Paper short abstract:

Philosophical anthropology, a largely overseen discourse within 20th century philosophy, approaches the question ‘what is the human being?’. The paper suggests the concept of ‘responsiveness’ to provide a philosophical, non-naturalist take on what it means to be a human being, avoiding the pitfalls of traditional metaphysics and theological speculation.

Paper long abstract:

The paper wants to introduce the concept of 'responsiveness' into philosophical anthropology. The term and the corresponding claim - the human as the responsive being - reflects the openness of the human being, i.e. the fact that the human life has to be lead in order to be lived (Gehlen 1940). This overall condition does not come to us as a cultural or social Überbau on top of a biological base. It seems to determine human being all the way through. Responsiveness is hence presented to characterize human embodiment, individual existence, sociality, technology and history (Waldenfels 1994, 2011). It captures the human life from a phenomenological perspective, i.e. from the perspective of what it means to be a human being that always finds itself thrown in certain situations (Heidegger 1962) that have to be met properly. One can describe this throwness in terms of responsiveness, i.e. as being in need to come up with an answer that is taken to be satisfying to meet the challenge in question. The paper has two parts: It will circumscribe the project of an existential anthropology (Jackson 2007) in light of a phenomenological conception of responsiveness. It then will analyze complex phenomena such as the attunement of being embarrassed and/or feeling shame. Disregarding the peculiar normative systems that support or sanction embarrassment or shame the paper wants to ask what kind of being the human being is providing over such complex, bodily mediated phenomena as embarrassment and shame.