm. Hhlenausgnge(Exiting rom Caves) (Frankurt: suhrkamp, 1989),

whch bul on Plato Grunmytho,unrcor th contnung but ultmatly utl ort tontvly xt rom cav (.., hav a total vw). W cannot prov our ultmat aumpton, w

hav no Go-y vw or abolutly tabl rrnc pont, w hav no x human natur, an w


13/29


urvval. it a conton wthout paramtr: th nrnc o pac [whch]

th quvalnc o vry locaton n pac wthout rpct to all othr an th

nrnc o tm, whch th quvalnc o vry momnt wth rpct to

all othr39an anxty-provokng tat o natur wthout rul, cutom, law,

thc, or orr o any kn.At th lmt thr no we.Th terminus a quo a lmtconcpt that rr to th lmt tuaton an to our ubjctv xprnc o t.

so, th vanhng pont o xtnc woul conc wth a tat o pur anxtya

nothngn that w mut mov awayrom, not towar (Hggr), n orr torman vabl.40 Blumnbrg tak thn to account or orntaton vis--visthlmt. H argu that rhtorc or ymbolc orm, uch a languag an myth,

ar th cultural contant that mak acton an rfcton, or autonomy, pobl

by compnatng or a l-thratnng ct.

To magn th tat o aar, Blumnbrg u a thought mol, whch h

clam mlar n uncton to tat o natur concpt. in Work on Myth, h akwhat l bhn th ormaton o cultur, or th pat pat, clamng that w o

not know what happn, but uch a tory can b jut wthn th accpt

thor o anthropogn, th conn o our currnt concptual apparatu,

vocabulary, rarch, an nrnc . . . w mut pot that om uch problm [..,

a alur o ntnct] nuc th prhuman cratur to aapt by ormng what

w woul call a cultur. By aoptng an uprght potur, th cratur conront

a worl no longr amnabl to tmulu-rpon or rght or fght bhavor. Th

abolutm o ralty gnat a conton, contnually rcng nto th pat n

whch man cam clo to not havng control ovr th conton o h xtnc,an what mor mportant, blv that h mply lack control o thm.41

Th objctv tat o aar corrlat wth th bgnnng o l-awarn. Th

abolutm o ralty , a Barbara Mrkr clam, a phnomnon o concoun,

known (rprnt) only bcau w hav cop wth th lo t rprnt, largly

through th ormaton o myth.42 A Blumnbrg put t, thr no rct rla-

ton to ralty; th only ralty w can know on w hav ntrprt. Hnc,

th unctonal mportanc o ymbol, myth, an mtaphor.

To rturn brfy to a uggton ra arlr: t pobl to vw Blumnbrg

anthropology n rpon to Hggr noton o a mtontology. A complttratmnt o th topc byon th cop o th papr, an Blumnbrg o

not to my knowlg mnton mtontology, o my pculaton hr ba on h

crtcm o Hggr unamntal ontology. in Work on Myth, or xampl, Blu-mnbrg acknowlg that Hggr unamntal ontology or guanc

alway bgn in mediis rebus. so w mut u what w o hav: analogy an mtaphor. Blumnbrg wouljuty h thought mol by what thy can xplan, argung that ttlng or provonal account

ncary bcau xtnc tl provonal. H acknowlg th r or crtanty, but h

nt that t pobl to uncton wth unulll r. Clam o crtanty la to unoun orunxamn aumpton, ach wth t own unntn an omtm atrou conqunc.

39WM, 98 / AM, 111.40WM,9 / AM, 15.41WM, 34 / AM, 910.42Barbara Mrkr, Brn nach Butamkt: Zwchn Lbnwlt un Abolutmu r

Wrklchkt [Brn nach Butamkt] nDie Kunst des berlebens,81. i hav borrow Mrkrramng, .., approachng Blumnbrg n trm o th two prmary lmt concpt.


14/29


or unrtanng what mant by th work o myth.43 Frt o all, work omythrr to th work that myth ntally accomplh: th multanou mrgnc o

myth an th human orm o xtnc asa conrontaton wth an ovrpowrngralty that mut b ruc or ymbolz uch that a tory (myth) can b tol.

Th conrontaton th ourc o a compnatory gncanc (Bedeutsamkeit).By gvng hap an orm to xtnc, human bng tanc thmlv rom

thr own contngncy, rom an mmat rlaton to ralty. Work onmyth, ncontrat, pruppo th work o myth an rr to th ongong htorcal rcp-

ton o mythcal thm, much lk thm an varaton n muc.

Iw aum that a mtontology woul b a kn o mt-anthropology, aOtto Pgglr uggt,44 an t woul xamn th existentiellgroun o un-amntal ontology, thn t ntructv to xamn two cton o Hggr

The Metaphysical Foundations o Logicthat bar on th u: (1) whr h cuArtotl concpton o rt or gnun phloophy an th br account o

how Hggr unrtan th phloophy to ovrlap wth concpt n Being andTime;an (2) th paag whr h propo a mtontology.Hggr pont outthat rt phloophyth poblty o whch prnt n th hght cratur,

man gnat by Artotl a qeologe in, whch th tuy o th k osmos. Toqe ionman mply bngth havn: th ncompang an ovrpowrng, thatunr an upon whch w ar thrown, that whch azzl u an tak u by urpr,

th ovrwhlmng. Th tuy ha a twool charactr . . . whch corrpon to

th twool n Being and Timeo xtnc an thrownn.45 stvn Galt Crowll

lnk mtontology to th arlr paag about rt phloophy an uggt thatw mght unrtan mtontology a an nvtgaton o th ontc groun o th

ontologcal projct.46 Blumnbrg tak up th challng by prntng omthng

lk a phloophcal comology vlop on th basiso th rlatonhp btwnthrownn an our anxty-ll xprnc o th ovrwhlmng (abolutm o

ralty). By man o h thought mol,47 Blumnbrg lay out thproblempoby thrownn, whch woul corrpon to a racal n or orntaton, plu

a unctonal account o how gncanc ruc that whch ovrwhlm. From

Blumnbrg pont o vw, Hggr tak gncanc (bng-n-th-worl)

or grant (an n abtracton rom ntu) wthout xplanng th unctonalrlaton btwn anxtyour racton to thrownnan gncanc. it

worth quotng a long paag rom Work on Mythwhrn Blumnbrg tak up

43WM, 110 / AM, 12425.44Otto Pgglr, Hggr on Art, n Martn Hggr, Politics, Art, and Technology, . Kartn

Harr an Chrtoph Jamm (Nw York: Holm an Mr, 1994), 10624, at116 n. 17.45GA26, 1213 / MFL, 1011.46Crowll, Mtaphyc, Mtontology, an th en oBeing and Time, n. 17. i o not clam that

Blumnbrg prov a oluton or Hggr projct. Howvr, i o thnk h captalz on what

h a t hortcomng whn h vlop a phloophcal anthropology that can prov a tartngpont or phloophy. Blumnbrg rjct th a o a unamntal ontology a Hggr concv

o t bcau t woul b on mor ntanc o what t man to orgt human bng.47in MFL148/ GA26, Hggr acknowlg that om thng can only b ma clar through

th u o a myth. in th contxt, h rrrng to Plato u o myth n th Phaedrus, whr Hggrunrtan Plato to b claryng th rlaton o th unrtanng-o-bng to tm. Blumnbrg

woul agr: gvn th naquacy o our acult or comprhnng ralty, w ncarly mak u

o thought mol, mtaphor, an phloophcal myth (MFL, 148 / GA26, 186).


