Abstract
This essay compares how four important figures in German philosophy have reacted in important ways to the phenomenon of modernity and some of the problems it poses. Kant’s project of the Enlightenment suggests a generally positive assessment of modernity at the same time as he tries to face the challenge that a physicalist model of causality poses for traditional notions of moral responsibility. Hegel represents the nineteenth century’s stronger reservations about one-sided orientations of the model of self-interested individuals, and he presents an alternative in his Philosophy of Right that recognizes the modern claims of subjectivity and balances it with the emphasis on the social and historical rootedness of those individuals and thereby highlights the importance of context and the need for a state regulation of modern market economies. This is also consistent with Husserl’s resistance to reductionist theories of all kinds oriented too one-sidedly on the models provided by modern natural science. Finally the essay shows how Heidegger’s critique of technology represents a powerful extension of that general project. It closes with a note that one response consistent with these insights has been the tendency of modern European states in the second half of the twentieth century to propose appropriate regulations on markets that helped them better serve the general good. The emergence of globalization that tends to undermine the power of individual states to regulate and control these powerful market forces presents a new challenge to societies across the globe to find similar ways of harnessing the power of modern technologies and markets in positive ways.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Notes
- 1.
G. W. F. Hegel, The Difference Between Fichte’s and Schelling’s System of Philosophy, translated by H. S. Harris and Walter Cerf (Albany: State University of New York Press, 1977), 90.
- 2.
In the “Vienna Lecture,” entitled “The Crisis of European Humanity and Philosophy” in Husserliana VI, 314–348, esp. 339 and 347.
- 3.
Hua VI 338.
- 4.
See on this topic Ausfsätze II, 79 ff. and even more clearly, “Die Idee einer philosophischen Kultur” (Hua VII, 8 ff.).
- 5.
A good account of this crisis, and Husserl’s attempt to offer phenomenology as a response to it, has been provided by R. Philip Buckley, Husserl, Heidegger and the Crisis of Philosophical Responsibility (Dordrecht: Kluwer, 1992).
- 6.
Martin Heidegger, “The Age of the World Picture,” in The Question Concerning Technology and Other Essays, trans. William Lovitt (New York: Harper Torchbooks, 1977), 115–154.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2016 Springer International Publishing Switzerland
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Nenon, T. (2016). Confrontations with Modernity. In: Jung, H., Embree, L. (eds) Political Phenomenology. Contributions To Phenomenology, vol 84. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-27775-2_4
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-27775-2_4
Published:
Publisher Name: Springer, Cham
Print ISBN: 978-3-319-27773-8
Online ISBN: 978-3-319-27775-2
eBook Packages: Religion and PhilosophyPhilosophy and Religion (R0)