Marta Faustino

This article reflects on the way the Covid-19 hecatomb has disclosed and unraveled the ongoing crisis of professional philosophy, and suggests some lessons that might be taken from the pandemic, urging academic philosophers to take action regarding the future of their work in philosophy departments and institutions. In the first section of the article, we highlight some lasting criticisms to academic philosophy and explore one particular nasty thorn in the side of philosophers doing the kind of work that might speak to broad audiences facing a crisis of meaning and living: the rush to publish instead of “perishing” without a secure academic position. In the next section, we discuss philosophy as a way of life as an alternative nascent field in academic philosophy that, while garnering respect and recognition within the academy, has regained connections with a broader public desperate for ways to chart their own paths of meaningful living, especially when facing a deeply challenged and fractured world. PWL helps address the crises of meaning many in the academy face and the absence of rich philosophical reflection and communities in the broader public, which otherwise all too easily fall prey to hucksters, con-artists, and authoritarian and conspiratorial forces. We argue that this kind of wholistic critical development of PWL from the ancient world is designed to enact a prefigurative or eutopian politics. We conclude by situating our recommendations into a broader reconstruction of professional philosophy needed at this critical cultural moment.

This essay discusses the possibility, relevance, and pertinence of a reactivation of philosophy as a way of life today on the basis of Pierre Hadot’s account and recent scholarly approaches to the topic. In the wake of John Sellars, it regards philosophy as a way of life as a metaphilosophical option that can still be applied today. The essay starts by addressing John Cooper’s criticism of philosophy as a way of life in the contemporary philosophical landscape and shows that, against the background of the model defined by Hadot, Cooper’s objections do not apply. It then illustrates the clear expression of the model in contemporary philosophy through the particular case of Nietzsche. It concludes by outlining some of the considerations that, in the wake of Hadot, Sellars, Michael Chase, and others, might persuade researchers, teachers, and academics to embrace philosophy as a way of life in their work and lives.

Nas últimas décadas do século passado Pierre Hadot e Michel Foucaultrevolucionaram a história da filosofia ao, nos seus Exercices spirituels et philosophie antique e L’herméneutique du sujet, respectivamente, colocarem um imperativo ético nas origens do pensamento filosófico ocidental e firmarem que, nessa altura, a filosofia era essencialmente uma “escolha de vida” ou “modo de vida”, no caso do primeiro, e um “cuidado de si”, na expressão do último. Uma vez que ambos os autores contrastam a orientação e função originais da filosofia com a sua forma contemporânea, as suas análises têm, para além da sua clara relevância históricofilosófica, um forte potencial de crítica contra a prática académica e institucionalizada da filosofia actual. Tomando a ideia da filosofia como modo de vida como forma de dissidência contra a filosofia universitária contemporânea, e como forma de experimentação com uma compreensão e prática alternativas da filosofia, este ensaio delineia as principais características do modelo da filosofia como modo de vida no seu contraste com a prática académica conteporânea e defende a relevância do modelo para uma eventual restruturação da filosofia profissionalizada perante a actual crise nas humanidades e desafios sociais, culturais e ambientais inéditos.

Marta Faustino and Gianfranco Ferraro present a collection of essays by esteemed academics on the ethical and political questions present in Michel Foucault's late work. As one of the most important and controversial thinkers of the twentieth century, the philosopher's last works are at the centre of much current academic research and debate. Comprising 15 essays written by specialists on Foucault's thought from 10 different countries, the perspectives offered by the contributors and the thinker himself can help us to unravel modernity and give us the tools to understand and ethically and politically transform our present.

