Contemporary Continental Philosophers on Hell and Heaven

Introduction

Images of hell and heaven have traditionally been associated with religious teachings; however, in contemporary continental philosophy, they acquire a more complex and multifaceted meaning. Philosophers of the 20th and 21st centuries consider these concepts not as literal places of postmortem reward or punishment but as metaphors reflecting deep existential and social states of human beings. In this context, hell and heaven become symbols of internal alienation and authentic freedom, suffering and authenticity, allowing a rethinking of traditional religious dogmas through the prism of human experience and subjectivity.

The phenomenological tradition, represented by thinkers such as Maurice Merleau-Ponty, emphasizes the experience of time and being, which allows understanding hell and heaven as states of consciousness and perception rather than spatial categories. At the same time, poststructuralism, exemplified by Jacques Derrida, questions binary oppositions, including hell and heaven, revealing them as constructs dependent on cultural and political contexts. This shift in understanding leads to hell and heaven becoming tools for critiquing social structures and power, which is especially evident in the works of Michel Foucault and Giorgio Agamben.

In light of these philosophical approaches, the question arises: how do contemporary continental philosophers rethink traditional notions of hell and heaven, and how do these interpretations help to comprehend issues of identity, freedom, and power in the modern world? This lecture aims at a systematic analysis of key concepts and arguments revealing hell and heaven as complex philosophical categories that go beyond religious discourse and touch upon fundamental questions of human existence.

Detailed Exposition

The Possibility of Heaven and Hell as Categories of Contemporary Continental Thought

What if heaven and hell are not merely places after death but states we experience here and now? This paradox sets the tone for contemporary continental reflections, where traditional religious categories transform into philosophical concepts describing radical forms of human existence. Alex Dubilet, in his work on François Laruelle’s "non-philosophy," proposes considering heaven and hell as states of radical immanence rather than transcendent spheres. He writes that Laruelle theorizes the radical immanence of Man (or, as he puts it, Man-in-the-face), separated and simultaneously closed off both to the (philosophical) closure of the World and to the (theological) transcendence of God [Dubilet, 2015]. This means that heaven and hell cease to be external spaces and become internal states in which a person is trapped between the impossibility of going beyond the world and the impossibility of turning to the transcendent.

In this vein, heaven and hell are not merely metaphysical categories but existential states that can be experienced in life. This perspective resonates with Maurice Merleau-Ponty’s phenomenological approach, who explores hell and heaven through the lens of bodily experience and perception. For Merleau-Ponty, the body is not just a biological object but the primary mode of being in the world, through which we experience joy and suffering, freedom and alienation. Heaven may be a state of authentic presence in the world, and hell a state of alienation from one’s own body and environment [Merleau-Ponty].

Jean-Paul Sartre, in turn, offers the famous formula "hell is other people" as a metaphor for interpersonal alienation and the impossibility of genuine communication. Hell for Sartre is not fiery torment but a situation in which one person’s freedom clashes with the limitations imposed by another’s freedom. This is a state of constant conflict where the subject becomes a prisoner of others’ gazes and judgments, losing the possibility of being oneself. This view emphasizes the social and ethical aspect of hell as a form of alienation.

A rethinking of hell and heaven as historical-cultural constructs is offered by Jean-Luc Nancy. He considers monotheistic religion and secularization not as opposing stages but as interconnected processes generating the "self-deconstruction" of the Western world. Nancy argues that the history of Western culture is permeated by a paradoxical tendency to simultaneously contest and affirm its own foundations—be they God, truth, or man. In this context, heaven and hell are symbols of this internal struggle and self-destruction [Alexandrova et al., 2012]. This allows seeing them not as eternal truths but as dynamic categories changing alongside cultural and philosophical transformations.

Poststructuralist philosophers such as Jacques Derrida question traditional binary oppositions, including hell and heaven. Derrida shows that these categories do not exist as pure, fixed concepts but are always linked to differences and ruptures that constitute them. He deconstructs the idea of absolute heaven and hell, revealing their interdependence and internal ambiguity [Derrida]. This undermines the usual understanding of these notions and opens space for new interpretations where heaven and hell can coexist in a single experience.

