Jan Patocka'scontribution to phenomenology and the philosophy of history mean that he is considered one of the most important philosophers of the 20th century. Yet, his writing is not widely available in English and the Anglophone world remains rather unfamiliar with his work. In this new book of essential Patocka texts, of which the majority have been translated from the original Czech for the first time, readers will experience a general introduction to the key tenets of his philosophy. This includes his thoughts on the relationship between philosophy and political engagement which strike at the heart of contemporary debates about freedom, political participation and responsibility and a truly pressing issue for modern Europe, what exactly constitutes a European identity? In this important collection, Patocka provides an original vision of the relationship between self, world, and history that will benefit students, philosophers and those who are interested in the ideals that underpin our democracies.
To Be Shaken
Our revels now are ended. These our actors, as I foretold you, were all spirits, and are melted into air, into thin air.
- Prospero, The Tempest, William Shakespeare
When I first heard the phrase "the solidarity of the shaken," it rang true. Coined by the Czech philosopher Jan Patočka (1907–1977), it resonated with my sense that many people in the world, perhaps especially those committed to liberal democracies and a spirit of what Whitehead calls world loyalty, are radically unsettled by the rise of authoritarian governments and ethnic populism the world over. It is as if all that we took for granted - all that was "solid" - has melted into thin air.
Patočka's phrase, used in his Heretical Essays in the Philosophy of History, gave voice to our melting. He was a phenomenologist and dissident whose work explored themes of history, responsibility, and the experience of the shaken—those who, through suffering or moral awakening, come to recognize a deeper solidarity with others.
This page is an attempt to initiate an interchange between people interested in process philosophy and those interested in Patočka’s thought. Click here for an excellent research page on his work, offered by The Institute for Human Sciences, based in Germany. And here for a digital humanities website.
At the outset, I want to clarify that I am not a scholar of Jan Patočka. My understanding is based primarily on how he is presented by Professor Erin Plunkett, a scholar of his work, in a video featured on this page, along with scattered readings of his works from The Collected Writings of Jan Patočka, edited by Plunkett:
I include the video along with notes summarizing key ideas. My aim here is not to offer a definitive analysis but to put some ideas on the table—ideas that I hope Whitehead scholars and Patočka scholars might pick up, critique, and develop further.
- Prospero, The Tempest, William Shakespeare
When I first heard the phrase "the solidarity of the shaken," it rang true. Coined by the Czech philosopher Jan Patočka (1907–1977), it resonated with my sense that many people in the world, perhaps especially those committed to liberal democracies and a spirit of what Whitehead calls world loyalty, are radically unsettled by the rise of authoritarian governments and ethnic populism the world over. It is as if all that we took for granted - all that was "solid" - has melted into thin air.
Patočka's phrase, used in his Heretical Essays in the Philosophy of History, gave voice to our melting. He was a phenomenologist and dissident whose work explored themes of history, responsibility, and the experience of the shaken—those who, through suffering or moral awakening, come to recognize a deeper solidarity with others.
This page is an attempt to initiate an interchange between people interested in process philosophy and those interested in Patočka’s thought. Click here for an excellent research page on his work, offered by The Institute for Human Sciences, based in Germany. And here for a digital humanities website.
At the outset, I want to clarify that I am not a scholar of Jan Patočka. My understanding is based primarily on how he is presented by Professor Erin Plunkett, a scholar of his work, in a video featured on this page, along with scattered readings of his works from The Collected Writings of Jan Patočka, edited by Plunkett:
I include the video along with notes summarizing key ideas. My aim here is not to offer a definitive analysis but to put some ideas on the table—ideas that I hope Whitehead scholars and Patočka scholars might pick up, critique, and develop further.
Process and Shakenness
Whitehead and Patočka
The Collapse of an Old World Order
Many in the global West find themselves in what can be called a "solidarity of the shaken."
