Die Reihe Islamkundliche Untersuchungen wurde 1969 im Klaus Schwarz Verlag begründet und hat sich zu einem der wichtigsten Publikationsorgane der Islamwissenschaft in Deutschland entwickelt. Die über 330 Bände widmen sich der Geschichte, Kultur und den Gesellschaften Nordafrikas, des Nahen und Mittleren Ostens sowie Zentral-, Süd- und Südost-Asiens.

Will to Power, Eternal Recurrence, and the Being of Entities. Heidegger’s “Aus-einander-setzung” with Nietzsche. The article examines the internal dynamics of Heidegger’s influential interpretation of Nietzsche, focusing on his lectures written between 1936 and 1942, which form the basis for Heidegger’s two-volume book Nietzsche, first published in 1961. Speaking of Heidegger’s interpretation of Nietzsche is potentially misleading, however, since Heidegger gave a series of different interpretations that contradict one another in some essential points. In the first two lectures from 1936/37, (...) we can still observe a far-reaching identification with Nietzsche as the mastermind of a ‘new beginning’ in the ‘history of being’. Nevertheless, shortly afterwards, Heidegger makes Nietzsche’s metaphysics responsible for the domination of modern technology and thus for the last stage of the ‘forgetting of being’. As such, Heidegger no longer views Nietzsche as a thinker of ‘transition’, but merely as the philosophical founder of a hopeless ‘end time’. Against this backdrop, and after the Second World War, Heidegger declared that this particular critique of Nietzsche entailed an “intellectual resistance” against National Socialism. This assertion is discussed at the end of the article together with Heidegger’s rapprochement with Nietzsche during the early 1950s. (shrink)

In this article, Shea aims to overturn Jürgen Habermas’s characterization of Nietzsche in The Philosophical Discourse of Modernity as a postmodern irrationalist. On Habermas’s account, Nietzsche employs Wille zur Macht both as a principle by which to invalidate the claims of metaphysics and as a primordial “other” to reason that unmasks reason as an expression of domination. If Habermas’s reading is correct, Nietzsche’s work is ultimately incoherent since it either lapses back into metaphysics or puts forward a self-refuting (...) anti-metaphysics. Contrary to Habermas, Shea argues that Nietzsche’s theoretical inquiries result from a considered methodological decision on the part of Nietzsche to suspend metaphysical interpretations. For this reason, Wille zur Macht can be read as the fabrication of a post-metaphysical principle for interpreting life rather than as a purported insight into the ultimate nature of reality and thus as a genuine alternative to the trappings of both metaphysical and anti-metaphysical philosophies. (shrink)

Band I der zweibändigen Nietzsche-Interpretationen enthält sowohl bisher unveröffentlichte wie auch ergänzte und stark erweiterte Abhandlungen zu dieser zentralen Thematik in Nietzsches Philosophie. In ihnen werden die wichtigsten Schritte der vom Verfasser vertretenen und viel diskutierten Interpretation des "Willens zur Macht" sichtbar. Die Prozesse "der" Willen zur Macht konstituieren den "absoluten Fluß" des Werdens; im Ja-sagen zu dessen ewiger Wiederkunft vollendet sich auch Nietzsches "Philosophie der Macht". Die Deutung des Werdens als "Wille zur Macht" ist (...) entscheidend von der Nachlaß-Kompilation der Schwester Nietzsches beeinflußt worden. Der letzte Beitrag des Bandes geht der Geschichte dieser Wirkung und den mit ihr verbundenen Mißverständnissen nach. (shrink)

Interpretation is an institutional activity and that may be the most significant fact about it; we are, indeed, a profession, and as such we train students to think about literature in certain ways. Membership in the community is determined by how well one masters the rules of the game. These inescapable facts may be the source of our greatest problems—or their hidden solution. Stanley Fish champions the latter alternative, arguing, in his most recent book, that “the interpretive community” is the (...) ultimate principle of authority in criticism and is capable of resolving all the problems of interpretation.1 If we want to know what reading is, how texts achieve determinate meaning, what constitutes validity in interpretation, or how to resolve the “conflict of interpretations,” we must, Fish argues, focus on the community itself, for it is here alone that these matters are determined.Though he has had more than his share of professional attention, having developed this argument makes Fish’s work worthy of further consideration. He quite simply presents the best picture we are likely to get of the “mind” of the profession, and, in treating him at length here, I am primarily concerned with his representative status. His great achievement is to have articulated the assumptions and beliefs underlying the practices that are favored in our profession: the tacit theoretical position composed of ideas and commonplaces that are so deeply held and constantly in use that they “prestructure” both our dealings with literature and our debates over those dealings. While remaining for the most part “unconscious,” these ideas nevertheless function as self-evident and unassailable truths. If we are to move, as I think we must, toward experiencing a crisis in our discipline, we first have to know where we are. And for that, Fish is invaluable because he has set out to become the official spokesman and efender of the profession. Walter A. Davis, associate professor of English at the Ohio State University, is the author of The Act of Interpretation: A Critique of Literary Reason. The present essay is from a recently completed work on contemporary criticism. He is currently writing a book on modern American drama. (shrink)

Kap. Rhythmus Ce texte est une section du livre de C. Nielsen, Zeitatomistik und “Wille zur Macht”. Annäherungen an Nietzsche, Tübingen, Attempto, 2014, 134 S. Nous remercions chaleureusement Cathrin Nielsen de nous avoir autorisé à le reproduire ici. Das griechische Wort rhythmos bedeutet zunächst, ähnlich wie schema und tropos, lediglich das Moment der Distinktion und impliziert darin so etwas wie die Abstandnahme einer einförmigen Bewegung von sich selbst. Erst Platon verbindet ihn mit - Philosophie.

Schmidt untersucht die Rezeption des "Willen zur Macht" bei maßgeblichen Autoren des 20. Jahrhunderts und unterzieht das Ideologem einer quellenbasierten Kritik. Die ideologisch und politisch präjudizierten Deformationen in der Wahrnehmung durch den Nietzsche-Kult werden deutlich aufgezeigt. Die Streitschrift nimmt sich neben der Fälschung "Der Wille zur Macht" des Gesamtwerks an. Schmidt zeigt auf, dass Nietzsche ein Sohn des 19. Jahrhunderts blieb, aus dem er reaktiv und immer mehr auch reaktionär auszubrechen suchte. Dass er sich in seinen Aphorismen-Sammlungen (...) an der Aufklärung und am Ideal des Freigeists orientierte sowie sich in die Tradition der Experimentalphilosophie stellte, wird vor dem historischen Hintergrund der zweiten Hälfte des 19. Jahrhunderts dargestellt. (shrink)