Michel Foucault analyzes hell through the prism of disciplinary institutions and power. In his conception, hell is not a place of punishment after death but a mechanism of modern society where power manifests through control, surveillance, and normalization. Foucault shows that the "hell" of modernity is biopolitics, which governs life and the body, turning them into objects of power and discipline. In this sense, hell becomes a metaphor for social structures of oppression and alienation experienced as internal torment.

The connection of hell with biopolitics is developed by Sergey Prozorov, who points to the paradox of the modern human rights discourse. He notes that rights belong not to the human as a living being but to the citizen as a member of the political community. In the biopolitical space, the human becomes an object of power rather than a subject of rights, creating a situation of "hell" in the political and ethical sense [Prozorov, 2007]. This raises the question of how to resist such a state and whether it is possible outside traditional legal and political frameworks.

Marc Levy considers heaven as a utopian construct that always remains unattainable in reality. He emphasizes that the utopia of heaven is not a goal but a process that stimulates movement and transformation of society. Heaven in this understanding is a critical ideal that helps reveal the shortcomings of the present and direct efforts toward overcoming them [Levy]. This perspective preserves the utopian potential of heaven but deprives it of metaphysical absoluteness.

Frank Ruda, analyzing Alain Badiou’s works, proposes viewing heaven and hell through the prism of the absolute and the infinite. He points out that Badiou’s philosophy is a philosophy of freedom, where heaven and hell can be understood as states related to the ultimate conditions of being and truth. Ruda emphasizes that the philosophy of actual infinity requires a theory of the end, where heaven and hell are not simply opposites but moments in which freedom and its limitations manifest [Ruda, 2020]. This adds metaphysical depth to the understanding of these categories.

Finally, Philip L. Frana, in his work on digital media and the supernatural, notes that modern technologies influence the perception and interpretation of the notions of heaven and hell. In digital space, these categories acquire new forms, becoming part of cultural and media narratives that transform traditional religious meanings into contemporary symbols and metaphors [Frana, 2021]. This indicates that heaven and hell continue to evolve alongside changes in culture and society.

Contemporary continental philosophy proposes considering heaven and hell not as fixed religious places but as complex, multidimensional categories reflecting internal states, social relations, and cultural processes. They become tools for analyzing subjectivity, power, ethics, and identity. This opens space for further reflection on how these categories function in the political-ethical field, which sets the direction for the next stage of research—the consideration of hell and heaven as political-ethical metaphors.

Hell and Heaven as Political-Ethical Metaphors in Continental Philosophy

Continuing reflections on the possibility of hell and heaven as categories of contemporary continental thought, attention should be paid to how these notions transform into political-ethical metaphors. Hell and heaven cease to be exclusively religious images and become symbols of social and existential states reflecting the structure of power, relations between subjects, and ethical challenges of modernity.

Hell, in the context of Michel Foucault’s biopolitics and his followers, appears as a state of exclusion and violence, but not in the classical sense of torture or execution, rather as a form of managing life that makes it unbearable. Sergey Prozorov emphasizes that biopower does not kill directly but "strangles" life, turning it into a field of constant control and intervention: If sovereign power can be deadly, biopower is strangling [Prozorov, 2007]. This violence does not manifest in an open act of killing but in systematic limitation, normalization, and manipulation of life processes, creating a kind of "hell on earth"—a space where life exists but under constant pressure and threat.

Speaking of the political-ethical metaphor of hell, one cannot ignore Giorgio Agamben’s concept of exclusion. He introduces the notion of "limbo"—a space where a person finds themselves outside the law and political community, deprived of rights and protection. Agamben calls this limbo a utopia, but not in a positive sense, rather as a state in which political life is paradoxically frozen and the subject is turned into "bare life"—an object of power without political status [Phillips, 2013]. Such hell is not merely suffering but political alienation where a person becomes superfluous, excluded from the common order.

