Der agyptische Zeitbegriff hat zwei Eigentumlichkeiten: erstens gibt es nicht einen, sondern zwei Begriffe fur das, was wir Zeit nennen, und zweitens konnen wir diese Begriffe zugleich mit Zeit und mit Ewigkeit wiedergeben. Sie bezeichnen die Zeit in ihrer Gesamtheit, ihrer unabsehbaren Fulle. Jan Assmann untersucht die Bedeutung dieses dualen Zeit/Ewigkeitsbegriffs in funf Schritten. Im ersten Teil wird diese Zweiteilung der Zeit aus der Aspektopposition des agyptischen Verbalsystems abgeleitet, das sich nicht, wie das uns vertraute auf die drei Zeitstufen (...) Vergangenheit Gegenwart Zukunft, sondern auf die zwei Aspekte Imperfektiv/Perfektiv bezieht und mit verschiedenen Symbolisierungen und Personifikationen in Verbindung gebracht. Die eine Zeit der unendlich in sich kreisenden Bewegung, aus der die Zeiteinheiten der Stunden, Tage, Monate, Jahre hervorgehen ist die Sternzeit, die Zeit des Sonnengottes, die andere Zeit der unwandelbaren Dauer ist die Steinzeit, die Zeit des Osiris. In einem zweiten Schritt wird diese Unterscheidung inhaltlich konkretisiert als kosmische und moralische Zeit. Die kosmische Sternzeit ist die Zeit der Riten, durch deren Vollzug sich der Mensch in die kosmischen Ordnungen eingliedert. Die Steinzeit der Grabmonumente, in denen sich der Mensch ins Gedachtnis der Nachwelt einzuschreiben hofft, ist die Zeit der Rechenschaft und der Geschichte. Speziell dem agyptischen Umgang mit Geschichte widmet sich der dritte Teil. Hier geht es um den engen Zusammenhang von Zeit, Geschichte und Staat, der fur das agyptische Zeitverstandnis charakteristisch ist. Der vierte Teil behandelt den Unterschied von linearer und zyklischer Zeit, Irreversibilitat und Reversibilitat, Steinzeit und Sternzeit unter dem Gesichtspunkt des Endes, das in beiden Dimensionen jeweils ganz unterschiedliche Formen annimmt. Im letzten Teil untersucht Assmann den grundlegenden Wandel des agyptischen Zeitdenkens in der 2. Halfte des 2. Jahrtausends v. Chr. Die aus der Bewegung der Sonne um die Erde ausstromende Sternzeit fullt sich immer mehr mit dem Inhalt von Schicksal und Geschichte, die Zeit, und mit ihr das menschliche Leben und das Geschick des Landes, wird in Gottes Handen gedacht. (shrink)

Der 9. Band der Reihe behandelt das Thema der Identität, allerdings von einer ganz anderen Seite, von seinem Gegenbegriff der Verwandlung aus. Es geht dabei um die Frage: Was ist der Mensch? Ist er der Verwandlungskünstler, Rollenspieler, Maskenträger gegenüber der Welt der Tiere, die sich immer treu bleiben und immer dieselben sind? Hat er sich im Laufe der Kulturgeschichte vom archaischen Menschen, der als Schamane Tiergestalt annimmt, als Benandante zum Werwolf wird, im Ritus ein Leopard ist, zum modernen Menschen entwickelt, (...) der sich festlegen muß und festgelegt wird auf eine Identität, die ihm zum stahlhart unentrinnbaren Gehäuse wird? Und welche Rolle spielt die Schrift in diesem Prozeß? Bedeutet der Gegensatz von Mündlichkeit und Schriftlichkeit zugleich den Übergang von der labilen zur stabilen, zugeschriebenen und festgeschriebenen Identität? Diese und andere Fragen werden an archaischen Gesellschaften und Werken der Hochkultur ebenso erörtert wie an popkulturellen Phänomenen der Gegenwart. (shrink)

Since the 1990s, Reinhart Koselleck has been one of the critics of the concept of collective memory. This includes contributions to practical debates on the one hand and reflections on a more theoretical level on the other. In contrast, with her concept of cultural memory, Aleida Assmann has taken a more positive view of the concept of collective memory. She defends this concept against Koselleck’s critical remarks, referring to him as an implicit addressee of her reflections. This essay takes (...) this disagreement as an opportunity to look more closely at the ‘dialogue’ between them by addressing three overlapping aspects, primarily on a theoretical level: the distinction between experience and recollection, the collective conditions of recollection, and the opposition between history of memory and memory of history. (shrink)

A book review of Jan Assman's book on Total Religion.

