| dc.description.abstract | In the
first part of this chapter I will thus raise doubts by showing that, while Heidegger
does point out significant weaknesses in the humanist tradition, he is also suspicious
of an anti- or post- humanist reaction to that tradition. His ontological
determination of the nonhuman retains anthropocentric assumptions. These
commit him to what I will call “crypto- humanism.” Crypto- humanists conceal
the anthropocentric premises underlying their philosophy by assigning humans
the role of shepherds of, rather than masters over, nonhumans.
The second part of this chapter develops a transcultural critique of
Heidegger’s crypto- humanism by contrasting it with conceptions of the human–
nonhuman relationship in the tradition of philosophical Daoism. This chapter
thus contributes to the ongoing attempt to investigate the relationship between
Daoist philosophy and Heidegger. However, rather than stressing the parallels
and resonances, this chapter intends to uncover significant differences between
the two accounts in conceiving of the human–nonhuman relationship. | es |