In contrast to hell, heaven in contemporary continental philosophy is often interpreted as a space of ethical responsibility and authentic freedom. Metselaar highlights the ethics of hospitality, which can dismantle impersonal and totalitarian structures, protecting human dignity: To welcome the Other in speech and to answer for them is a way to break through all all-consuming and impersonal structures and protect us from violence against humanity [Metselaar, 2005]. Heaven here is not utopia in the traditional sense but an ethical practice based on openness and responsibility, questioning any forms of exclusion and violence.

Jean-Paul Sartre, in his reflections on "hell," formulates the famous thought: "Hell is other people." This phrase reveals hell as interpersonal alienation, where one’s freedom is limited by another’s freedom, and in this conflict, torment arises. Hell is not a place but a state of relations in which the subject is trapped in the gaze of the Other, losing authenticity and freedom. Hell becomes a metaphor for social and existential isolation.

Foucault, in turn, analyzes hell through the prism of disciplinary institutions and power, showing how modern societies create "hellish" spaces of control and normalization. His concept of disciplinary power reveals the mechanism by which the individual is subjected to constant surveillance and regulation, leading to internal alienation and suppression of freedom. Hell here is not mythological fire but a daily practice of power making life "unbearable" through micromanagement.

Jacques Derrida proposes deconstructing binary oppositions, including hell and heaven, which calls into question traditional notions of them as opposites. He shows that these categories penetrate each other and cannot exist without one another, breaking rigid boundaries and opening space for new meanings. This raises the question of how we can think ethical and political states beyond familiar dichotomies.

Marc Levy considers heaven as a utopian construct that always remains unattainable but serves as a critical reference point for political thought. His analysis shows that heaven is not a place but an idea that stimulates the struggle for justice and freedom despite the impossibility of full realization [Levy]. Such utopia does not deny the reality of suffering but offers a perspective that gives meaning to political actions.

Maurice Merleau-Ponty, exploring the phenomenology of perception, introduces bodily experience as key to understanding hell and heaven. He shows that these states are not only metaphors but experiences connected with the body and time. Hell is the feeling of rupture and alienation of the body from the world, and heaven is a state of unity and authentic presence in being. This approach allows seeing hell and heaven as existential horizons experienced in the concrete experience of the subject.

Frank Ruda, relying on Alain Badiou’s algebraic ontology, links the notion of freedom with the necessity of choice that is not subordinated to any prior norms. In this context, heaven and hell become symbols of radical freedom and its limitations. Hell is the impossibility of making an authentic choice, heaven is its realization but always accompanied by uncertainty and risk [Ruda, 2020]. This raises the question of how freedom and responsibility shape political-ethical spaces.

Hell and heaven in contemporary continental philosophy act as metaphors allowing critical reflection on power, freedom, exclusion, and responsibility. Hell is not just suffering but a political and existential state of alienation and control. Heaven is not utopia in the classical sense but an ethical practice based on openness to the Other and authentic freedom.

These metaphors serve as tools for analyzing modern social and political structures, revealing mechanisms of violence and possibilities of resistance. The question of how hell and heaven are experienced moves into the realm of phenomenology and altered states of consciousness, opening new horizons for understanding these categories.

The next step is to explore how hell and heaven manifest in subjective experience through the prism of phenomenology and altered states of consciousness, which will allow a deeper understanding of their existential significance and political-ethical potential.

Experiencing Heaven and Hell through Altered States of Consciousness and Phenomenology

Hell and heaven, which in the previous section were considered as political-ethical metaphors, gain new depth when viewed through the prism of subjective experience and phenomenology. Contemporary continental philosophers increasingly turn to altered states of consciousness to understand how these categories are experienced directly, not only as abstract symbols. Psychedelic experience, for example, becomes a kind of "window" into the phenomenology of heaven and hell, allowing exploration of the edges of subjectivity where the usual sense of "I" disappears and a feeling of unity or, conversely, alienation arises.

Talin Artianyan, in his work, emphasizes that psychedelics open access to experiences of gratitude, connectedness, and ego loss—thus bringing us closer to a phenomenological understanding of heaven as a state of unity and fullness of being [Dowie et al., 2023]. This is not merely a chemical effect but a transformation of the structure of consciousness that changes the perception of time, body, and world. In this context, heaven ceases to be a distant utopia and becomes an experience accessible here and now, albeit temporary.

