Zoographies pdf epub mobi txt 电子书下载 2024

☆☆☆☆☆
简体网页||繁体网页

Matthew Calarco

Columbia University Press

2008-7-4

171

GBP 18.50

Paperback

9780231140232

图书标签: 动物研究思想史 animal 德里达哲学人类学动物性人与动物 Zoographies

喜欢 Zoographies 的读者还喜欢

下载链接在页面底部

点击这里下载

facebook linkedin mastodon messenger pinterest reddit telegram twitter viber vkontakte whatsapp 复制链接

想要找书就要到小哈图书下载中心

qciss.net

立刻按 ctrl+D收藏本页

你会得到大惊喜!!

发表于2024-11-22

Zoographies epub 下载 mobi 下载 pdf 下载 txt 电子书下载 2024

Zoographies pdf epub mobi txt 电子书下载 2024

图书描述

Zoographies challenges the anthropocentrism of the Continental philosophical tradition and advances the position that, while some distinctions are valid, humans and animals are best viewed as part of an ontological whole. Matthew Calarco draws on ethological and evolutionary evidence and the work of Heidegger, who called for a radicalized responsibility toward all forms of life. He also turns to Levinas, who raised questions about the nature and scope of ethics; Agamben, who held the "anthropological machine" responsible for the horrors of the twentieth century; and Derrida, who initiated a nonanthropocentric ethics. Calarco concludes with a call for the abolition of classical versions of the human-animal distinction and asks that we devise new ways of thinking about and living with animals.

Zoographies 下载 mobi epub pdf txt 电子书

著者简介

Matthew Calarco is Associate Professor of Philosophy at California State University, Fullerton.

图书目录

Zoographies pdf epub mobi txt 电子书下载

想要找书就要到小哈图书下载中心

qciss.net

立刻按 ctrl+D收藏本页

你会得到大惊喜!!

用户评价

评分☆☆☆☆☆

Necessary interrogation on why Derrida insists on a radical discontinuity between human and the animals. Insistence on a non-essential, multiplying, even abyssmal difference is not just between human and the animals, but rather among all living beings, of which humans are but one example, in order to to secure that radical singularity of the Other.

评分☆☆☆☆☆

噱头很足。从海德格尔、列维纳斯、阿甘本、德里达谈动物的文章为材料做论述。可惜正文的内容几乎是introduction的扩写，逻辑和结论都没有更新的内容。整个画圈圈。

评分☆☆☆☆☆

线条太单一了，想以anthropocentrism为基础展开批判，力道又不够

评分☆☆☆☆☆

线条太单一了，想以anthropocentrism为基础展开批判，力道又不够