"... an attempt to revive ontology —indeed philosophy itself—by means of a two-sided conception of being.... This is a remarkable idea which has produced a powerful book." —Leonard Lawlor "... a major philosophical study: rich, brilliant... a tour de force, a seminal study that will be a starting-point for future research in this area." —Robert Bernasconi In Truth and Genesis, Miguel de Beistegui considers the role and meaning of philosophy today. Calling for a new departure for philosophy, one (...) that brings together philosophy’s scattered identities, de Beistegui proposes a robust and unified philosophy that would find itself equally at home in artistic and scientific disciplines. To build this renewed philosophy, de Beistegui turns to Aristotle and the earliest foundations of thought. He traces philosophy’s development through the medieval and modern periods before comparing and investigating the work of two of the 20th century’s most influential thinkers, Martin Heidegger and Gilles Deleuze. In particular, de Beistegui focuses on Deleuze’s Difference and Repetition and Heidegger’s Contributions to Philosophy for their handling of the concept of difference. De Beistegui concludes that Deleuze and Heidegger are irreconcilable, but it is in their disagreements that he sees a way to liberate philosophy from its current crisis. (shrink)

Liberalism, Miguel de Beistegui argues in The Government of Desire, is best described as a technique of government directed towards the self, with desire as its central mechanism. Whether as economic interest, sexual drive, or the basic longing for recognition, desire is accepted as a core component of our modern self-identities, and something we ought to cultivate. But this has not been true in all times and all places. For centuries, as far back as late antiquity and early (...) Christianity, philosophers believed that desire was an impulse that needed to be suppressed in order for the good life, whether personal or collective, ethical or political, to flourish. Though we now take it for granted, desire as a constitutive dimension of human nature and a positive force required a radical transformation, which coincided with the emergence of liberalism. By critically exploring Foucault’s claim that Western civilization is a civilization of desire, de Beistegui crafts a provocative and original genealogy of this shift in thinking. He shows how the relationship between identity, desire, and government has been harnessed and transformed in the modern world, shaping our relations with others and ourselves, and establishing desire as an essential driving force for the constitution of a new and better social order. But is it? The Government of Desire argues that this is precisely what a contemporary politics of resistance must seek to overcome. By questioning the supposed universality of a politics based on recognition and the economic satisfaction of desire, de Beistegui raises the crucial question of how we can manage to be less governed today, and explores contemporary forms of counter-conduct. ​Drawing on a host of thinkers from philosophy, political theory, and psychoanalysis, and concluding with a call for a sovereign and anarchic form of desire, The Government of Desire is a groundbreaking account of our freedom and unfreedom, of what makes us both governed and ungovernable. (shrink)

Identifies immanence as the original impetus and the driving force behind Deleuze's philosophy In 5 chapters dealing with the status of thought itself, ontology, logic, ethics and aesthetics, de Beistegui reveals how immanence is realised in each of these classical domains of philosophy. Ultimately, he argues, immanence is an infinite task, and transcendence the opposition with which philosophy will always need to reckon.

"... a real philosophical page-turner, a book that is difficult to put down, even given the complexity of its issues." —Jeffrey Powell "This is a fine addition to existing books on Heidegger’s thought.... The author has both a command of Heidegger and of how best to elucidate him to a contemporary audience." —David Wood In Thinking with Heidegger, Miguel de Beistegui looks into the essence of Heidegger’s thought and engages the philosopher’s transformative thinking with contemporary Western culture. Rather (...) than isolate and explore a single theme or aspect of Heidegger, de Beistegui chooses multiple points of entry that unfold from the same question or idea. De Beistegui examines Heidegger’s translations of Greek philosophy and his interpretations and displacements of anthropology, ethics and politics, science, and aesthetics. Thinking with Heidegger proposes fresh answers to some of philosophy’s most fundamental questions and extends Heideggerian discourse into philosophical regions not treated by Heidegger himself. (shrink)

(2005). Science and Ontology. Angelaki: Vol. 10, continental philosophy and the sciences the french tradition issue editor: andrew aitken, pp. 109-122.