15/29


quton ra by Hggr unamntal ontology. Bgnnng wth th clam

that Hggr unamntal ontology or orntaton or ort to gan ac-

c to th work o myth, h go on to ay:

Th ntrtwnng o gncanc an amlarty a orgroun apparanc an -gu omthng that on not uppo to bcom awar o n t ubjctv-objc-

tv ambvalnc: th way thy corrpon to nullty [Nichtigkeit] an th prouctono anxty [ngstigung]. i gncanc th qualty o th worl a t woul not havorgnally bn or mn, thn t wrung rom a tuaton that prouc anxty, th

orcng o whch nto concalmnt brought about an conrm by that vry g-

ncanc. sgncanc th orm n whch th backgroun o nothng [des Nichts],a that whch prouc anxty, ha bn put at a tanc, whrby, wthout th

prhtory, th uncton o what gncant rman uncomprhn, though

prnt.For th n or gncanc root n th act that w ar concou onvr bng ntvly xmpt rom th proucton o anxty [bcau w ar

nvr wholly xmpt rom th abolutm o ralty]. Car, a th Bng oDasein,whch uppo to b clo pcally n th bac tat o mn o anxty,

th ourc not only o th totalty o th tructur oDaseinbut o t wantng gn-canc n th worl, n t xprnc, n htory. Th nak truth not what l

can lv wth; or, lt u not orgt, th l th rult o a long htory o complt

congrunc btwn [man] nvronmnt an gncatoncongrunc that

only hattr n t mot rcnt pha. in th htory l tl contnually prv

tl o an mmat rlaton to t aby, to what woul mak t mpobl, an

thu ru to oby th ummon o t trryng authntcty.48

From Blumnbrg prpctv, Hggr ha gnor howDasein prhtory

a conton o urvval, how bng-n-th-worl a resulto th prhtory. Thl o complt congrunc ntnctual l; th congrunc hattr by th

chang n botop, or th mrgnc o th human orm o xtnc, whch

ccntrc n omthng lk Plnr n. W mut pruppo th mlln-

na-long work o myth that ha tablz human l by man o th gncanc

an nttuton (Ghln) that allow u to gt on wth th practcal bun o

l. Th unctiono gncanc rman uncomprhn n Hggr work. Cruly put, rom Blumnbrg prpctv, Hggr unamntal

ontology wrongha n larg part bcau t ahtorcal an bcau t

ovrlook unamntal human n. No account o human xtnc woul baccurat t gnor th n or th tmporal tancng rom th abolutm

o ralty va ymbolc orm. Nor woul t b accurat t omtt th l-a-

rton (Selbstbehauptung)ncary to achv th tanc. sl-arton mancary prcly bcau o ntu,49 whch mpl that t mak no n

to brackt th ontc. Blumnbrg thu or a kn o mt-anthropology, a vw

o th rlaton btwn human xtnc an ralty who uncton, morovr,

trmn how th hrmnutc mtho can uncton.50 (Mor on Blumnbrg

u o th trm l-arton latr.)

48WM, 110 / AM, 125.49in h cuon o th davo bat, Olvr Mllr (Sorge um die Vernunt, 393) charactrz

th rnc btwn Blumnbrg, Hggr, an Carr. For Hggr, human bng bcom

r or th ntu oDasein; or Carr, human bng bcom r rom th ntu oDasein. Ha: or Blumnbrg thr patho n th noton o rom: through l-arton, human bng

cop wth ntu an rnounc thr clam to an mpobl, unalloy rom.50in The Legitimacy o the Modern Age, Blumnbrg commnt on Hggr urng a cuon o

hrmnutc. Whl crtqung th concpt o cularzaton, Blumnbrg tnguh h vron


16/29


Crtc hav objct that Blumnbrg pro knowlg o orgn an

ngag n jut th ort o gran pculaton h clam mpobl,51 that h

pot a prhuman tat, or nulg n mtaphyc.52 H may alo m to a-

um th p manng pruppo by om hrmnutct. Howvr, rathr

than th ntv account o orgn, Blumnbrg or only an account that

at our n or uch tor, noar a w lv n a narrat worl.53 No

mattr whch tartng pont w tak up, w wll alway alray b on th o

what th abolutm o ralty concpt gnat. Th ntal tuaton not th

p manng contan n mythcal orgn, bcau manng or gncanc

alray by nton alway on th o th aby. Bcau th pat pat

unknowabl, no hrmnutc rcovry pobl. Contngncy (thrownn)

qual meaninglessness.so ar, Blumnbrg account o th human conton th terminus a quoan

th volvng cultural contant (a provonal l-worl) that prov tracton n

an aln nvronmnt. Thu Blumnbrg vw o anxty r markly rom

Hggr: or Blumnbrg anxty nvr raltc; rathr than a harbngr

o authntcty, t gnal th brakown o orntaton. By man o orm, l

tl contnually prv tl o an mmat rlaton to t aby.54 ially,

anxty a trantonal momnt (Carr), on that thr gnrat nto -

tructv ractv bhavor or prompt u to gv hap to our xprnc through

ymbolc maton. i wll ay mor about th proc o orntaton ollowng th

ntroucton o Blumnbrg othr man lmt concpt.55

Human xtnc mut occur btwn th two lmt o no orntaton anprct orntaton. Th al l-worl or utopa o our magnatonwhch

attmpt to bypa contngncy th othr prmary lmt concpt, on put n

plac by th abolutm o ralty noton. Blumnbrg thu u th concpt o

th l-worl n two way; t th a o a lvabl worl, mlar to that o phloo-

phr uch a Habrma, who n t a a torhou o unquton cultural

gvn rom whch tho partcpatng n communcaton raw on agr-upon

o hrmnutc rom that o Gaamr. Gaamr ha clam that th concpt o cularzaton

contrbut a whol mnon o hn manng to th l-comprhnon o what ha com to

b an prntly xt, an how n th way that what prntly xt an man ar mor than

t know o tl, an that a concpt lgtmz t hrmnutc uncton by what t prouc. Blu-

mnbrg countr: whn cung how th hrmnutc mtho houl uncton, t mportant

to ak how hn manng got thr n th rt plac; thiswll trmn how th hrmnutcmtho wll oprat. A an a, h clam that Hggr an xampl o th hn-manng