This solidarity begins with a sense of groundlessness, of the rug being pulled out from under one’s feet, only to realize there was no floor—indeed, no ground—on which the rug lay. As Marx, perhaps inspired by Shakespeare, famously put it in The Communist Manifesto, under capitalism, "all that is solid melts into air." Structures once taken as immutable—political orders, social norms, economic systems—dissolve, revealing a world in constant flux.
The phrase "solidarity of the shaken" comes from Jan Patočka, the Czech philosopher and dissident, who used it to describe a form of existential awakening that arises in moments of historical rupture. For Patočka, those who are "shaken" experience a profound disillusionment with the taken-for-granted structures of their world. Whether through political crisis, moral reckoning, or personal confrontation with injustice, they come to see reality not as fixed and stable but as deeply contingent, shaped by human decisions rather than historical necessity.
This idea resonates with many today. Economic instability, environmental collapse, political polarization, and the erosion of democratic norms have left many with a sense that the foundations of their world are not as solid as they once seemed. The shaken are those who recognize that the supposed solidity of taken-for-granted structures has indeed melted away, that something new is happening, and that passivity is no longer an option. They are shaken out of old illusions and, at best, into personal and social responsibility. They understand that history is not on autopilot, that no hidden hand ensures justice or stability, and that responsibility must be taken—not just for their own lives but for the trajectory of society as a whole.
Patočka and Process Philosophy
In this, Patočka’s thought resonates deeply with process philosophy, particularly as influenced by Alfred North Whitehead. Like process philosophers, Patočka was a philosopher of movement, emphasizing that life unfolds not as a static given but as a dynamic progression from past to future. He also believed that we are always already in community—that human beings do not exist in isolation but in a fundamental relationality where personal well-being is inseparable from the well-being of others.
In many ways, his thought aligns with key process philosophy principles:
At the heart of Patočka’s solidarity of the shaken is an awareness of the reality of possibility. Like Whiteheadian process thinkers, Patočka rejects the idea that history follows a predetermined course. Instead, the world is radically contingent, meaning that what comes next depends on decisions made in the present.
But Patočka takes this insight further: to be shaken is not just to understand contingency but to feel it—to experience the weight of responsibility in a moment of rupture. For process philosophers, contingency means that new possibilities are always emerging. For Patočka, it means that history does not guarantee justice, progress, or stability—only the responsibility of those who recognize what is at stake.
Process philosophers, too, recognize that contingency does not always lead to positive outcomes. Whitehead himself acknowledged that the creative advance of reality includes both flourishing and suffering. What Patočka contributes is an existential urgency—a recognition that those who are shaken must decide whether to respond with responsibility or allow history to take its course without their engagement.
The 20th century, which Patočka lived through, was marked by totalitarian regimes, war, and ideological violence—all of which emerged not as historical necessities but as consequences of decisions made by individuals and collectives. Process philosophers often focus on the generative possibilities of contingency, but they are not blind to the fact that history includes tragedy, loss, and destruction. Patočka emphasizes that contingency carries an ethical demand: failing to take responsibility for historical openness can lead to devastating consequences.
Beyond Cosmology: The Existential Weight of Contingency
This is where Patočka’s perspective adds something distinctive to process thought. While process philosophy often examines contingency at a cosmological level, Patočka’s concern is more immediate: how human beings live through history, experience rupture, and decide how to act. His solidarity of the shaken is not just an acknowledgment of contingency but a lived, ethical response to it.
Thus, while Patočka can be understood as a philosopher of movement in ways that parallel process thought, his approach adds a uniquely existential dimension. He was not merely concerned with the unfolding of reality in abstract terms but with the lived experience of historical rupture, oppression, and resistance. His thought speaks not only to the fluid nature of existence but to the ethical weight of standing within it.
The solidarity of the shaken, then, is not merely a recognition of contingency but a call to responsibility. It is a demand that we shape history with awareness rather than drift passively in the currents of possibility. Those who are shaken are not merely witnesses to the collapse of old world orders; they are those who see that something new must be built—and that the choices made in this moment will determine what kind of future will emerge.
