Continental Philosophy Review

, Volume 48, Issue 4, pp 463–478 | Cite as

Heidegger’s phenomenology of embodiment in the Zollikon Seminars

  • Cristian Ciocan


In this article, I focus on the problem of body as it is developed in Heidegger’s Zollikon Seminars, in contrast with its enigmatic concealment in Being and Time. In the first part, I emphasize the implicit connection of Heidegger’s approach of body with Husserl’s problematic of Leib and Körper, and with his phenomenological analyses of tactility. In the second part, I focus on Heidegger’s distinction between the limits of the lived body and the limits of the corresponding corporeal thing, opening to an ontological understanding of the ecstatic bodying forth of the body. In the third part, I analyse this ecstatic bodiliness in relation to the problem of spatiality, exploring the tension between the here and the over there in the experience of the embodiment. Heidegger not only refuses to understand the space starting from the here of the body, but he also refuses to understand the body starting from the here of the space. Thus, there are two interconnected inversions that Heidegger operates in relation to Husserl: In the topic of spatiality, he rejects the pre-eminence of the here; in relation to the body, he contests the primacy of tactility. Finally, the conclusion stresses that, even if the bodying forth penetrates almost all behaviour of Dasein in the world, there is however a limit of embodiment, an unreachable frontier beyond any possibility of the bodying forth, namely the understanding of being. This also implies that the problem of body needs be understood in the context of the ontological difference.


Body Space Tactility LeibKörper distinction Ontological difference 



This article is part of the research Project PN-II-RU-TE-2010-156 funded by CNCSIS-UEFISCSU.


  1. Aho, Kevin A. 2009. Heidegger’s neglect of the body. Albany, NY: SUNY.Google Scholar
  2. Benoist, Jocelyn. 1994. Chair et corps dans les Séminaires de Zollikon: la différence et le reste. In Autour de Husserl: L’ego et la raison, ed. Jocelyn Benoist, 107–122. Paris: Vrin.Google Scholar
  3. Cerbone, David R. 2000. Heidegger and Dasein’s “Bodily nature”: What is the hidden problematic? International Journal of Philosophical Studies 8(2): 209–230.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Ciocan, Cristian. 2008. The question of the living body in Heidegger’s analytic of Dasein. Research in Phenomenology 38(1): 72–89.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. D’Angelo, Diego. 2012. Die Schwelle des Lebe-Wesens. Überlegungen zur Leibsinterpretation Heideggers in der Nietzsche-Abhandlung. Studia Phænomenologica 12: 59–81.Google Scholar
  6. Greisch, Jean. 1994. Le phénomène de la chair: un “ratage” de Sein und Zeit. In Dimensions de L’Exister, ed. G. Florival, 154–177. Louvain: Peeters.Google Scholar
  7. Gros-Azorin, Caroline. 1998. Le phénomène du corps (Leib). Une entente participative. Les Études Philosophiques 4: 465–477.Google Scholar
  8. Haar, Michel. 1985. Le chant de la terre. Paris: L’Herne.Google Scholar
  9. Heidegger, Martin. 1986. Sein und Zeit. Tübingen: Max Niemeyer.Google Scholar
  10. Heidegger, Martin. 1987. Zollikoner Seminare, ProtokolleGesprächeBriefe (hrsg. von Medard Boss). Frankfurt am Main: Vittorio Klostermann.Google Scholar
  11. Heidegger, Martin. 1996. Nietzsche I (GA 6.1, hrsg. von Brigitte Schillbach). Vittorio Klosterman, Frankfurt am Main.Google Scholar
  12. Heidegger, Martin. 2001. Zollikon Seminars. ProtocolsConversationsLetters (edited by Medard Boss, translated from the German and with notes and afterwords by Franz Mayr and Richard Askay). Evanston, IL: Northwestern University Press.Google Scholar
  13. Husserl, Edmund. 1952. Ideen zu einer reinen Phänomenologie und phänomenologischen Philosophie. Zweites Buch: Phänomenologische Untersuchungen zur Konstitution (Hua IV, hrsg. von Marly Biemel). Den Haag: Martinus Nijhoff.Google Scholar
  14. Husserl, Edmund. 1960. Cartesian meditations. An introduction to phenomenology (trans: Cairns, Dorion). Hague: Martinus Nijhoff.Google Scholar
  15. Husserl, Edmund. 1973a. Ding und Raum. Vorlesungen 1907 (Hua XVI, hrsg. von Ulrich Claesges). Den Haag: Martinus Nijhoff.Google Scholar
  16. Husserl, Edmund. 1973b. Zur Phänomenologie der Intersubjektivität. Texte aus dem Nachlass. Dritter Teil: 19291935 (Hua XV, hrsg. von Iso Kern). Den Haag, Martinus Nijhoff.Google Scholar
  17. Husserl, Edmund. 1989. Ideas pertaining to a pure phenomenology and to a phenomenological philosophy. Second Book, Studies in the phenomenology of constitution (trans: Rojcewicz, Richard, André Schuwer). Dordrecht/Boston/London: Kluwer Academic.Google Scholar
  18. Husserl, Edmund. 1991. Cartesianische Meditationen und Pariser Vorträge (Hua I, hrsg. von S. Strasser). Den Haag: Kluwer Academic.Google Scholar
  19. Husserl, Edmund. 2008. Die Lebenswelt. Auslegungen der vorgegebenen Welt und ihrer Konstitution. Texte aus dem Nachlass (19161937) (Hua XXXIX, hrsg. von Rochus Sowa). Dordrecht: Springer.Google Scholar
  20. Merleau-Ponty, Maurice. 1964. Le Visible et l’invisible. Paris: Gallimard.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media Dordrecht 2015

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Institute for Philosophy “Alexandru Dragomir” BucharestRomanian Society for PhenomenologyBucharestRomania

Personalised recommendations