Logo tectonics

from Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

The German philosopher Heribert Boeder used the term logotectonics to describe the attempt to present the progress of Western philosophy in the form of a closed whole. The “logotectonic thinking” cannot be clearly defined as a “method” or a “paradigm” of philosophy, but must be understood as a philosophical way of thinking or a hermeneutic heuristic. It primarily serves the goal of enabling the history of philosophy to be grasped as a non-contingent and closed structure without having to fall back on historical-philosophical drafts in the strict sense .

Derivation of the term

The term “logotectonics” is made up of two ancient Greek word stems, the ancient Greek λόγος [ lógos ], whose conceptual history Boeder devotes a separate article; and τεκτονικός [ tektonikós ] "skillful in architecture". This artificially formed compound can be translated without obligation as "the architecture belonging to the logo" or free "architecture of the Logoi", which is also reflected in Boeder's approach to the conceptual understanding of the philosophical logo . The fact that λόγος is only transcribed untranslated into German refers to the rich history of this term, which cannot be clearly translated as “word”, “teaching” or “science”.

Theoretical foundations

Boeder only occasionally published explicit annotations for understanding and realizing “logotectonic thinking”. The essay "Logotectonic Thinking", which can be assessed as programmatic, was only published in 1998; 18 years after the publication of the first magnum opus, the "Topology of Metaphysics", where the principles of logotectonics had already been used extensively. The same systematic maxims formed the background for the continuation of the project started with the above work with the “The Reason-Structure of Modernity” published in 1988 and finally with the work “The Installations of Submodernity” published in 2006. On the tectonics of today's philosophy ”.

For Boeder, the whole of philosophy is a fluid structure, although this can also be grasped by an elaborate conceptual apparatus. The handling of this conceptual architecture could be described as “logotectonic thinking” in the form of a specific historical concept of reason, “ which can no longer hold reason as a given ability, but restricts itself to it as a tripartite ratio terminorum say: to be realized as closed relationships of different terms. These terms are points of view according to which logo tectonics proceeds in their construction. For their part, they fit together to form figures, which at the same time reveal the merging of three positions of thought into a whole. “With explicit reference to Heidegger's “ The determination of the thing of thinking ”“ the rationes or conditions mentioned are to be distinguished according to the term of thinking, that of the thing and that of the standard. “A concept of reason differentiated in this way develops from the figures resulting from the consideration of the rationes and the“ resulting differences can be described in each of their epochs as those of “natural”, “mundane” and “conceptual reason”. According to these terms, reason can only be understood from its different tasks within the same epoch. “This moment of logotectonic thought mechanics with regard to the different tasks or functions of reason, which is difficult to illustrate, but all the more decisive, is taken up elsewhere:“ Their [the three terms] different sequences bind the individual rationes into one figure. The different character of the figures develops from the first term of their respective first ratio: for natural or technical reason from knowledge, for conceptual reason from determination, for worldly reason from the matter. "

In the above programmatic essay, Boeder sought to distance himself from the theorizing and methodological gesture of logo tectonics. The “logotectonic thinking” should enable the possibility of a hermeneutical grasp of a history of philosophy that meanwhile clearly exceeds the scope of graspability : “ Not as an organ of a rational being, but as an organ of the human species. “Boeder's apparent lack of interest in founding a philosophical school on the basis of his theory or the establishment of logotectonics as a discipline-immanent paradigm also speaks for this thesis . The advantages of “logotectonic thinking” should not be manifested primarily in deliberations in the humanities, but in actu: “ We leave aside the clarification of the name of our title. He should show his right in the following building of figures from rationes or λόγοι. "

literature

  • Heribert Boeder: Topology of Metaphysics. (= Orbis academicus. Special volume 5). Karl Alber, Freiburg / Munich 1980, ISBN 3-495-47437-4 .
  • Heribert Boeder: The rational structure of modernity. Karl Alber, Freiburg / Munich 1988, ISBN 3-495-47656-3 .
  • Heribert Boeder: Logotectonic thinking. In: Sapientia. Volume LIII, Buenos Aires 1998, pp. 15-24. (Full text on: bibliotecadigital.uca.edu.ar )
  • Heribert Boeder: Seditions: Heidegger and the Limit of Modernity . Ed. And transl. v. Marcus Brainard. State University of New York, Albany, NY 1997, ISBN 0-7914-3532-6 .
  • Heribert Boeder: The installations of the submodern. On the tectonics of today's philosophy. (= Orbis phenomenologicus studies. Volume 15). Königshausen & Neumann, Würzburg 2006, ISBN 3-8260-3356-6 .

Individual evidence

  1. ↑ Heribert Boeder: The early Greek word usage of logos and Aletheia. In: Gerald Meier (ed.): The building tools of history. Essays and lectures on Greek and medieval philosophy. Königshausen & Neumann, Würzburg 1994, ISBN 3-88479-782-4 , pp. 1-30.
  2. ↑ Heribert Boeder: Logotectonic thinking. In: Sapientia. Vol LIII, 1998, pp. 15-24. (Full text on: bibliotecadigital.uca.edu.ar )
  3. ↑ Heribert Boeder: The installations of the submodern. On the tectonics of today's philosophy . Königshausen & Neumann, Würzburg 2006, ISBN 3-8260-3356-6 , p. 10 .
  4. ^ Martin Heidegger: Waymarks. In: Friedrich-Wilhelm Von Hermann (ed.): Complete edition. Volume 9, 1976, IX.
  5. ↑ The Installations of Submodernism , 10.
  6. ↑ ibid., 10-11.
  7. ↑ Heribert Boeder: The structure of reason of modernity . Alber, Freiburg 1988, ISBN 3-495-47656-3 , p. 18 .
  8. ↑ Heribert Boeder: Logotectonic thinking . In: Sapientia . tape LIII . Buenos Aires 1998, p. 23 .
  9. ↑ ibid, 16.