By framing contingency in terms of personal and social responsibility, Patočka deepens the process philosophical understanding of history’s openness. He reminds us that contingency is not just a fact to be observed but a condition to be met with ethical resolve. In this way, his solidarity of the shaken is a call to those who recognize history’s fragility—to step forward and take responsibility for what comes next.
A Word to Theologians
It will not do to propose a metaphysics in which things seem "grounded" again—say, in a particular cosmology that talks about God and divine ideals as features of the universe. The sense of being ungrounded in the contingencies of life is deeper, much deeper, than a metaphysic can assuage. What is needed is a living faith which persists in being shaken while trusting in God - a faith that involves emotions and actions as well as the intellect. Can open and relational (process) theology offer that? Perhaps so...if it learns from, and thinks with, Patočka.
It may do so by representing God, not as an entity in the sky, but as a field of possibilities and a field of love. That is, by trusting in a field of normative possibilities for love and justice, respect and care, available in each moment, and then acting on those norms, understood as responsiveness to a divine lure without being sure about the existence of God. And it can do so by trusting that the truth of what happens somehow resides in a field as well, a itself part of God, even though one may not be sure about that either. This kind of faith is an act of Václav Havel would call "living in truth." For more on this, see Seeking Truth in a Post-Truth World : Process Theology and Václav Havel. Below I offer a summary.
Living in Truth, Never Being Certain
To live in truth is not to claim that one possesses the truth. It is not to have certainty. But it is to believe that there are objective truths, indeed objective facts, that exist independently of human projection, and to have a passion for being honest to them. My suggestion is that these facts reside in God and in an important sense are God. They are the objective content of the divine life.
This means refusing to manipulate facts for personal or political gain, resisting the temptation to reduce truth to ideology, and committing to the hard work of discernment, humility, and intellectual integrity. It is an ongoing process, an orientation of openness, curiosity, and courage.
In a world where facts are denied, distorted, or forgotten, God remains the place where nothing is erased, where no experience is overlooked, where reality—both outer and inner—continues to exist in its full depth. God is not a person if that means an entity located in a region of the sky, but rather a place, field - an environment of truth transcending a house of lies.
This understanding of God resists both totalitarian claims to absolute knowledge and postmodern skepticism that dissolves truth into mere perspective. Instead, it affirms that truth is real and enduring—but always relational, always unfolding in the interplay between past, present, and future. To live in truth, then, is not to grasp it as a static possession but to participate in the ongoing reality of God, the place where all facts—all occasions of experience, realized and unrealized, past and possible—are gathered, remembered, and transformed by divine care.
Many in the global West find themselves in what can be called a "solidarity of the shaken."
This solidarity begins with a sense of groundlessness, of the rug being pulled out from under one’s feet, only to realize there was no floor—indeed, no ground—on which the rug lay. As Marx, perhaps inspired by Shakespeare, famously put it in The Communist Manifesto, under capitalism, "all that is solid melts into air." Structures once taken as immutable—political orders, social norms, economic systems—dissolve, revealing a world in constant flux.
The phrase "solidarity of the shaken" comes from Jan Patočka, the Czech philosopher and dissident, who used it to describe a form of existential awakening that arises in moments of historical rupture. For Patočka, those who are "shaken" experience a profound disillusionment with the taken-for-granted structures of their world. Whether through political crisis, moral reckoning, or personal confrontation with injustice, they come to see reality not as fixed and stable but as deeply contingent, shaped by human decisions rather than historical necessity.
This idea resonates with many today. Economic instability, environmental collapse, political polarization, and the erosion of democratic norms have left many with a sense that the foundations of their world are not as solid as they once seemed. The shaken are those who recognize that the supposed solidity of taken-for-granted structures has indeed melted away, that something new is happening, and that passivity is no longer an option. They are shaken out of old illusions and, at best, into personal and social responsibility. They understand that history is not on autopilot, that no hidden hand ensures justice or stability, and that responsibility must be taken—not just for their own lives but for the trajectory of society as a whole.
