Philosophy of the Future
It’s worth remembering, for a moment, that phenomenology was research. Forget about the appellations “rigorous” and “scientific”–look for a moment at these titles: Logische Untersuchungen, Jahrbuch für Philosophie und Phänomenologische Forschung, etc. And–take this seriously, those of you reading Heidegger–what the hell is special about the “fore-structure” if you’re not doing research? Nobody but a researcher would care.
Since then, “continental” philosophy has lost the stance of the researcher. Even the best, Marion for example, are commentators, rhetoricians, and fashion police without considering their work an investigation of the matters themselves. We’ve forgotten how to ask questions that have answers.
Asking questions that have answers–that’s what Sein und Zeit did. A greedy book, solving problems almost gratuitously–poof, idealism, realism, mind/body, flash out. But all research on these proper-name difficulties had long ceased; they were problems without a future. These musty debates did not give Sein und Zeit its agenda; Heidegger “solved” them by moving in a completely new direction, after all, building a positive machinery of investigation, a “secure question- and answer-horizon, without which the source and possibilities of the ‘idea’ of Being in general could never be researched” (H 437). And with this machinery a new domain was opened for investigation.
To say it again–any philosopher who has ceased to research is without a future.