problm: Hggr tart wth th aumpton that Dasein unrtanng o Bng ntal tot an yt n th rt ntanc an or th mot part hn an wthrawn rom t ( The Legitimacyo the Modern Age, 17). Blumnbrg contruct th conncton hrmnutcally by provng aunctonal account o gncanc. Th prmannt problm that w ar to ourlv thu trmn

how th hrmnutc mtho can oprat.51Robrt sgal, Blumnbrg a Thort o Myth, Annals o Scholarship15 (1987), 93.52J. M. Frtzman, Blumnbrg an th Ratonalty o Rhtorc, Rhetorica10 (1992): 42335.53Aam, Mtaphor or Mankn, 161.54WM, 110 / AM, 125. it woul b mor accurat to ay that human bng ar anxou about

notbng n th worl.55Blumnbrg oprat wth othr lmt concpt, uch a nal myth or a myth that attmpt

to n all myth. i omt conraton o th concpt bcau n nc a nal myth woul b th

tory o prct l-worl, .., prct orntaton.


17/29


pattrn o ntrprtaton or u n thr ntrprtv ort.56 Howvr, a a lmt

concpt, th l-worl rprnt th human longng to b r o contngncy,

th wh or prct congrunc btwn th organm an t nvronmnt, th

prct atacton o human n, a wll a a prct t btwn thought an

t objctall goal o mythcal thnkng. it woul b a worl vo o chao,

mry, or appontmnt. From Blumnbrg prpctv, Hurl, Habrma,

an othr o not rcognz th unxamn pruppoton o a prgvn con-

gruty contan n th l-worl concpt, whch rlat to thr aumpton

that t an unproblmatc tartng pont.57 Nonthl, vn though Blumnbrg

contruct th no-romantc, altc momnt, h acknowlg th (alway)

thwart n or th worl ntn by th momnt. Gvn th chma, cultur

an htory ar th atmophr that mak t pobl to brath. Th munan

l-worl a conqunc o our n or l-prrvaton. it rr to rhtorc

an takn-or-grant bhavor pattrn rom th prpctv o thr uncton.

in nc, Blumnbrg ubttut an mpl thory o lmt or a tratonal

account o human natur that allow u to lnat th paramtr o xtnc.

What rman a th ubjct mattr o phloophcal anthropology a human

natur that ha nvr bn natur an nvr wll b.58 But th o not man

that vrythng arbtrary or that thr no logc to xprnc. Blumnbrg

blv that morn phloophy ha orgottn man (not Bng), an o h

or a rmnr o what ncary to mantan th human orm o xtnc,

a rmnr that human xtnc rky, that t mak t apparanc n mta-

phorcal gu an alway an achvmnt. Hnc th mportanc o whath call l-arton, a atur o th nton gvn arlr, whch rqur

lmt an tablzaton. Fact about u prov guln.

intally, th l-worl a prouct o mytha tory that amlarz an hu-

manz ralty, who orgn ar alway rcng nto th pat an ar thror

unknowabl. For xampl, Promthu th tory o th l-arton that pro-

uc cvlzaton: th tory ongong rcpton htoryacc by ralzng that

myth mut alway b rtol rom th prpctv o th prntrcor chang

n l an worl concpton.59 A provonal cratur, w alway hav what Blu-

mnbrg call an anty or myth, whch a conttutv n concounha to covr contant manng,60 pt th act that thr ar no contant

manng. Th mpl argumnt n Blumnbrg Work on Myth, about whch iwll hav mor to ay latr, that myth rprnt our needor varyng gr ol-vnc (nttuton) n orr to uncton at all.

56Jrgn Habrma, Moral Consciousness and Communicative Action, tran. Chrtan Lnhart anshrry Wbr Ncholon (Cambrg: MiT Pr, 1991), 135.

57For Blumnbrg, th phnomnologcal mtho mut bgn wth th ralzaton o th contin-gencyo concoun; cuon n Hnrch, Mensch und Moderne bei Hans Blumenberg, 30.

58

AC, 456 / AR, 312.59A Chara Bottn (A Philosophy o Political Myth[Cambrg: Cambrg Unvrty Pr, 2007],

129) pont out, or Blumnbrg, myth rprnt our n to prov gncanc n contantly

changng crcumtanc. Hnc, Bottn rjct account o myth uch a Mrca ela that rt on

ormulatng unchangng paragm. Bottn argu, n concrt wth Blumnbrg, that w nvr lav

our n or myth bhn, an that conton o morntyrap chang an orntatonag-

gravat th n. sh go on to ba hr analy o th r o morn unmat or totaltaran

myth on Blumnbrg account o myth anthropologcal uncton.60WM, 51 / AM, 60.


18/29


t h e l o g i c o f t h e l i f e - w o r l d : s e l f - a s s e r t i o n ,m e t a p h o r , a n d i n t e n t i o n a l i t y

Thr a crtan logc to th ormaton o a l-worl (unrtoo hr n

th rt n, a a lvabl worl) that wll a nty to Blumnbrg mplconcpton o human xtnc. it bt captur by xamnng th rlaton

btwn l-arton, mtaphor, ntntonalty, an xtntal lmt (terminusa quo), conncton that ar nthr obvou nor ully xplan by Blumnbrg.Rrnc to th a ar cattr throughout h work, but my man ourc

hr wll b Work on Mythan Propct or a Thory o Nonconcptualty. Frt,Blumnbrg rjct Hurl aumpton that ntntonalty alwayspar wthan objct or that thr can b a r-foatng thortcal ubjct. Blumnbrg

crtqu o Hurl concpt o ntntonalty n Lebenszeit und Weltzeit(Lietime

and Worldtime) a tuy n t own rght.61

i rtrct myl hr to lucatngBlumnbrg vw o th mattr a t appl to h concpton o human x-

tnc. For Blumnbrg, ntntonalty an act o l-arton ovr agant th

terminus a quo,62 a prott agant th inhumanlmt o ralty nrnc. That, ntntonalty an xpron o th needconcoun ha to b par wthmanng, gvn that tach cratur n to establishhorzon that crcumcrbpoblt; l-arton thror rr to th mpul towar l-prrvaton

that potntally wll tak th orm o a humanly rlvant worl.63 On th account,

ntntonalty can b unrtoo a a vhcl or xpanng horzon pragmatcally

n th ntrt o l-prrvaton.64

Blumnbrg alo clam that ntntonalty an th horzon that orm a lvabl

worl hav a mtaphorcal tructur n th n that mtaphor, by carryng man-

ng ovr rom on contxt to anothr ornt human bng. Blumnbrg can b

count a part o th contmporary mtaphor rnaanc that bgan wth th

collap o nav cntc ralm an th rjcton o a corrponnc thory

o manng. Th ha l to a rvval o ntrt n rhtorc an an mpha on

mtaphor tranormatv, nvntv uncton. ernt Carr ntat much o

th chang wth h xploraton o th ormatv an conttutv rol o mta-

61Blumnbrg alo raw attnton to Hurl thortcal ubjct n Beschreibung des Menschen,whr h clam that Hurl pak o concoun but nothumanconcoun, .., concouncrcumcrb by human lmt (BM, 9). in th book, Blumnbrg rturn to thm that occuphm urng h tunt yar, but h mak mor xplct th anthropologcal ba o h crtqu o

