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

Learn More →

The Secret and the Neuter: On Heidegger and Blanchot

The Secret and the Neuter: On Heidegger and Blanchot © Koninklijke Brill NV, Leiden, 2007 DOI: 10.1163/156916407X169807 The Secret and the Neuter: On Heidegger and Blanchot Pascal Massie Miami University of Ohio Abstract Blanchot’s thought has oft en been understood as a critique and a reversal of Heidegger’s. Indeed, many formulas of the former are construed as mere inversions of the latter. Yet, the philosophical problem raised by the encounter between Blanchot and Heidegger cannot be sufficiently accounted for in terms of ‘inversion’ or ‘reversal’. Focusing on the question of the secret (Blanchot’s term) in its relation to Geheimnis (Heidegger), this essay starts with a dis- cussion of the notion of secrecy in relation to mysticism and argues that (a) this difference should not be construed in terms of a disjunction. Blanchot’s relation to Heidegger is not on a par with Levinas’ critical account of the latter; (b) that to acknowledge the centrality of the secret does not commit one to mysticism; and (c) that Blanchot’s ultimate claims about the neuter commit him to a position that is much closer to Heidegger’s than his apparent dis- avowal of the latter would seem to entail. Keywords Heidegger, Blanchot, secret, neuter, mysticism The intent of this essay is to http://www.deepdyve.com/assets/images/DeepDyve-Logo-lg.png Research in Phenomenology Brill

The Secret and the Neuter: On Heidegger and Blanchot

Research in Phenomenology , Volume 37 (1): 32 – Jan 1, 2007

Loading next page...
 
/lp/brill/the-secret-and-the-neuter-on-heidegger-and-blanchot-DRdvA34e8M
Publisher
Brill
Copyright
© 2006 Koninklijke Brill NV, Leiden, The Netherlands
ISSN
0085-5553
eISSN
1569-1640
DOI
10.1163/156916407X169807
Publisher site
See Article on Publisher Site

Abstract

© Koninklijke Brill NV, Leiden, 2007 DOI: 10.1163/156916407X169807 The Secret and the Neuter: On Heidegger and Blanchot Pascal Massie Miami University of Ohio Abstract Blanchot’s thought has oft en been understood as a critique and a reversal of Heidegger’s. Indeed, many formulas of the former are construed as mere inversions of the latter. Yet, the philosophical problem raised by the encounter between Blanchot and Heidegger cannot be sufficiently accounted for in terms of ‘inversion’ or ‘reversal’. Focusing on the question of the secret (Blanchot’s term) in its relation to Geheimnis (Heidegger), this essay starts with a dis- cussion of the notion of secrecy in relation to mysticism and argues that (a) this difference should not be construed in terms of a disjunction. Blanchot’s relation to Heidegger is not on a par with Levinas’ critical account of the latter; (b) that to acknowledge the centrality of the secret does not commit one to mysticism; and (c) that Blanchot’s ultimate claims about the neuter commit him to a position that is much closer to Heidegger’s than his apparent dis- avowal of the latter would seem to entail. Keywords Heidegger, Blanchot, secret, neuter, mysticism The intent of this essay is to

Journal

Research in PhenomenologyBrill

Published: Jan 1, 2007

Keywords: Heidegger; neuter; secret; Blanchot; mysticism

There are no references for this article.