English (United Kingdom)

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/featured_content/oa?rat=en

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/highlighted_journal/

Global: Zendy Plus annual

Presents the access of premium content as premium feature

Premium Content

Presents the keyphrase highlighting as premium feature

Keyphrase Highlighting

Presents the summarisation as premium feature

Summarisation

Insights

Presents the pdf analysis as premium feature

PDF Analysis

Presents the zaia usage as premium feature

ZAIA

Global: Zendy Plus monthly

Global: Zendy Tools annual

Global: Zendy Tools monthly

Global: Zendy Free Plan

This paper presents and discusses Karl Löwith’s anthropological critique of existential analytic that is formulated in his Habilitation thesis ( Das Individuum in der Rolle des Mitmenschen , 1928), where he develops an anthropological counter-paradigm, i. e.  Mitanthropologie , in opposition to Heidegger’s fundamental ontology. Given the extent and the complexity of such a subject, I will limit the present inquiry to two specific topics: the  Miteinandersein  (Being-with-one-another) and above all the  Sein zum Tode  (Being-towards-death). In practice, I will first explain the basic features of Mitanthropologie together with the crucial critique that it levels at  Being and Time . I will follow by outlining the importance of the  Todesfrage  (the question of death) within the existential analytic by means of a comparison between Heidegger’s  Being - towards - death  and Kierkegaard’s  Sickness unto death  ( Krankheit zum Tode ). Finally, I will expound Löwith’s objection to  Being - towards - death , which is expressed in the alternative formula  Freiheit zum Tode  (Freedom-towards-death).

Mitmensch contra Dasein: Karl Löwiths anthropologische Kritik an der Daseinsanalytik