Hurl an Hggr. H clam that Hurl ban on anthropology uncton lk an apotropac

vc to n th poton o th trancnntal obrvr (Zuschauer) (b., 91).62Blumnbrg, Propct or a Thory o Nonconcptualty [PT], n Shipwreck with Spectator:

Paradigm o a Metaphor or Existence, tran. stvn Rnall (Cambrg: MiT Pr, 1997), 98 / Au-blck au n Thor r Unbgrfchkt [AT], n Theorie der Metapher, . Anlm Havrkamp(darmtat: Wnchatlch Buchgllchat, 1983), 451. s alo, BM, 206, whr Blumnbrgclam l-arton prmarly a rpon to th concoun o contngncy.

63

in The Legitimacy o the Modern Age, Blumnbrg clam that l-arton th prncpl omornty, but t mportant not to ovrlook th anthropologcal mnon that th ba or hcrtqu o th mtaphycal humanm that trv or racal l-grounng, a humanm that al to

rcognz th lmntary human orntaton n that can b pc by Blumnbrg concpton

o phloophcal anthropology. in th way, The Legitimacy o the Modern Ageor a mtgat no mornty, on that unrwrt a lmt concpton o cntc progr an a cal-own a

o autonomy approprat to our lmt.64Or, a h tat n BM, 76, ntntonalty a ytm o l-tablzaton an l-rgulaton.


19/29


phorcal languag or thnkng gnrally. Analytc phloophr, tructuralt,

an hrmnutct hav put ovr how th orgnaton accomplh,

whthr an what kn o cogntv orc can b agn to mtaphor, th rlaton

btwn ltral an mtaphorcal languag, an whthr mtaphor rr only

to othr lngutc contxt. Blumnbrg, who t bt n th hrmnutc camp,

prov an xtntal ratonal or mtaphor cntral plac n th contructon

o our n o ralty, on that aum mtaphor cogntv uncton rt on

how mtaphor acltat copng wth tachmnt.

Th copng multanouly a proc by whch concoun ulll t n

or manng. That , unr th prur to mak n o a ralty that alway

xc our grap, w u mtaphor, or ubttut, to ntgrat th unknown

nto a ytm o th known. Blumnbrg clam: Mtaphor not only a chaptr

n th cuon o rhtorcal man, t a tnctv lmnt o rhtorc, n

whch rhtorc uncton can b play an xpr n trm o t rlaton

to anthropology.65 Blumnbrg xtnon o th uual n o th trm, gur

o pch, to ar xtntal n ollow rctly rom th cncy th,

whch prcrb an nrct rlaton to ralty. snc ntntonalty mpl a gap

btwn concoun an pobl objct an pr towar ubttuton a a

way o lnkng up wth alray xtng manng contxt (l-worl or rhtorc)

n orr to projct a nw orntaton, mtaphor th orntng g o ntn-

tonalty. For xampl, whn Romo ay that Jult th un, th ba on a

prvou rupton o Romo cutomary way o bhavng an h attmpt to

amlat a paonat nw xprnc. A a rult, a nw prtnnc com ntobng ba on connctng two htrognou a. Th actor mak thng

mlar through an nght, whch occur n pt o th rnc. donanc

thn mbrac wthn a nw congruty. in all o th, thr , a Paul Rcour mght

ay, an conc momnt prouc by how th abnt thng ha bn amlat

uch that t manng ra on th mag to whch t pctorally boun.66 Jult

now boun to th mag o th un. Romo raw on amlar ymbolm aoc-

at wth th un, whch azzl vrythng an th ourc an cntr o l.

Lk Plato orm o th goo, Jult conr ralty an ntllgblty on h l,

an o on. Anthropologcally, rortng to mtaphor mpl that harmony (l-worlly orntaton that no longr work, hav bcom ratonalz, routnz,

an o on) ha bn rupt an a nw orntaton call or. Mtaphor ar

rct back towar th conncton wth th l-worl a th contant movng

upport.67 Mtaphor ar not tru or al but approprat or napproprat.

Th logc o Blumnbrg poton rt on th vw that mtaphor an

concoun woul b unncary n a tat o prct harmony, uch a th

tmulu-rpon bhavor that gu othr pc mor rlably or a prctly

congrunt l-worl. Th only ralty ovr whch w coul pobly xprnc our

own nfunc a amlar ralty, on wthn th cop o our pobl goal anpractc. Only a tour, a mtaphor, put th amlarty wthn our grap. in all

65AC, 440 / AR, 296.66Th Mtaphorcal Proc a Cognton, imagnaton, an Flng, n On Metaphor, . shlon

sack (Chcago: Unvrty o Chcago Pr, 1979), 142.67PT, 81 / AT, 438.


20/29


o th, mtaphor tl a mtaphor that allow u to contruct an unrtanng

o orntaton, on that unrwrttn by th contngncy o all orntaton.

Thr on mor mportant lmnt n th rcontructon o Blumnbrg

concpton o ntntonalty: t lnk to act. Blumnbrg unrtan act a

th boly rgtrng o lmt. That , on mnon o our xprnc o lmt

tak th orm o act. Th tat o natur tory n Work on Mythcontan an ab-brvat account o how ntntonalty, act, an mtaphor work togthr n th

proc o l- an worl-ormaton. Th thought mol contan th rourc

to xtrapolat how an that w ntrorz th conncton btwn l an worl

through lng, whch anchor an nlarg horzon n what ha now bcom (or

), a a rult o our worl opnn, an aln an ra, or uncanny worl.

Copng wth worl opnn mut nvolv rolvng troublom rlaton to our

act. spcc actuch a angr, ar, joy, an o onpartcularz an o-

cu th magnaton. Howvr, nc th account that ollow attmpt to captur

how act rlat to xtntal lmt, anxty wll b th pont o rrnc or

playng how objct ar partcularz an ntrojct through lng.