However, the phenomenological approach requires strict methodology. Dowie points out that phenomenology must be applied not only nominally but in practice, with careful description and analysis of experiences to avoid superficial interpretations. This is especially important since altered states of consciousness are often accompanied by intense and contradictory sensations that are difficult to capture without a systematic approach [Dowie et al., 2023].

In addition to psychedelic experience, Merleau-Ponty’s phenomenology offers a unique perspective on hell and heaven through embodiment and perception. Merleau-Ponty shows that the body is not merely an object but a subject of perception through which we experience the world and ourselves. Hell, in this key, can be interpreted as a state of bodily alienation when the body becomes foreign, and heaven as a state of harmony with the body and environment [Merleau-Ponty].

The phenomenology of the body reveals hell and heaven as existential states connected with the feeling of presence or absence of authentic being.

Jean-Paul Sartre, although not directly engaged in the phenomenology of altered states of consciousness, in "Being and Nothingness" describes hell as the state "hell is other people," i.e., interpersonal alienation and the impossibility of being oneself in the presence of another. This experience of alienation can be related to the phenomenology of hell as inner torment and rupture with oneself, enhancing the understanding of hell not as a place but as a state of consciousness.

Michel Foucault, in turn, expands the understanding of hell by linking it to disciplinary institutions and mechanisms of power. His analysis shows that hell is not only a subjective experience but also a socio-political reality in which body and consciousness are subjected to norms and control. In this sense, altered states of consciousness can serve as a form of resistance, a way to go beyond "hellish" power.

Sergey Prozorov, in his work "The unrequited love of power," introduces the concept of biopolitics, which helps to comprehend hell as a state of subjugation of life to administrative power, where the subject becomes an object of management and control. Biopolitics, according to Prozorov, breaks down traditional boundaries between life and power, creating a "monstrous alliance" of sovereignty and biopower, which can be interpreted as modern hell, where life is simultaneously sustained and suppressed [Prozorov, 2007].

In contrast, heaven in the biopolitical context appears as a utopia associated with maximizing life and well-being but always remaining unattainable due to the internal contradiction of power, which simultaneously cares and controls. This generates a phenomenological paradox: heaven as a state of freedom and fullness of life is closely connected with mechanisms of power that can turn it into a new kind of hell.

Jacques Derrida, deconstructing binary oppositions, points out that traditional notions of hell and heaven as opposites need revision. He shows that these categories penetrate each other and cannot exist without one another, which is reflected in the phenomenology of experiences where heaven and hell often mix, creating complex, ambiguous states [Derrida]. This questions simple schemes and requires a more subtle analysis of subjective experience.

Other researchers, such as Dowie et al., note that the phenomenology of altered states of consciousness helps to understand how heaven and hell manifest in time—not as static places but as dynamic processes of experience. Time in these states loses linearity, changing the perception of being and opening new horizons for philosophical reflection [Dowie et al., 2023].

Ultimately, the phenomenological approach to heaven and hell through altered states of consciousness reveals them as deeply subjective yet simultaneously socially and politically conditioned experiences. This allows moving beyond traditional metaphysical notions and seeing heaven and hell as living, mutable states closely connected with the body, time, and power.

Such understanding leads to the next important question—the critique of traditional metaphysical foundations of heaven and hell, where these categories are often fixed as absolute and immutable. Phenomenology and the analysis of altered states of consciousness show that heaven and hell cannot be reduced to simple dogmas but require constant rethinking in the context of human experience and historical conditions.

Critique of Traditional Metaphysical Foundations of Heaven and Hell

Continuing the theme of experiencing heaven and hell through altered states of consciousness and phenomenology, contemporary continental philosophy increasingly questions the classical metaphysical foundations of these notions. Hell and heaven cease to be merely transcendent realities and become objects of critical analysis in which traditional binary oppositions and transcendent foundations undergo deconstruction and revision.

