Karl Jaspers proslul v meziválečné době jako zakladatel nové filosofie existence, která však byla v kombinaci s jeho psychologickým školením, zaostřením na ,,mezní situace“ lidského prožívání a kritikou filosofických systémů často dezinterpretována jako forma subjektivismu či iracionalismu. Předložená studie se pokouší vystihnout jádro Jaspersova využití filosofie existence pro novou rekonstrukci lidské racionality, univerzálních charakteristik lidství. Jejich pochopení mělo podle Jasperse vzdorovat pokořování lidské důstojnosti v moderních totalitách a v globálním ekonomicko-technologickém provozu, pro něž hodnoty lidství, jak je definuje Jaspersova filosofie, přestaly být určujícími měřítky. Studie ukazuje Jaspersovo ukotvení existence ve vztahu k transcendenci a individuality v komunikaci s druhým a jeho kritiku monistického myšlení, které pluralitu ve smyslu jeho filosofické koncepce neumožňuje., Karl Jaspers received much attention in the interwar period as the founder of a new philosophy of existence that, however, was – in tandem with his psychological training, focus on “borderline situations” of human experience, and critique of philosophical systems – often misinterpreted as a form of subjectivism or irrationalism. The study presented here strives to depict the substance of Jaspers’ use of the philosophy of existence for a new reconstruction of human rationality, of the universal characteristics of humanity. Understanding these characteristics shall, in his estimation, help us to resist the degradation of human dignity in modern totalitarianism and in the global economic-technological system, in which the values of humanity, as defined by Jaspers’ philosophy, have ceased being decisive criteria. The study presents Jaspers’ anchoring of existence in the relationship to transcendence and of individuality in the communication with others, as well as his critique of monistic thinking, which in his philosophical conception does not allow for plurality., and Karl Jaspers wurde in der Zwischenkriegszeit als Begründer der Existenzphilosophie bekannt, die jedoch im Zusammenhang mit der psychologischen Ausbildung Jaspers’, der Konzentration auf „Grenzsituationen“ des menschlichen Erlebens und der Kritik philosophischer Systeme oft als eine Form von Subjektivismus bzw. Irrationalismus fehlinterpretiert wurde. In der vorliegenden Studie wird der Versuch unternommen, den Kern von Jaspers’ Nutzung der Existenzphilosophie für eine Rekonstruktion der menschlichen Rationalität und der universalen Merkmale des Menschseins zu erfassen. Deren Erkenntnis sollte laut Jaspers der Demütigung der Menschenwürde in modernen totalitären Regimen und im globalen ökonomisch-technologischen Betrieb widerstehen, in denen die in Jaspers’ Philosophie definierten Werte des Menschseins kein Maßstab mehr sind. In der Studie wird Jaspers’ Verankerung der Existenz in der Beziehung zur Transzendenz und zur Individualität in der Kommunikation mit anderen und seine Kritik am monistischen Denken aufgezeigt, das keine Pluralität im Sinne seines philosophischen Konzepts ermöglicht.
Over the last decade or two, judging by the frequency and jubilance of its sundry invocations, “materialism” seems to have fi nally returned from discursive exile, having barely survived and only with aid from the most unlikely ally. Th at this new materialism is barely recognizable matters little, for the stories of conceptual adventure and the promise of a world beyond our wildest conceptual grasp are so captivating that most fail to notice that the human never appears in them. Th at is precisely the point. Under the guise of materialism, a redemptive nihilism has taken the place of the revolutionary hubris that once struck fear in ruling classes and ideas alike. How did it come to this? Th e stodgy old materialism did not so much lose to the imposter in some marketplace of ideas as it was systematically appropriated, its concepts expropriated, aspirations falsifi ed and entire traditions eff aced. A sustained philosophical and political eff ort to weaken the Left Hegelian tradition – the concept of alienation in particular – preceded today’s ontological restoration, enabling new “materialists” to maintain what is entirely an absurdity (materialism that resides solely and immanently in the object) and an obscenity (radical politics built on arch-conservative principles). Th is essay will identify a few points of ontological infi ltration and argue that critical social theory, for the sake of materialism and not against it, must recuperate the prohibitively idealist conceptual framework – one that is by no means foreign to it and that once went by the name of Reason in History.