Patočka and Process Philosophy
In this, Patočka’s thought resonates deeply with process philosophy, particularly as influenced by Alfred North Whitehead. Like process philosophers, Patočka was a philosopher of movement, emphasizing that life unfolds not as a static given but as a dynamic progression from past to future. He also believed that we are always already in community—that human beings do not exist in isolation but in a fundamental relationality where personal well-being is inseparable from the well-being of others.
In many ways, his thought aligns with key process philosophy principles:
- Reality as movement – Patočka, like process philosophers, saw reality as fundamentally dynamic. Existence is not a set of static structures but an ongoing process, a flow of becoming rather than a fixed state of being. For Whitehead and other process philosophers, this means that reality itself is composed of events and relationships rather than substances. Patočka shares this insight but directs it more toward human historical experience, emphasizing that individuals and societies are always in motion, always transforming.
- Relationality – Both Patočka and process thought reject the idea of the isolated self. In process philosophy, reality is constituted by relationships—nothing exists independently but rather through its interactions with others. Patočka similarly argues that human beings are always already embedded in a shared world, where meaning arises not in isolation but through our relationships, responsibilities, and common history. This stands in contrast to modern individualism, which treats people as self-contained units rather than as deeply interwoven beings.
- Radical contingency – For both process philosophers and Patočka, history is open-ended and shaped by human choices. Whitehead’s philosophy posits that each moment of reality involves a decision, an actualization of certain possibilities over others. Similarly, Patočka rejects the idea that history unfolds according to strict necessity. The future is not predetermined; it is created through the actions and inactions of individuals and societies. This means that nothing is inevitable—either progress or decline—but rather contingent upon our choices in the present.
- Critique of modern objectification – Both Patočka and process philosophers critique the way modernity treats the world as a collection of objects for use rather than as a dynamic web of relationships. In Whiteheadian thought, modern science and industrialization have led to a misplaced concreteness, where the richness of lived experience is reduced to mechanical or instrumental terms. Patočka’s critique is similar but takes on an existential and historical dimension: modernity not only objectifies the natural world but also dehumanizes individuals, reducing them to mere cogs in political or economic systems.
- Intrinsic human dignity – Patočka’s insistence on the irreducible dignity of the individual resonates with process thought’s rejection of purely instrumentalist views of human value. In Whiteheadian metaphysics, every actual entity has its own intrinsic worth, and creativity is an essential aspect of existence. Patočka extends this idea into the ethical and political realm, arguing that the dignity of the shaken comes from their ability to confront historical and existential crises with responsibility.
At the heart of Patočka’s solidarity of the shaken is an awareness of the reality of possibility. Like Whiteheadian process thinkers, Patočka rejects the idea that history follows a predetermined course. Instead, the world is radically contingent, meaning that what comes next depends on decisions made in the present.
But Patočka takes this insight further: to be shaken is not just to understand contingency but to feel it—to experience the weight of responsibility in a moment of rupture. For process philosophers, contingency means that new possibilities are always emerging. For Patočka, it means that history does not guarantee justice, progress, or stability—only the responsibility of those who recognize what is at stake.
Process philosophers, too, recognize that contingency does not always lead to positive outcomes. Whitehead himself acknowledged that the creative advance of reality includes both flourishing and suffering. What Patočka contributes is an existential urgency—a recognition that those who are shaken must decide whether to respond with responsibility or allow history to take its course without their engagement.
The 20th century, which Patočka lived through, was marked by totalitarian regimes, war, and ideological violence—all of which emerged not as historical necessities but as consequences of decisions made by individuals and collectives. Process philosophers often focus on the generative possibilities of contingency, but they are not blind to the fact that history includes tragedy, loss, and destruction. Patočka emphasizes that contingency carries an ethical demand: failing to take responsibility for historical openness can lead to devastating consequences.
