1. The article discusses the confrontation between Bernard Stiegler and Don Idhe in 2018, which was based on a decade of "push-back" on Hans Achterhuis's American Philosophy of Technology: The Empirical Turn (2001).
2. The article outlines three waves of response to Heidegger's Technologies: Postphenomenological Perspectives (2010), including positive responses, Heidegger revisionists, and true believer Heideggerians.
3. The article also mentions recent publications related to the “transcendental/empirical” debate, as well as Don Idhe's recommendations for burgeoning postphenomenologists and his own interest in imaging technologies.
The article is generally reliable and trustworthy. It provides an overview of the confrontation between Bernard Stiegler and Don Idhe in 2018, which was based on a decade of "push-back" on Hans Achterhuis's American Philosophy of Technology: The Empirical Turn (2001). It outlines three waves of response to Heidegger's Technologies: Postphenomenological Perspectives (2010), including positive responses, Heidegger revisionists, and true believer Heideggerians. It also mentions recent publications related to the “transcendental/empirical” debate, as well as Don Idhe's recommendations for burgeoning postphenomenologists and his own interest in imaging technologies.
The article does not appear to be biased or one-sided; it presents both sides equally by outlining both the positive responses to Heidegger's Technologies as well as the criticisms from Heidegger revisionists and true believer Heideggerians. Furthermore, it does not appear to contain any unsupported claims or missing points of consideration; all claims are supported with evidence from relevant sources such as books and articles published by other authors. Additionally, there is no promotional content or partiality present in the article; it is an objective overview of the debate between empirical and transcendental philosophy of technology. Finally, possible risks are noted throughout the article; for example, Don Idhe notes that he has been critical of “armchair philosophy” and recommends that philosophers should “mix it up” with their researches in concrete ways.