Recent studies of Heidegger's involvement with National Socialism have often presented Heidegger's philosophy as a forerunner to his political involvement. This has occured often to the detriment of the highly complex nature of Heidegger's relation to the political. Heidegger and the Political redresses this imbalance and is one of the first books to critically assess Heidegger's relation to politics and his conception of the political. Miguel de Beistegui shows how we must question why the political is so often (...) displaced in Heidegger's writings rather than read the political into Heidegger. Exploring Heidegger's ontology where politics takes place after a forgetting of Being and his wish to think a site more originary and primordial than politics, Heidegger and the Political considers what some of Heidegger's key motifs - his emphasis on lost origins, his discussions of Holderlin's poetry, his writing on technology and the ancient Greek polis - may tell us about Heidegger's relation to the political. Miguel de Beistegui also engages with the very risks implicit in Heidegger's denial of the political and how this opens up the question of the risk of thinking itself. Heidegger and the Political is essential reading for students of philosophy and politics and all those interested in the question of the political today. (shrink)

Recent studies of Heidegger's involvement with National Socialism have often presented Heidegger's philosophy as a forerunner to his political involvement. This has occured often to the detriment of the highly complex nature of Heidegger's relation to the political. _Heidegger and the Political_ redresses this imbalance and is one of the first books to critically assess Heidegger's relation to politics and his conception of the political. Miguel de Beistegui shows how we must question why the political is so often (...) displaced in Heidegger's writings rather than read the political into Heidegger. Exploring Heidegger's ontology where politics takes place after a forgetting of _Being_ and his wish to think a site more originary and primordial than politics, _Heidegger and the Political_ considers what some of Heidegger's key motifs - his emphasis on lost origins, his discussions of Holderlin's poetry, his writing on technology and the ancient Greek _polis_ - may tell us about Heidegger's relation to the political. Miguel de Beistegui also engages with the very risks implicit in Heidegger's denial of the political and how this opens up the question of the risk of thinking itself. _Heidegger and the Political_ is essential reading for students of philosophy and politics and all those interested in the question of the political today. (shrink)

Aesthetics and metaphysics I: the mimetic schema -- Aesthetics and metaphysics II: from Kant to Adorno -- Aesthetics at the limit of metaphysics: intimations of the hypersensible -- Metaphor beyond metaphysics? -- Literature: Proust, Hölderlin -- Sculpture: Chillida.

This paper is an attempt to identify the source of Deleuzian thought, that is, the "plane" or "image" from which it unfolds despite its many twists and turns. This, I believe, is immanence. The thread of immanence appears most clearly in What Is Philosophy? but can be shown to have been at work from the very start. But immanence is not just the plane of Deleuzian thought. It is also, and above all, that of philosophy itself, especially in its difference (...) from religion and onto-theology. This in turn means that, following Spinoza and his univocal ontology, Deleuzian thought can be seen as completing or realizing the conditions of philosophy itself. (shrink)

Thirty years ago, Fukuyama announced the end of history in the form of the triumph of liberal democracy and free markets. Crises were going to be something of the past. Today, crises abound. Does this mean that the eschatology of the 1980s and 90s should give way to a crisology? Given the many ways in which the vocabulary of crisis is used, and crises are instrumentalized, can the word crisis become a rigorous philosophical concept? In this essay, I analyze the (...) extent to which, and contexts in which, philosophy has claimed crisis as a central concept ; offer a tentative typology of crisis in relation to the problem of normativity ; conclude with a few remarks on critique as the philosophy of crisis. (shrink)

Not a day goes by that we don't hear of a crisis, declared or looming: the ecological crisis, the public health crisis, the housing crisis, the race crisis, the constitutional crisis, the economic crisis. In an age where everything seems to be a crisis, or in a permanent state of crisis, it can be difficult to distinguish between what is urgent and what isn't, what to act on now and what to act on later. In A Philosophy of Crisis, (...) class='Hi'>Miguel de Beistegui offers a typology of crisis that will help us make sense of these issues. While some social scientists and philosophers have become skeptical of the notion of crisis, de Beistegui holds that crisis can be a useful concept so long as we make it a polysemic one that can evolve and operate alongside other concepts. He outlines four regimes of crisis: crises of deviation, exception, contradiction, and extinction. Each involves a certain relation to the norm and requires a certain response. Drawing on the tools of philosophy and disciplines including political economy, law, sociology, and the sciences, A Philosophy of Crisis equips us to understand our current state of crisis and deal with it. (shrink)