Beyond Cosmology: The Existential Weight of Contingency
This is where Patočka’s perspective adds something distinctive to process thought. While process philosophy often examines contingency at a cosmological level, Patočka’s concern is more immediate: how human beings live through history, experience rupture, and decide how to act. His solidarity of the shaken is not just an acknowledgment of contingency but a lived, ethical response to it.
Thus, while Patočka can be understood as a philosopher of movement in ways that parallel process thought, his approach adds a uniquely existential dimension. He was not merely concerned with the unfolding of reality in abstract terms but with the lived experience of historical rupture, oppression, and resistance. His thought speaks not only to the fluid nature of existence but to the ethical weight of standing within it.
The solidarity of the shaken, then, is not merely a recognition of contingency but a call to responsibility. It is a demand that we shape history with awareness rather than drift passively in the currents of possibility. Those who are shaken are not merely witnesses to the collapse of old world orders; they are those who see that something new must be built—and that the choices made in this moment will determine what kind of future will emerge.
By framing contingency in terms of personal and social responsibility, Patočka deepens the process philosophical understanding of history’s openness. He reminds us that contingency is not just a fact to be observed but a condition to be met with ethical resolve. In this way, his solidarity of the shaken is a call to those who recognize history’s fragility—to step forward and take responsibility for what comes next.
A Word to Theologians
It will not do to propose a metaphysics in which things seem "grounded" again—say, in a particular cosmology that talks about God and divine ideals as features of the universe. The sense of being ungrounded in the contingencies of life is deeper, much deeper, than a metaphysic can assuage. What is needed is a living faith which persists in being shaken while trusting in God - a faith that involves emotions and actions as well as the intellect. Can open and relational (process) theology offer that? Perhaps so...if it learns from, and thinks with, Patočka.
It may do so by representing God, not as an entity in the sky, but as a field of possibilities and a field of love. That is, by trusting in a field of normative possibilities for love and justice, respect and care, available in each moment, and then acting on those norms, understood as responsiveness to a divine lure without being sure about the existence of God. And it can do so by trusting that the truth of what happens somehow resides in a field as well, a itself part of God, even though one may not be sure about that either. This kind of faith is an act of Václav Havel would call "living in truth." For more on this, see Seeking Truth in a Post-Truth World : Process Theology and Václav Havel. Below I offer a summary.
Living in Truth, Never Being Certain
To live in truth is not to claim that one possesses the truth. It is not to have certainty. But it is to believe that there are objective truths, indeed objective facts, that exist independently of human projection, and to have a passion for being honest to them. My suggestion is that these facts reside in God and in an important sense are God. They are the objective content of the divine life.
This means refusing to manipulate facts for personal or political gain, resisting the temptation to reduce truth to ideology, and committing to the hard work of discernment, humility, and intellectual integrity. It is an ongoing process, an orientation of openness, curiosity, and courage.
In a world where facts are denied, distorted, or forgotten, God remains the place where nothing is erased, where no experience is overlooked, where reality—both outer and inner—continues to exist in its full depth. God is not a person if that means an entity located in a region of the sky, but rather a place, field - an environment of truth transcending a house of lies.
This understanding of God resists both totalitarian claims to absolute knowledge and postmodern skepticism that dissolves truth into mere perspective. Instead, it affirms that truth is real and enduring—but always relational, always unfolding in the interplay between past, present, and future. To live in truth, then, is not to grasp it as a static possession but to participate in the ongoing reality of God, the place where all facts—all occasions of experience, realized and unrealized, past and possible—are gathered, remembered, and transformed by divine care.
Dr. Erin Plunkett is senior lecturer in Philosophy and Religious Studies at the University of Hertfordshire, UK. She writes and teaches on Kierkegaard, Patočka, phenomenology, post-Kantian philosophy, and existentialism. Research topics include possibility, anxiety, despair, self and world (in phenomenology), receptivity, and textual form. Other areas of interest include: philosophy of religion, feminist philosophy, and essay studies.
