The Dissatisfactions of Self‐Consciousness
Joseph K. Schear
European Journal of Philosophy September 1, 2024 DOI: 10.1111/ejop.13002 (opens in new tab)
Study at a glance
AI-extracted from the abstract| Characteristics | Theoretical or philosophical paper Peer reviewed |
|---|---|
| Key points | Argues that Pippin's Heideggerian critique of the Hegelian rationalist tradition rests on three assumptions about the role of reason in orienting us toward the world; if a sound rationalist regards these assumptions as optional and falsifying, the critique loses force. Contends that the dissatisfactions of self-consciousness can emerge as a genuine alternative only against a credible picture of reason's presence in human life. |
Abstract
Abstract: Robert Pippin has long defended the Hegelian ‘satisfactions of self‐consciousness’ against virtually all attacks, including Heidegger's. He now concedes in a striking reversal that ‘Heidegger is right’. Pippin diagnoses his past allegiance to the Western rationalist tradition culminating in Hegel as resting on ‘a misplaced confidence in the inescapably self‐reflective character of any orientation or attunement to the meaningfulness of Being’. What were once the satisfactions of self‐consciousness have become its dissatisfactions. But does Pippin's presentation of the rationalist position ultimately make it too easy for Heidegger to topple it? Will the rationalist impulse, interpreted more charitably, rest undisturbed by Pippin's Heideggerian challenge? I identify three assumptions Pippin's Heidegger makes about the role of reason in our orientation towards the world. If these assumptions are considered not only optional but falsifying by any sound rationalist, this will damage the power of Pippin's Heidegerrian critique. For it is only against the background of a credible picture of the presence of reason in human life that the dissatisfactions of self‐consciousness can emerge to reveal a genuine alternative.