Product Description

Zoographies challenges the anthropocentrism of the Continental philosophical tradition and advances the position that, while some distinctions are valid, humans and animals are best viewed as part of an ontological whole. Matthew Calarco draws on ethological and evolutionary evidence and the work of Heidegger, who called for a radicalized responsibility toward all forms of life. He also turns to Levinas, who raised questions about the nature and scope of ethics; Agamben, who held the "anthropological machine" responsible for the horrors of the twentieth century; and Derrida, who initiated a nonanthropocentric ethics. Calarco concludes with a call for the abolition of classical versions of the human-animal distinction and asks that we devise new ways of thinking about and living with animals.

Product Details

• Amazon Sales Rank: #171404 in Books
• Published on: 2008-06-01
• Original language: English
• Number of items: 1
• Binding: Paperback
• 169 pages

Review
"Matthew Calarco's book combines a passion for his subject matter with a keenly penetrating grasp of the complex issues which 'the question of the animal' raises at this juncture of Western history." -- Edward Casey, Distinguished Professor, State University of New York at Stony Brook "This important analysis is long overdue... Highly recommended." -- Choice

About the Author
Matthew Calarco is assistant professor of philosophy at California State University, Fullerton. His books include On Levinas; Animal Philosophy: Essential Readings in Continental Thought; and The Continental Ethics Reader.

Customer Reviews

The Animal and Continental Philosophy
This is an excellent book addressing a mostly ignored area of Continental Philosophy (although many contintental philosophers have directly or indirectly addressed the problem) of what is the relationship between the human and the animal in the wake of modern biological science.

Calarco is keen to answer the question of whether the distinction (philosophically speaking) between human and (non-human) animals can be maintained. With this in mind he sets out to expose the anthropocentrism inherent within the philosophies of Heidegger, Levinas, Agamben, and Derrida (although as Calarco admits, some philosophers are more guilty than others).

Calarco concludes that the human-animal distinction is no longer tenable and in the interests of animal welfare we should relocate our philosophical thinking to accomodate this fact. Although (I think) that I disagree with Calarco's conclusion (I believe that some kind of anthrpocentrism within philosophy may ne necessary to stave off nihilism) this an excellent book for all those involved with the consequences of evolution for philosophical thought and heartily recommended for its insights and clarity.