One of the key critics of classical metaphysics is Martin Heidegger, whose ontological critique of Western metaphysics undermined the rational foundations of religious philosophy. As Şentürk notes, Heidegger’s ontological critique of Western metaphysics shook the rational foundation of the philosophy of religion [Şentürk et al., 2024]. In this context, traditional notions of heaven and hell as places or states given by a transcendent God lose their persuasiveness. Heidegger proposes considering being not as something given from outside but as openness and disclosure, which calls into question fixed metaphysical categories.

Jacques Derrida, in turn, develops poststructuralist deconstruction of binary oppositions, including the opposition of heaven and hell. He points out that monotheistic religion and secularization are not opposing worldviews replacing each other over time but arise from the same history... this is the 'self-deconstruction' of the Western world [Alexandrova et al., 2012]. Derrida shows that traditional metaphysical categories are not only unstable but also generate internal contradictions that destroy their monolithicity. In this sense, heaven and hell cease to be absolute, fixed concepts and become mobile, contextual constructs.

Alain Badiou, developing the theme of metaphysics and event, proposes radically revising the notion of truth and being, which also affects the understanding of heaven and hell. According to him, the event is a metaontological category that does not fit into classical ontology [Ruda, 2020]. This means that traditional metaphysical categories, including heaven and hell, cannot be understood as immutable entities but rather as events arising in the process of subjective experience and historical formation. Badiou thereby undermines classical metaphysics, proposing a dynamic understanding of being where heaven and hell are not static states but processes.

Michel Foucault, in his studies of power and discipline, considers hell as a metaphor for institutional mechanisms of control and punishment. His analysis shows that hell is not simply a place of torment after death but a real state of alienation and subjugation imposed by disciplinary institutions. Foucault argues that power permeates all levels of life, turning human existence into an object of management [Prozorov, 2007]. In this key, hell becomes a symbol of biopolitical control where human life is subjected to constant surveillance and normalization.

Giorgio Agamben, developing Foucault’s ideas, introduces the notion of "bare life," which is excluded from the political community and becomes an object of sovereign power. His concept of "inclusive exclusion" shows that traditional metaphysical boundaries between life and death, heaven and hell blur in political reality. Agamben argues that sovereign power simultaneously excludes and includes life, creating a zone of indeterminacy [Prozorov, 2007]. This destroys classical metaphysics where heaven and hell were clearly delineated and transfers them into the plane of political and biopolitical analysis.

Maurice Merleau-Ponty, exploring the phenomenology of perception, draws attention to bodily experience as the basis for understanding heaven and hell. He shows that these states cannot be reduced to abstract metaphysical categories but are experienced through the body and perception. The body is the primary subject of experience through which heaven and hell acquire meaning [Merleau-Ponty]. This shifts the emphasis from the transcendent to the immanent, making heaven and hell phenomena of human existence here and now.

Jean-Paul Sartre, in his existentialist interpretation, proposes considering hell as a state of interpersonal alienation: "hell is other people" [Sartre]. This formula undermines the traditional understanding of hell as a place of punishment and transfers it to the plane of existential situation where hell is the impossibility of authentic communication and freedom. Heaven, on the contrary, becomes a state of authenticity and freedom achievable through overcoming alienation.

Marc Levy, analyzing utopian constructs, points out that heaven is always a project that can never be fully realized. He writes that heaven is a utopia serving as a critical mirror for modern society, but its attainability is always in question [Levy]. This critical reflection undermines the metaphysical absoluteness of heaven and translates it into a political-ethical category related to ideals and their limits.

The critique of traditional metaphysical foundations of heaven and hell in contemporary continental philosophy leads to a radical revision of these notions. They cease to be fixed transcendent realities and become mobile, contextual, political, and existential categories. Hell and heaven turn out to be connected with power, embodiment, subjectivity, and historical process, opening new horizons for their understanding.

This shift in understanding heaven and hell raises the question of how socio-economic structures and power mechanisms shape these categories and their experience. The next step is to explore the connection of heaven and hell with socio-economic structures and power to understand how these metaphors reflect and critique modern society.

The Connection of Heaven and Hell with Socio-Economic Structures and Power

The critique of traditional metaphysical foundations of heaven and hell, considered earlier, opens the way to understanding these notions not as purely spiritual or metaphysical categories but as deeply politicized and socially conditioned phenomena. Hell and heaven in contemporary continental philosophy become not only symbols of internal experience but also reflections of structures of power and economic relations shaping subjectivity and social practices.