Notes from the Interview
Patočka’s Life and Historical Context
Key Themes in His Philosophy
The Solidarity of the Shaken
One of Patočka’s most profound and politically relevant ideas is what he calls “the solidarity of the shaken” (solidarita otřesených), a term he introduces in his Heretical Essays. This concept describes a deeper form of solidarity that does not emerge from shared identity (such as nationality, ethnicity, or class) but from a shared existential experience of disruption, uncertainty, and loss.
Shakenness as an Existential Condition
Shakenness and War: The Front Experience
The Political and Ethical Implications
Relevance to Contemporary Crises
A Contrast with Derrida and Deconstruction
Patočka’s Concept of Sacrifice
Critique of Modernity and Technology
Patočka’s Relationship with Europe
Why Patočka Matters Today
Plunkett’s Own Work on Patočka
- Patočka lived through two world wars, the Nazi occupation, and communist rule in Czechoslovakia.
- He studied with Husserl and Heidegger and engaged deeply with phenomenology and the philosophy of history.
- His refusal to join the Communist Party limited his academic career, forcing him to teach in underground seminars.
- In 1977, as a spokesperson for Charter 77, a human rights movement, he was interrogated by the secret police, suffered a brain hemorrhage, and died soon after.
Key Themes in His Philosophy
- Existence as Movement – Patočka saw life not as static but as a continuous process of becoming. He rejected the rigid distinction between subject and object, instead drawing on Aristotle’s idea of life as motion.
- Three Movements of Human Existence – He describes human life in three stages:
- Acceptance – We inherit the world’s structures.
- Labor and Maintenance – We work to sustain life.
- Problematicity (Transcendence) – We seek truth and justice beyond mere survival, an idea linked to care for the soul.
- Care for the Soul – Inspired by Greek philosophy, this means engaging in deep questioning and ethical responsibility, not just for oneself but for society (polis).
- Phenomenology Beyond Subjectivity – While influenced by Husserl and Heidegger, Patočka moves beyond their focus on consciousness and individual being. Instead, he emphasizes how things appear in a broader phenomenal field.
The Solidarity of the Shaken
One of Patočka’s most profound and politically relevant ideas is what he calls “the solidarity of the shaken” (solidarita otřesených), a term he introduces in his Heretical Essays. This concept describes a deeper form of solidarity that does not emerge from shared identity (such as nationality, ethnicity, or class) but from a shared existential experience of disruption, uncertainty, and loss.
Shakenness as an Existential Condition
- Shakenness (otřesení) is the experience of having one's certainties undone, whether through personal suffering, war, political upheaval, or intellectual awakening.
- It is not merely a psychological state but a fundamental existential condition—the realization that life is not as stable, secure, or predictable as we once thought.
- This sense of being "shaken" can come externally (e.g., war, oppression, exile) or internally (e.g., questioning one's beliefs, facing death).
Shakenness and War: The Front Experience
- Patočka initially develops this idea in reference to World War I, where soldiers on opposing sides of the battlefield experience the same existential crisis:
- They are thrown into a situation where political and national identities lose meaning.
- They confront death directly, realizing that war is not a heroic endeavor but an existential rupture.
- They see each other not as enemies but as fellow human beings caught in the same tragic reality.
- This solidarity beyond political divisions points to a form of unity that transcends ideology and emerges from a deeper awareness of fragility and finitude.
The Political and Ethical Implications
- Patočka argues that this solidarity of the shaken is the foundation for a more authentic political consciousness—one based not on tribalism or nationalism but on a shared awareness of human vulnerability and responsibility.
- It contrasts with conventional forms of solidarity, which are often based on power, group identity, or economic interest. Instead, it is a solidarity born of suffering, truth-seeking, and resistance to oppression.
- This idea has been influential in political philosophy, particularly in discussions about post-totalitarian societies, human rights, and the ethics of responsibility.