Jan Assmann, one of the world’s most outstanding Egyptologists, has written a remarkable and fascinating book, Moses the Egyptian: The Memory of Egypt in Western Monotheism. Assmann, however, is not primarily concerned with the historical question that has intrigued thinkers throughout the ages : Was Moses an Egyptian? Nor is the book primarily a contribution to Egyptology—although Assmann is a master of the discipline. What then is it really about? The question is simple and direct, but the (...) answer—as we shall see—is complex and subtle. Assmann’s primary aim is to contribute to a new field of study that he calls “mnemohistory.” Moses, Assmann tells us, is a “figure of memory, not of history.” There is no independent historical or archaeological evidence that the biblical Moses ever really existed. Our knowledge of Moses is based primarily on the biblical account, although there are also legends, stories, and anecdotes that can be found in apocryphal sources. Yet there is no other human figure of memory that has exerted such a powerful influence in shaping the tradition of Western monotheism. Assmann explores the image of Egypt in Western thinking; he probes the dynamics of religious intolerance and tolerance, and the origins of anti-Semitism. He also contributes to an enriched understanding of the Enlightenment and its legacy. Furthermore, Assmann’s study can be read as a lucid reflection on issues that have been at the center of recent controversies about multiculturalism and cultural identity. Moses The Egyptian is erudite, beautifully conceived, and passionately written. (shrink)

Jan Assmann, one of the world’s most outstanding Egyptologists, has written a remarkable and fascinating book, Moses the Egyptian: The Memory of Egypt in Western Monotheism. Assmann, however, is not primarily concerned with the historical question that has intrigued thinkers throughout the ages : Was Moses an Egyptian? Nor is the book primarily a contribution to Egyptology—although Assmann is a master of the discipline. What then is it really about? The question is simple and direct, but the (...) answer—as we shall see—is complex and subtle. Assmann’s primary aim is to contribute to a new field of study that he calls “mnemohistory.” Moses, Assmann tells us, is a “figure of memory, not of history.” There is no independent historical or archaeological evidence that the biblical Moses ever really existed. Our knowledge of Moses is based primarily on the biblical account, although there are also legends, stories, and anecdotes that can be found in apocryphal sources. Yet there is no other human figure of memory that has exerted such a powerful influence in shaping the tradition of Western monotheism. Assmann explores the image of Egypt in Western thinking; he probes the dynamics of religious intolerance and tolerance, and the origins of anti-Semitism. He also contributes to an enriched understanding of the Enlightenment and its legacy. Furthermore, Assmann’s study can be read as a lucid reflection on issues that have been at the center of recent controversies about multiculturalism and cultural identity. Moses The Egyptian is erudite, beautifully conceived, and passionately written. (shrink)

Jan Assmann, one of the world’s most outstanding Egyptologists, has written a remarkable and fascinating book, Moses the Egyptian: The Memory of Egypt in Western Monotheism. Assmann, however, is not primarily concerned with the historical question that has intrigued thinkers throughout the ages : Was Moses an Egyptian? Nor is the book primarily a contribution to Egyptology—although Assmann is a master of the discipline. What then is it really about? The question is simple and direct, but the (...) answer—as we shall see—is complex and subtle. Assmann’s primary aim is to contribute to a new field of study that he calls “mnemohistory.” Moses, Assmann tells us, is a “figure of memory, not of history.” There is no independent historical or archaeological evidence that the biblical Moses ever really existed. Our knowledge of Moses is based primarily on the biblical account, although there are also legends, stories, and anecdotes that can be found in apocryphal sources. Yet there is no other human figure of memory that has exerted such a powerful influence in shaping the tradition of Western monotheism. Assmann explores the image of Egypt in Western thinking; he probes the dynamics of religious intolerance and tolerance, and the origins of anti-Semitism. He also contributes to an enriched understanding of the Enlightenment and its legacy. Furthermore, Assmann’s study can be read as a lucid reflection on issues that have been at the center of recent controversies about multiculturalism and cultural identity. Moses The Egyptian is erudite, beautifully conceived, and passionately written. (shrink)

Jan Assman traces the roots of Mosaic Religion back to its Aegyptian origin. Reading the Holy Bible often makes one think that Moses was Hebrew. But Moses was an adopted Agyptian, as we become aware. Cultural memory is certainly stored in books, but at the same time it is a memory that forms our perception as human beings.

J. Assmann, Religion and Cultural Memory: Ten Studies (R. Livingstone trans; Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press, 2006), ISBN 0804745226, 222 pp.

The paper discusses various aspects of the concept of “cultural memory” coined by Jan Assmann and related both to the problem of determining the categories of culture that became the first objects of philosophical reflection in the era of the Axial Age and to the issues of the modern crisis of the ideology of globalism and multiculturalism. Using the example of some categories of an archaic myth that have not lost their cultural and social relevance at present, the variability (...) of the genesis of philosophy in various civilizations of the epoch of the “Axial Age” is demonstrated - both those in which it arises as an independent form of worldview and those where this process stops at the stage of a highly speculative myth. Special attention is paid to the cultural and social aspects of memory and recollection of the past as forms of spiritual “resistance” to external cultural influences and the preservation of religious and ethnic identity, which is equally relevant both during the genesis of philosophy and in modern post-industrial society during the crisis of globalist ideology and the philosophy of multiculturalism. (shrink)