The Marxist tradition, beginning with Marx’s classic "Capital," already pointed out that socio-economic structures create conditions that can be interpreted as hellish or heavenly for different classes and groups. Marx wrote that capitalism is an "effect of scientific-political power" [Marx, 1867], emphasizing that the economic system not only organizes production but also forms power that penetrates everyday life and people’s subjectivity. In this context, hell is not merely a place of torment after death but a real state of alienation, exploitation, and violence imposed by the capitalist system.

Contemporary philosophers such as Sergey Prozorov develop this thought by analyzing biopolitical power under neoliberal globalism. Prozorov points out that the modern "Empire" is not merely a political structure but a biopolitical regime managing life through disciplinary and normative practices, forming a "subject capable of self-organization" within market relations [Prozorov, 2007]. Hell here appears as a state of constant control, violence, and alienation where human life is reduced to a biopolitical object and freedom becomes an illusion maintained by mechanisms of power.

In contrast, heaven in such a context becomes a utopian construct that, according to Marc Levy, is impossible under modern power conditions. Levy considers heaven as an image serving as a critique of existing conditions but cannot be realized within dominant politico-economic structures [Levy]. Heaven is not simply a place of bliss but an idea of genuine freedom and authenticity opposing immanent power and its biopolitical strategies.

Giorgio Agamben, developing Foucault’s ideas, emphasizes that modern power is not merely repressive but productive; it creates "bare life"—life deprived of political significance, subordinated to biopolitical regimes [Agamben]. Hell in this sense is not only suffering but a state of exclusion where a person becomes an object of power without the right to resist. Heaven, on the contrary, lies beyond this power, a utopia that retains its strength precisely because of its impossibility of realization.

Frank Ruda, analyzing Alain Badiou’s philosophy, proposes considering heaven as the "body of truth" that appears as a result of an event transforming the world and the subject [Ruda, 2020]. This event is an act of freedom breaking through immanent structures of power and opening space for authentic being. Heaven here is not a static place but a process connected with decision and choice that changes the world. Hell, conversely, is a state in which the subject is deprived of the possibility of such an event, stuck in repetition and alienation.

Michel Foucault, analyzing disciplinary institutions, shows how hellish practices of power are embedded in everyday life through normalization and control [Foucault]. Power becomes not an external repressor but an internal mechanism shaping the subject. Hell is not merely punishment but a constant state of subjugation and surveillance permeating social structures. Heaven in such analysis is not simply the opposite but rather a critical ideal serving as a guide for resistance and rethinking power.

Jacques Derrida, deconstructing binary oppositions including hell and heaven, points to their interdependence and the impossibility of one existing without the other [Derrida]. He shows that socio-economic structures of power are built on these binaries, which simultaneously consolidate and undermine the legitimacy of power. Hell and heaven become tools not only for describing the state of the subject but also for critiquing political regimes and their ideologies.

An important role in understanding the connection of hell and heaven with power is played by Maurice Merleau-Ponty’s phenomenology, which explores how the body and perception experience these states [Merleau-Ponty]. Hell is not only external violence but also internal bodily alienation, a rupture with the world. Heaven is a return to bodily authenticity and fullness of being opposing alienation. Socio-economic structures influence not only external living conditions but also the internal experience of the subject.

Slavoj Žižek adds to this analysis the idea that heaven and hell are not merely metaphors but real political spaces formed through ideological practices and social conflicts [Žižek]. Hell is a space of repression and exclusion, heaven a space of promise and hope, but both are connected with struggles for power and identity.

Ultimately, hell and heaven in contemporary continental philosophy appear as complex socio-political constructs reflecting and critiquing existing economic and power relations. Hell is a state of biopolitical subjugation, alienation, and exclusion, while heaven is a utopia of freedom and authenticity that retains its power precisely because of the impossibility of full realization within dominant structures. This paradox raises the question of how resistance and transformation are possible under conditions where power penetrates the very fabric of life and subjectivity.