Anxty our rpon to th lo o orntatonthr ntnctual (th tat

o natur cnaro) or whn nttuton al u (th l-worl a lvabl worl). To

cop wth anxty, concoun mut bcom concoun osomething. Blumn-brg rrrng to anxty whn h tat that act rt a kn o pc

agtaton an a conton o payng attnton that ha to tak ovr th poton

o a habtual aaptv ytm. H thn raw out th mplcaton:

Act th ncluv brackt that unt partal acton that work agant th abo-

lutm o ralty. intntonaltyth coornaton o part nto a whol, o qualt

nto an objct, o thng nto a worlmay b th cool o aggrgat conton

o uch arly accomplhmnt o concoun, accomplhmnt that l th way

out o th bracktng togthr o tmulu an rpon an that wr at th am

tm th outcom o th xou. To that xtnt thr omthng n th clacal

a that moton th unclarty o th mn lng t way orwar. Th chma

o accomplhmnt ll not only by naton an prcpton but alo by nam,

gur, an tor, th rtual an machnaton that ar brackt togthr by

th on tll-unn actv conton o ovrwhlmng powr [abolutm o

ralty].

68

i tmulu an rpon ar orgnally brackt togthr n th prhuman

cratur, or whch th worl rlvanc wr gvn, thn worl opnn

quvalnt to th uncouplng o tmulu an rpon. Th onanc th

poblty o concou bhavor bcau t alo th poblty o concoun

wth an objct an thror a horzonat whch pont partcularzaton an

ntrojcton occur. (Havng seenJult a th un, Romo eelsthat h h, orat lat that h th mot gncant conc objct n h worl: a nw congru-

nc mrg.) donanc thror alo th poblty o th mtaphorcal

ubttuton o on thng or anothr n an attmpt to ntgrat th unknown ntoour xprnc o th known. W eel th uncouplng n tat o orntnganxty. Th mrgnt worl opnn an xprnc o lack alo a n or

compnatory manng, whch partcular act, uch a ar, stabilizento objct.

68WM, 21 / AM, 28.


21/29


22/29


whn, n th contxt, h borrow Franz Ronzwg phra: nam brak nto

th chao o th unnam, or w mght ay that th wor crckt coul ub-

ttut or what w xprnc a no.72 in th proc, moton xpr a

potntalty or rom, bcau t ntrorz th nonconcnc o th l to

th l that corrlat wth bng worl-opn. But t alo ntrorz a n o

powrln, bcau moton tt to th nonngotabl lack o control ovr

th objctall o whch conton by an thror ntllgbl n rlaton

to ralty abolutm.

in Work on Myth, Blumnbrg ramatz th proc o orntaton or worl-ormaton by trackng how mythcal gur tanc u rom a lthal ralty. For

xampl, ovr tm pur ar coalc nto th gur Mua, who com to

tan (b a mtaphor) or potntally uncontroll anxty. Hr nam mpl

a tory wth procur (t t th trm) or alng wth hr. A mlar proc

nvolv n th ntrojcton crb by pychoanaly. Allung to The Futureo an Illusionat th bgnnng oWork on Myth, Blumnbrg clam that Frucrb th complt hlpln o th go n th ac o ovrwhlmng an-

gr a th cor o th traumatc tuaton, an aw n th chl arly man

or lov th compnaton or uch hlpln.73 Th chl magn lo o

a aml conncton to th mothr accompan nvuaton an l- an

othr-rcognton through ntrojcton. in th Fru xampl, lov nvu-

at by partcularzng an objct. Th nvual larn to mantan a poton by

rcognzng an attachng xpctaton an manng to a cathct objct. Thu,

mtaphor, a th vhcl that ntrojct alo nvolv rcogntonjut a myth anttutonalz, ntrojct cultural manng upport rcognton.

sl-prrvatv ntntonalty thror rounabout or crcumtantal an

pragmatc, an ncra rang o bhavor ma pobl by narrowng horzon

to human proporton.74 A rtanc to arbtrarn an ragmntaton, th

an accomplhmnt. A or Hurl, th corrlat gncanc, but hr t

tthr to actvly xprnc lmt. sgncanc can now b unrtoo, a

Barbara Mrkr argu, a a urrogat l-worl unr th conton o ntnton-

alty.75 By bracktng all ocally mat ymbolc contruct, th l-prrvatv

uncton o gncanc, mtaphor, an ntntonalty bcom vbl. snaton,prcpton, nam, gur, an tor ll our conttutonal worl opnn an

tanc u rom nothngn.

Obvouly, ntntonalty may b purly ubjctv, purly antay, th abolut-

m o mag an wh,76 a prc w pay or fxblty. Blumnbrg n a

crtron or crmnatng btwn pur antay an raltc bhavor. What th

horzon ll wth can lack ralm a long a th o not xtn to th cntral

mattr o urvval.77 For xampl, a long a i ralz that anta o jumpng o

cl an fyng ar not actual poblt, th antay not ncarly harmul.

72WM, 34 / AM, 40.73WM, 5 / AM, 10.74Blumnbrg rpatly u th wor crcumtantalty to crb our nrct rlaton to

ralty (.g., WM, 142 / AM, 15960, an AC, 439 / AR, 295).75Mrkr, Brn nach Butamkt, 8586.76WM, 8 / AM, 14.77WM, 7 / AM, 13.


23/29


Blumnbrg a that ca o alur crat a zon o raltc but crcumtantal

a bhavor. For xampl, Oyu rturn hom punctuat by bt o cun-

nng gn to outwt all that thratn to prvnt th rturn. H ha an arna

o a bhavor that, nc Oyu pragmatc, o not nclu ltnng to

th srn lthal ong unl h curly atn to th hp mat. Ovr tm,

w larn whch muhroom ar poonou an whch ar not. Th bhavor n-

orm by nam that hav bn ra out o unamlarty by man o mtaphor

an ma accbl, n trm o thr gncanc, by tllng tor.78 Ovr th

mllnna, tor (myth) mantan a l-worlly poton, on that acqur t

own objctvty an ncty. Th poton upport human l-prrvaton by

havng too th tt o tm. in orng rtanc to th lvlng out o pac-

tm contngncy, th groun urthr mtaphorcal ubttuton.

Blumnbrg broan h alray oyncratc unrtanng o mtaphor

vn mor n An Anthropologcal Approach to th Contmporary sgncanc

o Rhtorc, whn h uggt that our conttuton tl mtaphorcal. echo-

ng Kant arton o ncomplt l-rfxvty, Blumnbrg clam, Man

comprhn hml only by way o what h not. H ntrprt th a: t

not only [man] tuaton that potntally mtaphorcal; h conttuton tl

alray .79 stuaton rr to our ongong n to rolv our rlaton to th

unknown; th conttuton that alray th onanc o th cncy-ab-

olutm o ralty htrognty. Th onanc can b rolv only nrctly

nparticularway that ntgrat th unknown nto th known. Hr h ha u h

own analy o mtaphor to uggt mtaphorcally how w mght comprhnhuman xtnc unctonally.

Ba on th varou xtnon o th trm mtaphor, t ollow that no

wholly crptv an ratonal account o who w ar can b gvn, bcau vry

contnt-ba account contan a mtaphorcal urplu that xc concptualty.

