• Gesa LindemannEmail author
Theoretical/Philosophical Paper

The philosophical anthropology of Helmuth Plessner unfolds a systematic significance in different disciplines. His theory of excentric positionality is meaningful not only for a non-reductionist philosophy of the living, but also for a reflected understanding of societal and cultural orders. His approach can be of crucial relevance not only for philosophy, it also can serve as a theoretical foundation of empirical research within the humanities, including sociology and political science.

Although Plessner has published his major works in the 1920s and early 1930s, it took until the 1990s in both philosophy and sociology, before an in-depth and systematic reception of Plessner’s works began to develop. Because Plessner’s major works have not been translated into English, this discourse was more or less restricted to scholars working in the German language. Currently Levels of Organic Life and the Human, the translation of Die Stufen des Organischen und der Mensch(original 1928) is...



  1. Berger, P. L., & Luckmann, T. (1966/1980). Die gesellschaftliche Konstruktion der Wirklichkeit. Eine Theorie der Wissenssoziologie. Frankfurt/M.: Fischer.Google Scholar
  2. Berger, P. L., & Luckmann, T. (1966). The social construction of reality: A treatise in the sociology of knowledge. Garden City: Anchor Books.Google Scholar
  3. de Castro, V. E. (2004). Exchanging perspectives: The transformation of objects into subjects in amerindian ontologies. Common Knowledge, 10(3), 463–484.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Descola, P. (2005/2011). Jenseits von Natur und Kultur. Frankfurt/M.: Suhrkamp.Google Scholar
  5. Foucault, M. (1966/1971). Die ordnung der dinge. Frankfurt/M: Suhrkamp.Google Scholar
  6. Gugutzer, R. (2006). Body turn: Perspektiven der soziologie des körpers und des sports. Bielefeld: transcript.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Jäger, U. (2004). Der Körper, der Leib und die Soziologie. Entwurf einer Theorie der Inkorporierung. Königstein/Taunus: Ulrike Helmer Verlag.Google Scholar
  8. Knorr Cetina, K., Schatzki, T., & von Savigny, E. (Eds.). (2001). The practice turn in contemporary theory. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
  9. Krüger, H. P. (2001). Zwischen Lachen und Weinen, Bd. 2: Der dritte Weg philosophischer Anthropologie und die Geschlechterfrage. Berlin: Akademie.Google Scholar
  10. Leenhardt, M. (1947/1983). Do kamo. Die Person und der Mythos in der melanesischen Welt. Frankfurt/Main, Berlin, Wien: Ullstein.Google Scholar
  11. Lindemann, G. (2014). Weltzugänge. Die mehrdimensionale Ordnung des Sozialen. Weilerswist: Velbrück Wissenschaft.Google Scholar
  12. Lindemann, G. (2017). Die rekursive Automatisierung kommunikativer Steuerung. Soziale Welt, 68, 261–277.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Lindemann, G. (2018). Strukturnotwendige Kritik. Theorie der modernen Gesellschaft Bd. 1. Weilerswist: Velbrück Wissenschaft.Google Scholar
  14. Lindemann, G., & Matsuzaki, H. (2014). Constructing the robot’s position in time and space—the spatio-temporal preconditions of artificial social agency. Science, Technology & Innovation Studies, 10, 85–106.Google Scholar
  15. Luckmann, T. (1970). On the boundaries of the social world. In M. Natanson (Ed.), Phenomenology and social reality. Essays in memory of alfred schutz (pp. 73–100). The Hague: Nijhoff.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Mitscherlich, O. (2007). Natur und Geschichte. Helmuth Plessners in sich gebrochene Lebensphilosophie. Berlin: Akademie.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Plessner, H. (1920/1981) Untersuchungen zu einer Kritik der philosophischen Urteilskraft (1920). In Gesammelte Schriften II, S. 7–321. Frankfurt/M: Suhrkamp.Google Scholar
  18. Plessner, H. (1928/1975). Die Stufen des Organischen und der Mensch. Berlin: de Gruyter.Google Scholar
  19. Plessner, H. (1931/1981). Macht und menschliche Natur. Ein Versuch zur Anthropologie der geschichtlichen Weltansicht. In Gesammelte Schriften Bd. V: Macht und menschliche Natur (S. 135–234). Frankfurt/M.: Suhrkamp.Google Scholar
  20. Schürmann, V. (2002). Heitere Gelassenheit. Grundriß einer parteilichen Skepsis. Berlin: Edition Humboldt.Google Scholar
  21. Shilling, C. (1993). The body and social theory. London: Sage.Google Scholar
  22. Strathern, M. (1988). The gender of the gift. Problems with women and problems with society in Melanesia. Berkeley: University of California Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Woolgar, S., & Latour, B. (1979). Laboratory life. The social construction of scientific facts. Beverly Hills: Sage.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Nature B.V. 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Carl von Ossietzky UniversityOldenburgGermany

Personalised recommendations