This article considers Clement Rosset’s Logique du pire and Hans Jonas’ Das Prinzip Verantwortung from the point of view of the worst. These are diametrically opposed books in many ways. If for the former everything is chance (hazard) and no action is possible except that of exterminating laughter, for the latter action to avert catastrophe is a duty and it is mere gamble (azzardo) to add chance to chance in reckless actions. Both solutions are insufficient. To understand this, it is necessary t…
Read moreThis article considers Clement Rosset’s Logique du pire and Hans Jonas’ Das Prinzip Verantwortung from the point of view of the worst. These are diametrically opposed books in many ways. If for the former everything is chance (hazard) and no action is possible except that of exterminating laughter, for the latter action to avert catastrophe is a duty and it is mere gamble (azzardo) to add chance to chance in reckless actions. Both solutions are insufficient. To understand this, it is necessary to have a more perspicuous view on catastrophe. A catastrophe is that event, unpredictable when it develops, that indiscriminately involves a group of individuals and inflicts them irreversible or, better, amputating damage. Therefore, it is necessary to build a philosophy of the worst on a philosophy of amputation.