For xampl, th a that w ar anmal, machn, tram o concoun, or

gn mtaphorcally aturat; th contnt raw on th rchn (or povrty)

o avalabl l-worlly manng. Popl ornt thmlv by actng an conttut-

ng thmlv through th mtaphorcal urplu. Th htory o concpton o

human natur (.g., th ratonal anmal or th mag o go) a htory o l-conttutona htory o upr mtaphor or comparon. each mtaphor

t th trm o a worl-vw, t o nttuton, cutom, an xpctaton that

mantan a l-worl. Thunctiono mtaphor tl, apart rom pcc contnt, to crat th nlmnabl ubjctv pac ncary or human l-prrvaton

an cultural rproucton prcly by ttng tho trm.

W can unrtan how mtaphor accomplh l-prrvaton an r-

proucton by xamnng Blumnbrg cryptc an ar-tch ounng clam

that vn acton can hav a mtaphorcal tructur.80 Acton, by nton, not

ntnctual, tmulu-rpon, or ractv bhavor. That , acton pruppo atlat om mnmal pror maton o mpul, an t pruppo a wr rang

o bhavoral lattu, whch n turn pruppo th pac crat by mtaphor.

78WM, 6 / AM, 12.79AC, 456 / AR, 312.80AC, 456 / AR, 312


24/29


Mtaphor an magnatv procur, a projctv prncpl, whch xpan

an occup mpty pac.81 Mor prcly, acton canb mtaphorcal nth n that on acton can b ubttut or anothr, uch a anmal acrc

or human acrc. Or ymbolc bhavor can ubttut or or ntrr wth

acton that tn towar racton (tmulu-rpon). For xampl, trat can

b ubttut or nuclar prolraton, nvronmntal rgulaton can b ubt-

tut or nvronmntal graaton, or rhtorc can ubttut or trror. in th

rhtorc ay, Blumnbrg obrv that wthout th capacty to u ubttut

or acton not much woul b lt o mankn.82 Th obvouly problmatc

n th tchnologcal ra whr acton [thratn to] hrnk to racton.83 Hr,

Blumnbrg xtn th manng o th trm ubttuton n orr to unr-

tan acton unctonally.

s e l f - a s s e r t i o n a n d t h e h u m a n

Thr on mor mportant atur o th nton o human xtnc gvn

arlr. i l-arton otn bln bcau t tn to xc lmt, an th

anthropologcal manng o l-arton prott agant raw contngncy, thn

an a o what count a humanorntaton an a concrn or th thcal mpl-caton o anthropology mplct n Blumnbrg txt. Aaptaton to crcum-

tanc rqur human bng to l-artvly plac lmt btwn thmlv

an that whch orntto put lmt btwn thmlv an th lmt to

xtnc that upport what i wll call a mnmal anthrocntrn. To b hu-

man man to rcognz lmt n a pcc way, a Blumnbrg xplctly arm

n an arly ay on th lnk btwn thc an th problm o l-prrvaton

an n a latr ay cat n part to Carr achvmnt.

in an arly ay, it n phloophch ethk ggnwrtg mglch? (i a

Phloophcal ethc Pobl Toay?), Blumnbrg clam that Kant abtract a

o humanty a th powr to t n ha rc nto th backgroun. Howvr,

Blumnbrg tll nvok Kant whn h tnguh humanacton rom tmulu-rpon or ractv bhavor (Kant aln cau). in th ay, Blumnbrg

n thc a th l-prrvaton o th human. For Blumnbrg, t mak no

n to cu thc wthout rt havng trmn how to mt th orntatonn that wll upport valu conrral. so h both hol onto a rual Kantan

momnt an unrcor h own kptcm about th poblty o a Kantan

typ thc. H ct contmporary barrr, uch a th thcal ct prouc by

th lo o a comc ought, th tmptaton to la an athtc xtnc (lt l

happn rathr than la t), to allow ntrt n cncy to ovrr all ntrt n

n, or to allow ourlv to b ubum an cruh by an amntr octy,

thrby tranrrng th rol o th ubjct to an anonymou collctv84not un-

lkDaseinuprmpo on a tchnologcal gr or Foucault ubjct l. All

th thrat call or an anthropologcal rntrprtaton o th Kantan potulat,

81AC, 454 / AR, 309.82AC, 440 / AR, 296.83AC, 446 / AR, 302.84Blumnbrg, it n phloophch ethk ggnwrtg mglch?, n Studium Generale6

(1953), 174, 18081.


25/29


whch houl b parat rom mtaphyc an vw a part o th rhtorc

o thc, who am to gv manng to mprovng th conton o l. H

a: w houl contnu to wagr a though w can bnt.85

Whn awar th Kuno Fhr Prz n 1974, twnty yar atr th thc

ay, Blumnbrg tat that Carr Substance and Functionha bn unjutlyorgottn. Although Carr wrot th book n 1910, t contan th grm o

h latr thory o ymbolc orm. A dav Aam not, n t Carr argu that

th uncton o ymbolc orm a mportant a thr ubtanc an that rlaton

btwn thng ar a mportant a th thng thmlv.86 du to lngth con-

raton, i cannot go nto tal about how Carr appl h account o th

nvarant rqurmnt or apprhnon an objctvty o cntc objct to all

orm o xprnc, uch a languag an myth. Blumnbrg put th an

partcular, th a o unctonto nw u whn h rjct Carr ormalt

an ntally ahtorcal tratmnt o ymbolc ormto whch Hggr alo

objctan mphaz how ymbolc orm tl anwr to our l-prrva-

ton n n way i hav alray cu, .., to bcom an rman human, t

ncary to gv orm to xtnc.

in th am pch, Blumnbrg alo urg u not to orgt Kant an Carr

guanc n anothr way, an h cauton agant rgarng th a o humanty a

a l-grounng ubjct by man o whch w magn capng rom contngncy

or a a partcular concpton that can b unvralz uch that htory bcom

one(opprv) htory.87 To b human to b o n partcular way a th or that

nvual. Nonthl, thr ar prconton har by all or apprang thtat o aar. Th lmt concpt mnton arlr ar normatvly uggtv n

th rgar, although Blumnbrg o not xplctly ay o. For xampl, nt

xtnc mut b a man btwn th two lmt o cncy an prcton,

thn t pobl to ak whthr at any on pont n tm a ubjct or a cultur

ovrpowr by abolutm or ha uccumb to magcal thnkng. i th mov-

mnt towar orntaton an anxty or towar lluon o matry an utopan

thnkng that brackt a ralty prncpl? Whn Blumnbrg art that Kant

potulat ar part o th rhtorc o thc, i tak that to man that Kant am

or a worl o moral l-ralzaton, gu by a concpton o th hght goo, (wa) a orm o rhtorc that can rfct (onc rfct) a r to act n th

ntrt o humanty, countrng th tnncy to ac th human that bult

nto th logc o nchantmnt.