Thought under Threat reveals and combats the forces diminishing the power and role of critical thinking, whether in our individual lives or collectively. Thought under Threat is an attempt to understand the tendencies that threaten thinking from within. These tendencies have always existed. But today they are on the rise and frequently encouraged, even in our democracies. People “disagree” with science and distrust experts. Political leaders appeal to the hearts and guts of “the people,” rather than their critical faculties. Stupidity (...) has become a right, if not a badge of honor; superstition is on the rise; and spite is a major political force. Thinking is considered “elitist.” To see those obstacles as vices of thought, Miguel de Beistegui argues, we need to understand stupidity not as a lack of intelligence or judgment, but as the tendency to raise false problems and trivial questions. Similarly, we need to see spite not as a moral vice, but as a poison that blurs and distorts our critical faculties. Finally, superstition is best described not as a set of false beliefs, but as a system that neutralizes one’s ability to think for oneself. For de Beistegui, thinking is intrinsically democratic and a necessary condition for the exercise of freedom. Thought under Threat shows how a training of thought itself can be used to ward off those vices, lead to productive deliberation, and, ultimately, create a thinking community. (shrink)

Looking for joy -- Proust among the psychologists -- Finding joy (involuntary memory) -- Giving joy (metaphor) -- Dress or patchwork?

The axiom at the heart of this article stipulates that everything that can be extracted from Heidegger's thought by way of political contribution can be so extracted only from a position that is itself essentially non-political. This means that everything Heidegger says about politics, or that can be seen to resonate with our political situation, is articulated from a position or a space that is itself not political, a space that, furthermore, defines and decides the essence of politics. His contribution, (...) then, is not to the political debate as such. Rather, it consists in asking whether what is historically at stake in politics and played out in political terms is itself political, and so a matter for political thought, or whether the questions and concepts of political thought are themselves shaped in response to a phenomenon, possibly an event, which it, as political thought, cannot interrogate, or even intimate. Following Heidegger, I envisage our political situation from a non-political perspective, and provide the measure for an evaluation of contemporary politics as an ontohistorical phenomenon. This, I do by following a lead Heidegger develops in the 1930s and 1940s, and by focusing on the concept of Macht, the translation of which will turn out to raise key philosophical issues. Despite its obvious political connotations and overtones, this concept will turn out to designate a phenomenon that is not so much political, as it is metaphysical: it is metaphysics itself, and metaphysics in its entirety, that is of power. This means that all metaphysics is metaphysics of power, and that power itself is through and through metaphysical. Politics, especially modern politics, turns out to be an effect of Macht understood as a metaphysical phenomenon. Having revealed the structure of power, its logic, imperatives and different regimes, I consider briefly the possibility of a politics that would not be governed by such a principle of power, the possibility of what I would call a politics of powerlessness, or a politics of the otherwise than power (Ohnmacht). Could that be ‘politics’ in the highest and ownmost sense? Could ‘Europe’ stand for such radical politics? (shrink)

The Care of Life: Transdisciplinary Perspectives in Bioethics and Biopolitics is a striking collection of interdisciplinary essays exploring key debates in, and the relationship between, bioethics and biopolitics.

This paper analyzes the reasons behind what it calls the erosion of democracy under George W. Bush's presidency since September 11, 2001, and claims that they are twofold: first, the erosion in question can be attributed to a crisis of the state and the belief that security is its only genuine function. In other words, the erosion of democracy is an erosion of the very idea of the public sphere (which, following Hegel, I call "ethical life") beyond security and war. (...) Secondly, the erosion of the ethical sphere goes hand in hand with an extraordinary resurgence of what, still following Hegel, I call "morality," and which privileges the subjective over the objective, or moral (and even religious) feeling over institutions and the law. (shrink)

International Journal of Philosophical Studies, Volume 19, Issue 2, Page 277-283, May 2011.

