Foundations of Science

, Volume 22, Issue 2, pp 255–260 | Cite as

On Living with Technology through Renunciation and Releasement

  • Robert C. ScharffEmail author


Marc Van den Bosche suggests that Heidegger’s conceptions of Gestell and Gelassenheit, taken together with his analysis of Nietzschean Nihilism (interpreted especially by Wolfgang Schirmacher), depicts our era in a way that “supplements” Andrew Feenberg and Don Ihde’s work. Weaving these sources together, he sees the possibility of our becoming (quoting Schirmacher) “technicians” that “live, in a released way, within the groundless.” Here, I raise some questions about whether the author has really fitted all these sources together and argue that his idea of becoming post-modern “technicians” appears to require that we first practice a very un-Heideggerian kind of “renunciation.”


Heidegger Ihde Feenberg Schirmacher Gestell Gelassenheit Philosophy of technology 


  1. Belu, D. S., & Feenberg, A. (2011). Heidegger’s aporetic ontology of technology. Inquiry, 53(1), 1–19.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Feenberg, A. (2000). From essentialism to constructivism: Philosophy of technology at the crossroads. In E. Higgs, et al. (Eds.), Technology and the good life? (pp. 295–315). Chicago: University of Chicago.Google Scholar
  3. Feenberg, A. (2006). Replies to critics. In T. J. Veak (Ed.), Democratizing technology: Andrew Feenberg’s critical theory of technology (pp. 192–196). SUNY: Albany.Google Scholar
  4. Feenberg, A. (2010a). Between reason and experience: Essays in technology and modernity. Cambridge: MIT.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Feenberg, A. (2010b). Ten paradoxes of technology. Techné, 14(1), 3–15.Google Scholar
  6. Heidegger, M. (1966). Discourse on thinking [GA 16] (J. M. Anderson & E. Hans Freund, Trans.). New York: Harper and Row.Google Scholar
  7. Heidegger, M. (1975). Gesamtausgabe (Vol. 102). Klostermann: Frankfurt a.M.Google Scholar
  8. Heidegger, M. (1977) The question concerning technology and other essays [GA 7] (W. Lovitt, Trans.). New York: Harper and Row.Google Scholar
  9. Heidegger, M. (2008). The end of philosophy and the task of thinking [GA 14]. In Basic writings, rev. ed. (J. Stambaugh, Trans., D. F. Krell, Altered). New York: HarperCollins.Google Scholar
  10. Heidegger, M. (2012). Bremen and Freiburg lectures [GA 79] (A. Mitchell, Trans.). Bloomington: Indiana University Press.Google Scholar
  11. Ihde, D. (2006). Forty years in the wilderness. In E. Selinger (Ed.), Postphenomenology: A critical companion to Ihde (pp. 267–290). SUNY: Albany.Google Scholar
  12. Ihde, D. (2009). Postphenomenology and technoscience: The Peking University lectures. Albany: SUNY.Google Scholar
  13. Ihde, D. (2010). Heidegger’s technologies: Postphenomenological perspectives. New York: Fordham University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Schirmacher, W. (1983). Technik und Gelassenheit: Zeitkritik nach Heidegger. Freiburg: Alber.Google Scholar
  15. Schirmacher, W. (1987). The faces of compassion: Toward a post-metaphysical ethics. In A.-T. Tymieniecka (Ed.), Morality within the life- and social-world: Interdisciplinary phenomenology of the authentic life in the “moral sense” (Analecta Husserliana, Vol. 22, pp. 313–325). Dordrecht: Reidel.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Schirmacher, W. (1990). Ereignis technik. Vienna: Passagen.Google Scholar
  17. Schirmacher, W. (2013). On the world view of a vita activa. Poiesis, 15(1), 28–35.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media Dordrecht 2015

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.University of New HampshireDurhamUSA

Personalised recommendations