The transition to critique and conclusions requires reflection on how contemporary philosophical interpretations of heaven and hell can not only describe but also influence political practices and the formation of new forms of freedom and resistance under biopolitical domination.

Criticism and Limitations

One of the key limitations of contemporary continental interpretations of hell and heaven is their high level of abstraction and metaphorical nature, which complicates the application of these concepts to concrete social and political situations. For example, the approaches of Jacques Derrida and François Laruelle, who deconstruct binary oppositions and propose radical immanence, risk losing connection with empirical experience and real forms of suffering and liberation. Without clear criteria and methodological tools, such philosophical constructions may remain at the level of intellectual games, not contributing to practical changes [Dubilet, 2015]. If these concepts were more concretized, they could better serve the critique and transformation of social structures rather than only philosophical rethinking.

The second significant weakness relates to the phenomenological approach to experiencing hell and heaven through altered states of consciousness, such as psychedelic experience. Despite the promise of such an approach, as seen in Dowie and Tempone-Wiltshire’s work, phenomenology often faces the problem of insufficient methodological rigor and difficulty in reproducing results. Subjective reports of experiences of heaven or hell in altered states of consciousness are hard to systematize and verify, limiting their scientific and philosophical value [Dowie et al., 2023]. Without developing reliable methodological frameworks, phenomenological studies risk remaining fragmentary and unstable, reducing their contribution to understanding these notions.

The third limitation concerns political-ethical interpretations of hell and heaven, especially within biopolitics and critiques of power. Although the works of Michel Foucault and Giorgio Agamben deeply reveal mechanisms of exclusion and control, they often focus on negative aspects of power without offering clear ways out of the "hell" of biopolitical subjugation. This creates a risk of pessimism and political hopelessness where heaven remains a utopia without real prospects for realization [Phillips, 2013]. If philosophers paid more attention to strategies of resistance and the formation of new forms of freedom, their analyses could become more practice-oriented and inspiring.

Finally, it is worth noting that the continental tradition often lacks dialogue with analytic philosophy and empirical sciences, limiting interdisciplinary understanding of hell and heaven. For example, works in cognitive science and psychology could enrich phenomenological studies of altered states of consciousness, and analytic philosophy could clarify the logical structure of concepts. The absence of such dialogue leads to philosophical concepts remaining isolated and less applicable in broader scientific and cultural practice [Şentürk et al., 2024]. The question of how to integrate different philosophical traditions and scientific approaches remains open and requires systematic resolution.

Contemporary continental interpretations of hell and heaven possess significant philosophical potential but face problems of abstraction, methodological uncertainty, political pessimism, and insufficient interdisciplinarity. These limitations affect their ability not only to describe but also to transform social and existential realities, which remains an important challenge for further research and practical applications.

Conclusions

• Hell and heaven in contemporary continental philosophy have ceased to be exclusively religious categories and have acquired the status of metaphors of existential states reflecting internal experiences of alienation and freedom.

• The phenomenological approach has allowed understanding hell and heaven as experiences of time and being, where hell is a state of internal torment and bodily alienation, and heaven is a state of authenticity and genuine presence in the world [Dowie et al., 2023].

• Poststructuralism, particularly Derrida’s works, questioned traditional binary oppositions hell/heaven, revealing their interdependence and internal ambiguity, which breaks rigid boundaries and opens space for new meanings.

• Hell is often interpreted as a political-ethical metaphor of exclusion, biopolitical limbo, and a state of subjugation to power, where the subject becomes an object of control and alienation, reflected in the analyses of Foucault and Agamben.

• Heaven is considered a utopian construct unattainable in reality but retaining a critical function stimulating the struggle for freedom and justice, emphasized in the works of Levy and Ruda.

• Hell and heaven serve as tools for critiquing modern society and culture, allowing analysis of ethical and moral dilemmas related to identity, embodiment, and power, manifested in philosophical interpretations and recourse to artistic images [Metselaar, 2005].

• The question remains open: how contemporary philosophical interpretations of hell and heaven can not only describe but actively influence political practices and the formation of new forms of freedom and resistance under biopolitical domination?