ScholarWorks@숙명여자대학교

초록

There are undoubtedly many points of similarity between Schelling’s late philosophy and Heidegger’s late work. Nevertheless, it is not a simple task to compare the late thoughts of the two philosophers, because they operated in entirely different philosophical themes. To compare these two philosophers, one should begin by exploring the possibility of integrating them into the same philosophical problem, since comparison is possible only when the individuals compared are addressing the same point of view. In this paper, my perspective is that the means through which Schelling and Heidegger can be considered regarding the same philosophical problem is to explore their critiques of Hegel’s philosophy. This is because, in their late thoughts, they both not only criticized the principle of self-consciousness in Hegel’s philosophy that it is ungrounded ontologically, but also reached the same conclusion that the grounding of self-consciousness within thought itself is impossible. In particular, this conclusion indicates that their late thoughts were targeted at attempting to resolve the problem tackled in their conclusion. Therefore, to compare their late thoughts, I investigate the reasons for their criticism of the principle of self-consciousness in Hegel’s philosophy. Moreover, I further examine the similarities and differences of their critiques, their own solutions for the problems raised, and on which points their own philosophies had similarity and difference. Through these investigations, I seek to indicate the reason why Schelling advocated a transition from the negative philosophy to the positive philosophy, and likewise, Heidegger for “Turning.” In conclusion, I try to elucidate that Schelling’s “Ecstasy” and Heidegger’s “Turning” are another attempt to ground the self-consciousness as principle of rational philosophy.

키워드