l i m i t c o n c e p t s a n d m e t a p h o r i c s

Ultmatly Blumnbrg cannot prov h hypoth o lmt concpt, h tory

o th orgn o myth, or h arton o mtaphor prmacy, a long a th mol

cntc or on rronouly man by mtaphyc.88 Lmt concpt an

85AC, 450 / AR, 306. s Mllr (Sorge um die Vernunt, 36166) or a cuon o Blumn-brg an thc. H not that Blumnbrg o not prnt a ytmatc thc, but that an thcal

concrn motvat h mpha on carng or raon.86Aam, Mtaphor or Mankn, 154.87Blumnbrg, ernt Carr gnkn, Revue Internationale de Philosophie85 (1974): 45663;

rpr. n Wirklichkeiten in denen wir leben(stuttgart: Rclam, 1981).88s cuon n Lzk Kolakowk, The Presence o Myth(Chcago: Unvrty o Chcago Pr,

2001), 12.


26/29


mtaphor ar jut by what thy can xplan an thy (partally) aty th n

or atmporal rrnc pont. From an anthropologcal pont o vw, nthr

mtaphyc nor cntc ratonalm ar th n or th humanly rlvant

worl uppl by nablng vhcl uch a mtaphor an myth. Blumnbrg ob-

rv that, what w n rom htory [an cannot gt] tn towar ncator

havng th clarty o mythcal mol, ncator that nabl th nvual ubjct,

wth h nt tm, to trmn how h can t hml n a rlatonhp to th

larg-cal tructur that rach ar byon hm.89 in trm o th rrnt to

myth, or or that mattr lmt concpt, t not a quton o proo, but rathr, a

Lzk Kolakowk clam n The Presence o Myth, a mattr o matchng up nan ara or ourc o nrgy actv n man concou rlaton to th worl.

Kolakow contnu: th proo-makng ablty tl a powr o th analytc

mn, tchnologcally ornt, whch o not xtn byon t tak. . . . Th

a o proo, ntrouc nto mtaphyc, ar rom a conuon o two rnt

ourc o nrgy actv n man concou rlaton to th worl: th tchnolog-

cal an th mythcal.90 Tryng to convrt on uncton nto th othr or to tryng

to prov th truth o mythcal concoun analytcally rult n conuon,

bcau th two uncton mt rnt orntaton n.

Blumnbrg clam that w oprat on th ba o a prncpl o nucnt

raon, that tratonal mtaphyc thror an xcv xpctaton. Th

r or ounatonal truth a corrlat o trancnntal anthropolog; t

aum an mpobl congrunc, th ru o an magnary lot mythcal

orntaton.91 Th rult rom an anty or mythcal thnkng untmpr bya ralty prncpl. By way o anthropology, mtaphorca trm that rr to

Blumnbrg mthoologyfat ntalm or clam or tratonal mta-

phycal crtanty. Th nvolv covrng th backgroun, or root, mtaphor

on whch clam or ntv knowlg or varou l an worl unrtanng

pn. For xampl, natur may b unrtoo a an organm or a a machn,

an both hav thortcal conqunc bcau mtaphor t th trm o our

unrtanng. Onc w th unrlyng mtaphor a mtaphor, thn th

clam ba on th, whch w onc uppo wr ntv, ar fat.

Blumnbrg clam that mtaphyc ha otn prov tl to b mtaphorctakn ltrally or ubtantally.92 That , w mght blv that natur rally

a machn. Mtaphorc aum that w can crat tanc rom abolut or

ntv clam an yt prrv th manng ntall by th mtaphor.

Problm ar whn mtaphor ar takn ltrally. For xampl, gntc -

ntalm ructv an may upport th bl that gntc manpulaton wll

olv problm that may hav lttl to o wth gntc makup. At th pont n

tm, w ar alo ngag n a conrontaton wth th artcal worl prouc

89WM, 100 / AM, 113.90Kolakowk, The Presence o Myth, 2.91For Blumnbrg, raon conttut a paraox. Raon an aaptaton n rpon to a bo-

logcal hortcomng an thror on way n whch human bng tanc thmlv rom th

abolutm o ralty. it alway rman a contngnt achvmnt, pron to rror an hyprtrophy.

On th othr han, t th only tool w hav or l-crtcm an l-corrcton. s cuon n

Mllr (Sorge um die Vernunt, p. 32599).92Blumnbrg, Paragmn zu nr Mtaphorolog, 140.


27/29


by our tchnologcal nvnton. Th gung mtaphor th computr, whch

gnrat rarch nto computr that wll urpa th complxty o th human

mn. Unrtoo a a mtaphorcal rlatonhp, t a comparon btwn our-

lv an computr. Wayn Booth propo a kn o crtcal mtaphorc, wth

whch Blumnbrg woul mot lkly agr, whn h clam that th qualty o any

cultur wll n part b maur both by th qualty o th mtaphor t nuc or

allow an th qualty o th jug o mtaphor that t ucat an rwar. H

propo that unrtanng mtaphor allow u to c whthr to jon th

mtaphort or rjct hm, an that multanouly to c thr to b hap

n th ham h mtaphor rqur or to rt. For xampl, o t nlarg u

or mnh u to u Fru mtaphor or th oul, or B. F. sknnr?93

i tratonal mtaphyc th corrlat o trancnntal anthropolog,

mtaphorc th corrlat o th mnmal anthropology mpl n Blumnbrg

txt. Thr no prct congrunc btwn thought an t objct or btwn

th organm an t nvronmnt. Thr , howvr, relativecongrunc, whchcan b concptualz by rntrprtng how human bng an th nvronmnt

o or can t togthr (Passung).Th prncpl o nucnt raon mpl thr no prct t.94Th

tructur o human xtnc ncat a gap btwn th para o crtan

knowlg w onc blv w coul hav an what pobl. Th crt

grat quton an grat myth prt, whch ncat an anthropologcal n

that cannot b gana or contruct. Th ra th quton o whthr

th lo o tratonal mtaphyc houl gv way to a no-Kantan bypang ontu prur or a potvt ructonm that brackt out what t cannot

accommoat a manngl or anachrontc. Rathr, l-vnc can b qu-

ton by akng what t man wthn th lmt o xtnc.

o b j e c t i v i t y a n d r a t i o n a l i t y

i want to rturn brfy to th u o objctvty an ratonalty mpl by Blumn-

brg concpton o xtnc an t complmnt, th prncpl o nucnt

raon. somwhat countrntutvly, th grat myth ar th mol or what count

a objctvty an ratonalty n nttuton. Jut a myth mut b unrtoo ntrm o thr rcpton htorythy ar tt ovr tm an thr ucc an

our urvval maur by ralty alur to contract thmo ar all vabl

nttuton an habt o bhavor that woul hltr u rom thrat to vablty.

so, objctvty an ratonalty ar contxt-pnnt, wth nttuton provng

th ba or makng (ratonal) rt-orr amnt o th arrangmnt thy

mboy.