Preview: /Commentary: Richard Shusterman, Ars Erotica: Sex and Somaesthetics in the Classical Arts of Love, 436 pages./ Richard Shusterman’s Ars Erotica: Sex and Somaesthetics in the Classical Arts of Love is a masterpiece in a number of respects. With its focus on erotic love and the aesthetics of lovemaking, the book is to be admired for having the audacity to broach a topic that tends to be neglected – if not repressed – in contemporary academic scholarship. But Ars Erotica is far from being “simply” about sex and different arts of love. In exploring classical erotic theories and ideals in Western, Chinese, Indian, Islamic and Japanese cultures, it reveals an impressive amount of knowledge and erudition when analyzing, documenting, and contextualizing the various ars erotica in their different social, cultural, political, philosophical, and religious milieus. Moreover, although Shusterman’s guiding thread is the aesthetic dimension of classic ars erotica, the book also has an important ethical and spiritual dimension, as it compellingly demonstrates how the cultivation of physical beauty and sensual pleasures was – at least in classical ancient traditions – indissociable from a wider concern with the cultivation of one’s character and virtue, that is, with an art of living in which sexual practices and attitudes were strongly embedded and from which they ultimately derived their deep symbolic meaning and relevance.

This paper aims to discuss the coherence and consistency of the Stoic and the Nietzschean “art of dying at the right time”. Throughout this paper, we will use this expression to refer to the Stoics’ and Nietzsche’s treatment both of involuntary and voluntary death, inasmuch as both seem to be strongly connected to and grounded on the notion of timeliness. Taking this notion as a guiding thread, we will emphasize the several similarities that link their approach to suicide. Indeed, as will be shown, it is plausible to assume that Nietzsche’s understanding of voluntary death is particularly influenced by the Stoic tradition. At the same time, we will point out the relevant differences that make these two approaches differ. In dealing with the Stoic and the Nietzschean attitude towards suicide, the underlying question will be whether the legitimization and defense of voluntary death is compatible—and if so, to which extent—with their teachings, in particular, with their notions of happiness and affirmation of life, on the one hand, and their ideals of living in accordance with nature and amor fati, on the other.

This essay discusses the possibility, relevance, and pertinence of a reactivation of philosophy as a way of life today on the basis of Pierre Hadot’s account and recent scholarly approaches to the topic. In the wake of John Sellars, it regards philosophy as a way of life as a metaphilosophical option that can still be applied today. The essay starts by addressing John Cooper’s criticism of philosophy as a way of life in the contemporary philosophical landscape and shows that, against the background of the model defined by Hadot, Cooper’s objections do not apply. It then illustrates the clear expression of the model in contemporary philosophy through the particular case of Nietzsche. It concludes by outlining some of the considerations that, in the wake of Hadot, Sellars, Michael Chase, and others, might persuade researchers, teachers, and academics to embrace philosophy as a way of life in their work and lives.

The idea underlying Nietzsche, Foucault und die Medizin is laudable in at least two respects. First, it brings together Nietzsche and Foucault—a connection so multifaceted and fruitful that, despite the many recent volumes and essays devoted to it, it is still far from exhausted. Second, it focuses on the ethics of medicine, which, given the extraordinary development of medicine in the past two centuries and its related ethical challenges, is a field that increasingly demands philosophical reflection, finding in Nietzsche and Foucault extremely rich and fertile ground. As the editors point out in their introduction, the depth and breadth of Nietzsche's and Foucault's insights into the philosophy of...

O presente artigo tem como foco a relação ambivalente de Nietzsche com os filósofos do período helenista, em particular os estóicos e os epicuristas. Mais concretamente, procuraremos determinar por que razão, apesar da extraordinária influência que estas escolas exerceram no seu pensamento, Nietzsche se lhes viria a opor tão violentamente na fase mais tardia da sua obra. Seguindo o trilho da avaliação que Nietzsche faz destes filósofos terapeutas enquanto, ele próprio, "médico da cultura", verificaremos que as principais críticas de Nietzsche a estas escolas são muito semelhantes às que dirigiria ao cristianismo e vão ao encontro da própria ideia de terapia, tal como tradicionalmente concebida. Defenderemos que Nietzsche vê os filósofos helenistas como importantes precursores do cristianismo, responsabilizando-os pela criação do enquadramento e mundividência sem os quais este não se teria podido desenvolver. Tanto estóicos como epicuristas se revelam, assim, "pseudo-médicos", razão pela qual, como concluiremos, Nietzsche os vê como promotores fundamentais do niilismo que diagnostica na cultura ocidental.