8 ACUMEN • SPRING 2023 Contributions because I focus on a very tiny segment of Heidegger’s corpus,” he says. “It is important to notice that my interpretation does not reflect Heidegger’s overall view. Far from being a huge exegetical claim, my research relies on and explains a tiny, but crucial, part of his production.” JOURNALISM JOURNALISTIC FUTURES An international research group has been created by scholars worried about the future of journalism, and the development of this network is being led by professor Mariana De Maio. Journalistic Futures is a group composed of scholars from nine countries studying digital native outlets that lead in-depth investigative solution journalism and create community by generating connections with their audience beyond disseminating information. Many of these outlets host events where their audience participates and sometimes may become active citizen reporters. The researchers will be conducting in-depth interviews with journalists, content analysis of production of stories and surveys of the audiences. To survey audiences, Journalistic Futures is partnering with a news organization PHILOSOPHY HEIDEGGER AND BEING Martin Heidegger was one of the most important philosophers in the continental tradition. Filippo Casati examines Heidegger’s later work and defends an alternate interpretation of his wrestle with the notion of Being. In his book, Heidegger and the Contradiction of Being: An Analytic Interpretation of the Late Heidegger, Casati examines the philosopher’s concept of Being. Heidegger reasons that, when we think and speak, we always think and speak about something—that is, an entity. Moreover, Heidegger posits that Being—what makes any entity being—is not an entity itself. That is the ontological difference, Casati says. We are, thus, surrounded by entities; however, the reason for all these entities is not itself an entity. “At this point, we should notice a problem,” says Casati, assistant professor of philosophy. “Heidegger thinks and speaks about something that is not an entity, but he shouldn’t be able to do it. Heidegger finds himself stuck in this contradiction. On the one hand, he shouldn’t be able to think and speak about Being. On the other hand, Heidegger is able to think and speak about Being. This is a well-known problem in analytic philosophy as well. It is usually called the denotational paradox. We should not be able to denote something, but then, in doing so, we denote that something as what we should not be able to denote. I start from this analogy and work out a logical theory, which can somehow accommodate this contradiction.” Casati uncovers the premises that deliver the paradox and defends them both exegetically and philosophically. More importantly, Casati’s book presents a solution to the paradox by focusing on Section 34 of Heidegger’s Contributions to Philosophy. “I think I was able to successfully, according to others unsuccessfully, defend my own approach to ULLSTEIN BILD / GETTY IMAGES, JAM STA ROSA / GETTY IMAGES BRIEFS Martin Heidegger in his garden. Rappler reporters at their office in Pasig, Metro Manila.
RkJQdWJsaXNoZXIy MTA0OTQ5OA==