Get 20M+ Full-Text Papers For Less Than $1.50/day. Start a 14-Day Trial for You or Your Team.

Learn More →

Flesh and Nature: Understanding Merleau-Ponty’s Relational Ontology

Flesh and Nature: Understanding Merleau-Ponty’s Relational Ontology <jats:sec><jats:title>Abstract</jats:title><jats:p>In this paper I attempt to develop several ways Merleau-Ponty’s ontology might contribute to an environmental ethic through a redefinition of his concept of flesh in terms of a general theory of affectivity. Currently accepted interpretations of the concept such as those in Abram, Toadvine, Barbaras, and Dastur rely upon conceiving flesh as a perceptual experience. I contest this interpretation and argue that a more productive conception of flesh emerges when understood in terms of Heidegger’s philosophy. The paper concludes with a consideration of the normative significance of flesh by examining the role of “wildness” within a place-based ethic.</jats:p> </jats:sec> http://www.deepdyve.com/assets/images/DeepDyve-Logo-lg.png Research in Phenomenology Brill

Flesh and Nature: Understanding Merleau-Ponty’s Relational Ontology

Research in Phenomenology , Volume 41 (3): 327 – Jan 1, 2011

Loading next page...
 
/lp/brill/flesh-and-nature-understanding-merleau-ponty-s-relational-ontology-kuqk8DaPRy

References

References for this paper are not available at this time. We will be adding them shortly, thank you for your patience.

Publisher
Brill
Copyright
© 2011 Koninklijke Brill NV, Leiden, The Netherlands
ISSN
0085-5553
eISSN
1569-1640
DOI
10.1163/156916411X594431
Publisher site
See Article on Publisher Site

Abstract

<jats:sec><jats:title>Abstract</jats:title><jats:p>In this paper I attempt to develop several ways Merleau-Ponty’s ontology might contribute to an environmental ethic through a redefinition of his concept of flesh in terms of a general theory of affectivity. Currently accepted interpretations of the concept such as those in Abram, Toadvine, Barbaras, and Dastur rely upon conceiving flesh as a perceptual experience. I contest this interpretation and argue that a more productive conception of flesh emerges when understood in terms of Heidegger’s philosophy. The paper concludes with a consideration of the normative significance of flesh by examining the role of “wildness” within a place-based ethic.</jats:p> </jats:sec>

Journal

Research in PhenomenologyBrill

Published: Jan 1, 2011

Keywords: environmental ethics; flesh; nature; time; Maurice Merleau-Ponty; ontology

There are no references for this article.