Dirk Hennrich

In the current discussion on the concept of the Anthropocene, the implications of the Technosphere are becoming increasingly problematic. This sphere refers to the totality of the technical objects and all activities to be prescribed in technical rationality, which superimposes on the Biosphere due to their exponential growth. In the future, the Technosphere will be intensively programmed and controlled by Artificial Intelligence, and without a determination of the question about the human being, or even the question of consciousness having been satisfactorily answered, the development of this specific form of Intelligence is being pushed forward and endorsed, way ahead of all other expressions, especially Animal Intelligence. One of the main questions, therefore, is what exactly Animal Intelligence describes and what distinguishes it from Artificial Intelligence. To give a reason for this distinction, I introduce the concept of Ancestral Intelligence and define it as the potency that cannot be inserted into the artificial. This Intelligence includes the ability to catch up with the inconceivable, and the explanation of what must paradoxically be thought of as the Immemorial.

Judith Butler’s contributions to philosophy and politics have become one of the most fruitful spores in contemporary thought. Engaging with a wide range of critical thinking, they open a source to many of those who speak from the resistance to the norm. This article aims at introducing an antispeciecist reading of their major contributions to epistemology, ontology and ethics, namely through the concepts of frame, precariousness and grievability, with a special focus on their conception of the body. These ideas are discussed from the perspective of a possibility: that of taking Butler’s proposal beyond the human. The reflection shows that they do open interesting paths for antispeciecist philosophy, while some of its implications are not free of difficulty.

Landscape, body and atmosphere form a triad and must be conceived as peculiar dimensions of the ‘third’ and, at the same time, in their fundamental and original connection. They are ontological phenomena, groundless reasons, or anarchic elements and the silent prerequisites of world experience. The present article explores the concept of the ‘third’ and describes the constellation between the landscape, the body and the atmosphere in dialogue with authors like Gernot Böhme, Gilles Clément and Graham Harman. This explanation leads us to think about the political consequences of reconsidering the third and to develop a specific ‘Politics of the Sensible’. It is the task of the ‘Politics of the Sensible’ to recover what has fallen under the ruins of history, under the pharaonic construction of our civilization: to signify and develop the body’s own innate and learned sensibility and our vital relation with Earth.

Als ein Beitrag zu einer Ästhetik des Schattens deutet der vorliegende Artikel auf die Verwandtschaft zwischen dem ästhetischen Schatten bei Alexander G. Baumgarten und den Gravuren von Francisco de Goya. Der Schatten zeigt sich dabei, nach einer kurzen Einführung in den Begriff, als der grundlegende Modus der Darstellung und der Möglichkeit der Erkenntnis im Allgemeinen. Ohne den Schatten, als das Dritte zwischen Licht und Finsternis, ist weder die Vernunft noch die Unvernunft einsehbar. Auch diese Einsicht gehört in die Epoche der Aufklärung.