Relevance to Contemporary Crises
- Patočka’s idea of the solidarity of the shaken speaks powerfully to today's global challenges:
- Refugee Crises & Displacement – Millions of people worldwide experience upheaval, forced migration, and existential uncertainty. How do we cultivate a solidarity that is not based on borders but on shared fragility?
- Climate Change & Environmental Collapse – As ecological disasters disrupt familiar ways of life, a new form of solidarity may need to emerge—not between nations, but between all people facing existential threat.
- Political Upheaval & Social Movements – Many contemporary struggles (e.g., pro-democracy protests, social justice movements) are driven by people who have been "shaken" out of complacency and into active resistance.
A Contrast with Derrida and Deconstruction
- Some scholars draw comparisons between Patočka’s shakenness and Derrida’s deconstruction, as both involve a questioning of fixed meanings and inherited structures.
- However, Patočka’s shakenness is not merely intellectual; it is an existential and ethical awakening, a moment of radical responsibility in which one must choose how to live in light of this disruption.
Patočka’s Concept of Sacrifice
- A Break with the Prevailing Order – Patočka sees sacrifice as an act that disrupts the status quo. It is not just an instrumental exchange but a radical assertion of meaning beyond mere survival.
- Non-Instrumental Sacrifice – Unlike utilitarian or transactional sacrifices (e.g., giving up something for a later reward), true sacrifice is an act for nothing—not in the sense of being meaningless, but in the sense that it is not reducible to practical outcomes.
- Sacrifice and the Human Condition – He sees sacrifice as one of the most profound ways in which human beings assert their freedom and meaning beyond biological survival.
- Connection to Technology and Biopolitics – In his critique of modern technology, Patočka argues that the technological worldview reduces human life to a resource or a biological force. Sacrifice, in contrast, reveals that human beings are not just functional entities but are open to something beyond instrumental rationality.
Critique of Modernity and Technology
- He critiques modern technoscience, drawing from Heidegger and Husserl, arguing that it reduces the world and human life to mere resources.
- He introduces sacrifice as a counterpoint to technology, seeing it as an act that affirms human dignity beyond utilitarianism.
Patočka’s Relationship with Europe
- He saw Europe as originally rooted in care for the soul, but argued that its historical trajectory—especially its drive for control and domination—led to its decline.
- He questions whether the European project can be revived or whether we need a new philosophical framework beyond Europe.
Why Patočka Matters Today
- His ideas about questioning assumptions, embracing uncertainty, and fostering solidarity in crisis are highly relevant for contemporary issues such as political instability, climate change, and global migration.
- His critique of technological rationality speaks to modern concerns about AI, surveillance, and the commodification of human life.
- His reflections on sacrifice and the solidarity of the shaken challenge modern political and ethical frameworks that prioritize self-interest over deeper commitments.
Plunkett’s Own Work on Patočka
- She co-edited The Selected Writings of Jan Patočka: Care for the Soul, bringing many of his essays into English for the first time.
- She sees Patočka’s work as deeply important for rethinking how we relate to possibility, uncertainty, and ethical responsibility in an era of global crisis.
More on Patočka
David Lloyd Dusenbury David Lloyd Dusenbury is a philosopher, historian of ideas, and senior fellow at Budapest's Danube Institute. He is also visiting professor at Eötvös Loránd University, and the author of Nemesius of Emesa on Human Nature, The Innocence of Pontius Pilate, and I Judge No One (all published by Oxford University Press). Last year, he held the Chair for Jewish-Christian Relations at the University of Antwerp.
|
Martin Koci Martin Koci is associate professor at KU Linz, Austria. He is the author of Christianity after Christendom: Heretical Essays in Philosophical Theology (2023) and the award-winning Thinking Faith after Christianity: A Theological Reading of Jan Patočka’s Phenomenological Philosophy (2020). Martin is also an editor of numerous volumes—the most recent being God and Phenomenology: Thinking with Jean-Yves Lacoste (Cascade, 2023). His research interests includes the dialogue between phenomenology and theology, and the postmodern context of Christianity.
|