To unrtan mor about what Blumnbrg man by objctvty an

ratonalty, t ncary to tak a clor look at what h man by optmz

nttuton, o whch th grat myth ar xampl. Th trm nttuton rrto rhtorc rom th prpctv o t tablzaton ovr tm, to what w tak or

93Wayn Booth, Mtaphor an Rhtorc, n On Metaphor, . shlon sack (Chcago: Unvrtyo Chcago Pr, 1979), 63, 6667.

94s cuon n Mrkr, Brn nach Butamkt, 7576.


28/29


grant uch that urthr bhavoral xprmntaton pobl. For xampl,

th u o knv an ork, pn an pncl ha bn nttutonalz; o hav

chl-rarng pattrn, grammar, th u o wor to rr to thng an a.

Although nttuton ar only rlatvly contant, Blumnbrg clam that thy

conttut burn o proo that w hav urvv an can contnu to urvv.

it no accnt that th mtaphor rawn rom logc, gvn that optmzaton

mpl th contnung proucton o vnc n th rgar. Th not a

thory o progr or a moral catgory; th concpt horthan or th htor-

cal ormaton o any cultural or thortcal contruct w may com to tak or

grant. For xampl, cntc thor rman optmal a long a thy contnu

to account or phnomna an gnrat urthr rarch. Cultural contruct

rman optmal a long a thy contnu to upport valu conrral, ntty,

communcablty, an acton. Blumnbrg prnt h thory a an analogy to

darwnan voluton; optmzaton may not alway choo what bt, but what

work, an th optmal untl t top workng. Optmzaton th ba o a

kn o objctvty. H clam:

evn th trm optmzaton can nvr clam to b applcabl to a ynchronc

cro cton a a whol, t o tablh a nt trbuton o burn o proo

or what gv tl out a ratonalty. At lat argumnt o th kn that art that

omthng can no longr b accpt bcau t ha alray bn accpt or a vry

long tm wthout xamnaton o not hav th ratonal plaublty that grant to

thm at th tm. What th hang nttuton covr , abov all, a trbuton

o burn o proo. Whr an nttuton xt, th quton o t ratonal ouna-

ton not, o tl, urgnt.95

Th burn o proo mtaphor uggt that nttuton ar plaubl account,

who objctvty conrr on thm by thr contnung anthropologcal

rlvanc an corrcton by ralty. i an nttuton ha nur an uppl a

raltc zon o a bhavor, t prov th rourc or gttng on wth lv-

ng. Vw n th lght, th human cnc prov vnc o how, why, an

that choc o worl ntrprtaton hav alray bn ma that conttut our

htory. To rturn to th mtaphor: at lat n our jutc ytm, th nant

prum nnocnt. Th burn on th procutor to prov th nant

gult. smlarly, tho who objct to th optmz nttuton bar th burn o

montratng t hortcomng. in practc, th what happn. Th ay nothng

about th nhrnt jutc o th arrangmnt, but t o arm an anthropolog-

cal rqurmnt that thr b uch arrangmnt who plaublty lgbl nxt

to th yartck o l-prrvaton. Th ratonalty o nttuton coxtnv

wth t rjcton o quton n th n that thy hl u rom havng th qu-

ton vrythng at onc. inttuton rprnt lmntary commtmnt that ar

ncary bcau w cannot tart rom cratch at vry momnt. inttuton ar

burn o proo that allow u to mak om accommoaton wth th magr

ntu o l that th thnkr-or-hml ha poton ovr. Thy r th

worl obrvr.96 so amttng th ratonalty o nttuton lt th burn o

proo at th am tm that t n th burn by lnatng raon lmt.

95WM, 166 / AM, 18384.96WM, 26 / AM, 33.


29/29


Th lmt ar not jut th prncpl o noncontracton, but th antnomy o

l an thought, partally brg by nttuton. in th contxt, raon woul

hav to man takng up burn o proo pc-mal a thy ar trbut to

u. That , w mov away rom problm a w olv thm, an th mol th

on ovrwhlmng anthropologcal problm conttut by th terminus a quo.Ratonalty an objctvty ar aaptaton, qualt o tanc rom nucnt

orntaton an nonvablty.

a n t h r o p o c e n t r i s m a n d a n t h r o c e n t e r e d n e s s

Why Blumnbrg poton not anthropocntrc? Frt o all, Blumnbrg woul

pont out that a vw mut b a vw rom omwhr. i opt or th trm anthro-

cntrn bcau t ncary to acknowlg th plac an contrant on

th plac rom whch w mak our clam. Th thought mol cu arlrncourag rcognton o our malln an margnalty n rlaton to a largr

natural ttng at th am tm that t call nto quton grano knowlg

clam. dntv orntaton an ntv vnc alway xc our capact.

Th ha bn ovrlook by th mor optmtc enlghtnr an tchnocrat

targt by anthumant crtqu. Th vr-ncrang n o th unvr m-

mnty urthr ampl th crpancy. in a pothumouly publh work,DieVollzhligkeit, Blumnbrg mtat on th mmnty o tm an pac (nnumr-abl galax) an th powrln oWissen. Th z o th unvr an nxo th lo o our gncanc an alo th mprobablty o our orm o xtnc.

But t prcly th mtaton that fat an rplac th narcotzng an

grano narratv aocat wth anthropocntrm wth narratv that otr

lvng wthn our man. Rnorcng a n o l prcoun can bcom th

ba or how an why w houl car. Sorge not a gvn any mor than l arght.97Lk Carr, Blumnbrg thnk anxty mut b a trantonal momnt,but unlk Carr, th roluton o not maur progrv l-lbraton.

Thr no l to lbrat an no abolut pont o vw rom whch to jug

th proc. Awarn o bologcal lmt ky to th phloophcal navor

tl. Anthropology counl u to rmmbr human bng by rnouncng th

nothngn at th hart o xtnc, on th on han, an ntv anwr,on th othr han. Th anthropology o lmt prov th man to raltcally

a our poblt. W may not hav an ovrall vw o th cour o htory,

but w o hav a non-ngotabl lmt.98

97s cuon n Franz Jo Wtz, Abch ohn Wrhn: d engltgkt Vrchwn-

n, nDie Kunst des berlebens, 4247. Wtz tn to ra th paag pmtcally, whch noturprng bcau o th mmn burn plac on human bng by morn conton. Anothr

way to ra th that Blumnbrg obrly apprang th challng an th choc our

Pavesich 2008 Blumenberg's Phil Anthrop- Heidegger and Cassirer

Documents

Transcript of Pavesich 2008 Blumenberg's Phil Anthrop- Heidegger and Cassirer