《巨大的真空:克尔凯郭尔与公众在人类世的崛起》

IF 0.2 0 PHILOSOPHY
Niels Wilde
{"title":"《巨大的真空:克尔凯郭尔与公众在人类世的崛起》","authors":"Niels Wilde","doi":"10.1515/kierke-2022-0013","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Abstract In this paper, I argue that the debate in the environmental humanities about the reconceptualization of the human being as one (humanity as a geologic agent) vs. many (human individuals) in light of the Anthropocene, resembles the very structure of Kierkegaard’s notion of the public as a compound object (one entity) composed of individuals (several entities). Further, I argue that the public provides not only a model for understanding the ontological makeup of the Anthropos but also serves as an early version of it. Hence, the public plays a role in the very emergence of the Anthropocene itself.","PeriodicalId":53174,"journal":{"name":"Kierkegaard Studies Yearbook","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.2000,"publicationDate":"2022-07-14","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Colossal Vacuums: Kierkegaard and the Rise of the Public in the Anthropocene\",\"authors\":\"Niels Wilde\",\"doi\":\"10.1515/kierke-2022-0013\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Abstract In this paper, I argue that the debate in the environmental humanities about the reconceptualization of the human being as one (humanity as a geologic agent) vs. many (human individuals) in light of the Anthropocene, resembles the very structure of Kierkegaard’s notion of the public as a compound object (one entity) composed of individuals (several entities). Further, I argue that the public provides not only a model for understanding the ontological makeup of the Anthropos but also serves as an early version of it. Hence, the public plays a role in the very emergence of the Anthropocene itself.\",\"PeriodicalId\":53174,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Kierkegaard Studies Yearbook\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.2000,\"publicationDate\":\"2022-07-14\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Kierkegaard Studies Yearbook\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1515/kierke-2022-0013\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"0\",\"JCRName\":\"PHILOSOPHY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Kierkegaard Studies Yearbook","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1515/kierke-2022-0013","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"0","JCRName":"PHILOSOPHY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

在本文中,我认为,在人类世的背景下,环境人文学科中关于人类作为一个整体(人类作为地质代理人)与许多(人类个体)的重新概念化的争论,类似于克尔凯郭尔的公众概念的结构,即由个体(几个实体)组成的复合对象(一个实体)。此外,我认为公众不仅为理解人类的本体论构成提供了一个模型,而且还作为它的早期版本。因此,公众在人类世本身的出现中发挥了作用。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Colossal Vacuums: Kierkegaard and the Rise of the Public in the Anthropocene
Abstract In this paper, I argue that the debate in the environmental humanities about the reconceptualization of the human being as one (humanity as a geologic agent) vs. many (human individuals) in light of the Anthropocene, resembles the very structure of Kierkegaard’s notion of the public as a compound object (one entity) composed of individuals (several entities). Further, I argue that the public provides not only a model for understanding the ontological makeup of the Anthropos but also serves as an early version of it. Hence, the public plays a role in the very emergence of the Anthropocene itself.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
0.20
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信