English summary: The modern age understands justice not only as being an object of jurisprudence. Historical, philosophical, social and cultural studies along with theological approaches each draw near to justice in their own way. This collection devotes itself to the intricate interaction of outside perspectives with the judicial-interdisciplinary thematisation of the law, presenting revised papers delivered at the Protestant Institute for Interdisciplinary Research's symposium in honour of Professor Dr. Dres. h.c. Eberhard Schmidt-Aamann. The case studies and basic considerations deal with, (...) among other things, the function of the law in antique city states, the immanence and transcendence of justice from a theological perspective, as well as the relationship between economics and legal study. German description: Das Recht ist in der Moderne langst nicht nur Gegenstand der Rechtswissenschaft. Historische, philosophische, sozial- und kulturwissenschaftliche wie auch theologische Ansatze nahern sich dem Recht in je eigener Weise. Solche Aussenperspektiven stehen in komplexer Wechselwirkung mit der juristisch-binnendisziplinaren Thematisierung des Rechts. Dieser Sammelband ist dem Wechselspiel von Aussen- und Binnenperspektiven gewidmet. Er vereint die uberarbeiteten Beitrage eines Symposions, das an der Forschungsstatte der Evangelischen Studiengemeinschaft in Heidelberg zu Ehren von Prof. Dr. Dres. h.c. Eberhard Schmidt-Assmann veranstaltet wurde. Die exemplarischen Fallstudien und Grundsatzuberlegungen thematisieren unter anderem die Funktion des Rechts in antiken Stadtstaaten, die Immanenz und Transzendenz des Rechts aus theologischer Perspektive sowie das Verhaltnis von Okonomik und Rechtswissenschaft. Mit Beitragen von: Hans Diefenbacher, Hans-Joachim Gehrke, Klaus Gunther, Christoph Mollers, Thorsten Moos, Michael Moxter, Bernhard Nagel, Martin Ramstedt, Karl-Siegbert Rehberg, Magnus Schlette, Eberhard Schmidt-Assmann. (shrink)

According to metaphysical coherentism, grounding relations form an interconnected system in which things ground each other and nothing is ungrounded. This potentially viable view’s logical territory remains largely unexplored. In this paper, I describe that territory by articulating four varieties of metaphysical coherentism. I do not argue for any variety in particular. Rather, I aim to show that not all issues which might be raised against coherentism will be equally problematic for all the versions of that view, which features far (...) more nuance and diversity than is typically ascribed to it. (shrink)

Der Band enthält Beiträge von Medizinern, Juristen, Philosophen und Naturwissenschaftlern aus Estland, Polen, den Niederlanden und Deutschland zu Themen der Ethik und Wissenschaftstheorie der Medizin. Diese Beiträge sind im Rahmen des «Arbeitskreises für Ethik und Wissenschaftstheorie der Medizin in Ostmitteleuropa» entstanden, der auf einer Kooperationsvereinbarung des Interdisziplinären Zentrums für Ethik der Europa-Universität Viadrina Frankfurt (Oder) und des Instituts für Geschichte und Ethik der Medizin der Universität Halle-Wittenberg beruht. Sie befassen sich u. a. mit der Gesundheitsreform in Polen, Tschechien und Ungarn, (...) mit ethischen Problemen bei Abtreibung, HIV-Infektion, Drogenkonsum, Sterbehilfe und Gentechnik sowie dem Theorie-Praxis-Verhältnis in der Medizin. (shrink)

Representing the thinking of philosophers, psychologists, sociologists, coaches, and sports writers, these essays bring together a wide range of approaches to ...

This study clarifies the need for a renewed account of the body in physiotherapy to fill sizable gaps between physiotherapeutical theory and practice. Physiotherapists are trained to approach bodily functioning from an objectivist perspective; however, their therapeutic interactions with patients are not limited to the provision of natural-scientific explanations. Physiotherapists’ practice corresponds well to theorisation of the body as the bearer of original bodily intentionality, as outlined by Merleau-Ponty and elaborated upon by enactivists. We clarify how physiotherapeutical practice corroborates Merleau-Ponty’s (...) critical arguments against objectivist interpretations of the body; particularly, his analyses demonstrate that norms of optimal corporeal functioning are highly individual and variable in time and thus do not directly depend on generic physiological structures. In practice, objectively measurable physical deviations rarely correspond to specific subjective difficulties and, similarly, patients’ reflective insights into their own motor deficiencies do not necessarily produce meaningful motor improvements. Physiotherapeutical procedures can be understood neither as mechanical manipulations of patients’ machine-like bodies by experts nor as a process of such manipulation by way of instructing patients’ explicit conscious awareness. Rather, physiotherapeutical practice and theory can benefit from the philosophical interpretation of motor disorders as modifications of bodily intentionality. Consequently, motor performances addressed in physiotherapy are interpreted as relational features of a living organism coupled with its environment, and motor disorders are approached as failures to optimally manage the motor requirements of a given situation owing to a relative loss of the capacity to structure one’s relation with their environment through motor action. Building on this, we argue that the process of physiotherapy is most effective when understood as a bodily interaction to guide patients towards discovering better ways of grasping a situation as meaningful through bodily postures and movements. (shrink)