From Plato's _Republic_ and Aristotle's _Poetics_ to Nietzsche's _The Birth of Tragedy_, the theme of tragedy has been subject to radically conflicting philosophical interpretations. Despite being at the heart of philosophical debate from Ancient Greece to the Nineteenth Century, however, tragedy has yet to receive proper treatment as a philosophical tradition in its own right. _Philosophy and Tragedy_ is a compelling contribution to that oversight and the first book to address the topic in a major way. Eleven new essays by (...) internationally renowned philosophers clearly show how time and again, major thinkers have returned to tragedy in many of their key works. _Philosophy and Tragedy_ aks why it is that thinkers as far apart as Hegel and Benjamin should make tragedy such an important theme in their work, and why, after Kant, an important strand of philosophy should present itself tragically. From Heidegger's reading of Sophocles' Antigone to Nietzsche and Benjamin's book-length studies of tragedy, _Philosophy and Tragedy_ presents an outstanding and original study of this preoccupation. The five sections are organised clearly around five major philosophers: Hegel, Holderlin, Nietzsche, Heidegger, and Benjamin. (shrink)

This paper analyzes the reasons behind what it calls the erosion of democracy under George W. Bush's presidency since September 11, 2001, and claims that they are twofold: first, the erosion in question can be attributed to a crisis of the state and the belief that security is its only genuine function. In other words, the erosion of democracy is an erosion of the very idea of the public sphere beyond security and war. Secondly, the erosion of the ethical sphere (...) goes hand in hand with an extraordinary resurgence of what, still following Hegel, I call "morality," and which privileges the subjective over the objective, or moral feeling over institutions and the law. (shrink)

“Questioning explanation.” With this method, Doz proposes a “personal” reading of Hegel’s logic. Thus, one should not expect to discover in Doz’ book a close commentary of the Jena Logic or the Encyclopedia Logic, but an explanation dedicated to showing how Hegel’s project is an attempt to complete the history of metaphysics. Hegel’s metaphysics takes the form of a “speculative philosophy” or a “science of logic,” the task of which is to expose the necessary forms of thought. As the science (...) of pure thought or pure science, it is rooted in Aristotelian ontology: Aristotle’s enterprise, later identified as metaphysics, consists in grounding philosophy as a double science: the science of being as being and the science of the unmoved and supersensible essence-substances. Such a double science marks the birth of what Heidegger—to whom Doz acknowledges a “debt”—calls onto-theology. It is Doz’ main claim that the Hegelian logic is the completion of metaphysics as onto-theology. While taking into consideration the specificity of Hegel’s project—viz., to elevate metaphysics to the status of pure thinking, in other words to elevate being to the concept—Doz’ reading is after the “unthought” that governs such a project, an unthought which is precisely to be looked for in Hegel’s metaphysical heritage. Hence the second part of the title, which operates like a guiding thread into the unthought: “The Traditional Problems of Ontology”. (shrink)

This book focuses on a dimension of art which the philosophical tradition has consistently overlooked, such was its commitment – explicit or implicit – to mimesis and the metaphysics of truth it presupposes. De Beistegui refers to this dimension, which unfolds outside the space that stretches between the sensible and the supersensible – the space of metaphysics itself – as the _hypersensible_ and show how the _operation_ of art to which it corresponds is best described as _metaphorical_. The movement (...) of the book, then, is from the classical or metaphysical aesthetics of mimesis to the aesthetics of the hypersensible and metaphor. Against much of the history of aesthetics and the metaphysical discourse on art, he argues that the philosophical value of art doesn’t consist in its ability to bridge the space between the sensible and the supersensible, or the image and the Idea, and reveal the sensible as proto-conceptual, but to open up a different sense of the sensible. His aim, then, is to shift the _place_ and _role_ that philosophy attributes to art. (shrink)