The Making of Modern Law: Foreign, Comparative and International Law, 1600-1926, brings together foreign, comparative, and international titles in a single resource. Its International Law component features works of some of the great legal theorists, including Gentili, Grotius, Selden, Zouche, Pufendorf, Bijnkershoek, Wolff, Vattel, Martens, Mackintosh, Wheaton, among others. The materials in this archive are drawn from three world-class American law libraries: the Yale Law Library, the George Washington University Law Library, and the Columbia Law Library.Now for the first time, (...) these high-quality digital scans of original works are available via print-on-demand, making them readily accessible to libraries, students, independent scholars, and readers of all ages.+++++++++++++++The below data was compiled from various identification fields in the bibliographic record of this title. This data is provided as an additional tool in helping to insure edition identification: +++++++++++++++Yale Law LibraryLP3Y044500019260101The Making of Modern Law: Foreign, Comparative, and International Law, 1600-1926At head of title: Friedrich Julius Stahl.Tubingen: J. C. B. Mohr (Paul Siebeck), 1926xxxvi, 222 p. 21 cmGermany. (shrink)

Excerpt from Staatslehre Stechnung für Die getane patriotifche S])flicht 5u präfentieren. (R)er allgemeine 9bunfch Der %efien wollte eine @rnte auf Dem %elbe Der (c)aat, wollte für Die nationalen Spfer Den nationalen 'dreiß Die 2lufrichtung geeinter nationaler 932acht. @rft alß Diefe ßoffnung 3ufchanben geworben war, gewann Der (c)ebanfe mehr und mehr an %oben, Daß Dem (c)teger nicht berfagt werben Dürfe, waß Der %efiegte befaß. (R)o wurbe Der Rampf, Der bißher in Den großen 8tegionen Der flbelt fiel) bewegt hatte, in Daß Snnere (...) Der (c)taaten berfeßt und Die lonfiitutionelle 2enbeng, Die man alß einen {fort fchritt Der Seit betrachtete, wurbe überwiegenb. (sianfe.) About the Publisher Forgotten Books publishes hundreds of thousands of rare and classic books. Find more at www.forgottenbooks.com This book is a reproduction of an important historical work. Forgotten Books uses state-of-the-art technology to digitally reconstruct the work, preserving the original format whilst repairing imperfections present in the aged copy. In rare cases, an imperfection in the original, such as a blemish or missing page, may be replicated in our edition. We do, however, repair the vast majority of imperfections successfully; any imperfections that remain are intentionally left to preserve the state of such historical works. (shrink)

FriedrichJulius Stahl (1802-1861), der einst berühmte konservative Staatsphilo­ soph, Kirchenrechtslehrer und Politiker, gilt heute in der Hauptsache als Theoretiker des »monarchischen Prinzips« und als Verfechter eines autoritären Staats- und Kir­ chenbegriffs. Dieses Urteil erfaßt jedoch nur eine Seite der Leistung Stahls; es ver­ leitet dazu, seine politische Theorie als Konstruktion zur Rechtfertigung des monar­ chischen Prinzips und des »Obrigkeitsstaates« anzusehen und daher als überholt ab­ zutun. Die fruchtbaren Ansätze der politischen Wissenschaft, die in Stahls Werk enthalten sind, werden dabei (...) übersehen. In der Literatur ist Stahl bisher relativ wenig Aufmerksamkeit gewidmet wor­ den. Die liberale Staatslehre seiner Zeit sah in Stahl primär den politischen Gegner und bemühte sich kaum um ein tieferes Eindringen in sein Denken 1. Die erste philo­ sophisch gründliche Kritik an Stahl übte 1861 der Herbartianer Thilo 2; sein philo­ sophischer Standpunkt hinderte ihn jedoch daran, die auf Schelling zurückgehende Komponente in Stahls Denken verständnisvoll zu erfassen. So sieht er Widersprüche bei Stahl auch dort, wo keine sind. (shrink)

Sowohl Friedrich Schlegel als auch Joseph Görres reagieren mit ihren Einlassungen auf die Idee des "Ewigen Friedens", wie sie vor allem durch Kant vorgetragen und um 1800 durch eine Vielzahl von Autoren im Angesicht einer stürmischen und kriegerischen Zeitenwende diskutiert wurden -/- With their statements, both Friedrich Schlegel and Joseph Görres react to the idea of "eternal peace", as it was primarily put forward by Kant and discussed by a large number of authors around 1800 in the face (...) of a stormy and warlike turning point in time -/- Своими высказываниями и Фридрих Шлегель, и Йозеф Гёррес реагируют на идею «вечного мира», как она была в первую очередь выдвинута Кантом и обсуждалась большим числом авторов около 1800 года перед лицом бурного и воинственного перелома во время -/- Con sus declaraciones, tanto Friedrich Schlegel como Joseph Görres reaccionan a la idea de “paz eterna”, tal y como fue planteada principalmente por Kant y discutida por un gran número de autores hacia 1800 ante un tormentoso y bélico punto de inflexión. a tiempo. (shrink)

Friedrich Brunstäd, von Haus aus Philosoph in der Tradition Hegels, galt lange als vergessener Theologe des 20. Jahrhunderts, obwohl er zu Lebzeiten über eine grosse Wirksamkeit verfügte. Die vorliegende Studie entreisst ihn dem Vergessen und verortet ihn grundlegend in der theologisch-philosophischen Landschaft seiner Zeit. Brunstäd arbeitete an einer theologischen Hegel-Rezeption, die die programmatische Weichenstellung des Hegel'schen Ansatzes, die Philosophie der Theologie überzuordnen, bewusst nicht mitvollzog. In seinen sozialethischen Grundüberzeugungen wurde er von Reinhold Seeberg geprägt, den er in der Weimarer (...) Republik als Vordenker des christlich-sozialen Protestantismus beerbte. Brunstäd übte als Mitglied im Hauptvorstand der DNVP zeitweilig auch politisch einigen Einfluss aus. Nach 1933 galt sein Interesse der Wahrung der kirchenpolitischen und theologischen Integrität des Luthertums. Die vorliegende Studie erschliesst zum einen das hohe Reflexionsniveau seiner Hegel-Rezeption, zum anderen zeigt sie anhand seiner Person zentrale Problemstellungen im politischen Weg des deutschen Protestantismus nach 1918 auf. (shrink)

Ever since the publication of Dohm’s _Ueber die bürgerliche Verbesserung der Juden_ (On the Civil Improvement of the Jews) in 1781, which argued for Jewish political equality on humanitarian grounds, more and more voices joined those demands. Prominent among them was David Friedländer, a friend and disciple of Moses Mendelssohn. One of the leading figures of the Berlin Haskalah, he worked towards establishing equal legal status for Jews in Prussia. Friedländer did not accept the given view of his times, the (...) antithesis of Jew and German. For him only the antithesis Jew–Christian existed and even that he tried to reconcile by finding common ground in a religion of reason, the groundwork of which he laid out in an Open Letter in 1799. What he proposed at that time may have been illusionary, but it certainly met with approval in enlightened Jewish circles. Friedländer therefore not only stands for those who dared to break with the traditions, but also for the generation of those who consciously aimed at the denationalization of traditional Judaism – and thus decided in favour of the confessionalization and the Germanness of the Jews. (shrink)

Die neue Edition der Vorlesungen über die 'Philosophie der Weltgeschichte' stellt den Versuch dar, eine einzige der gehaltenen Vorlesungen aus drei Manuskripten unterschiedlicher Qualität möglichst authentisch zu rekonstruieren und bietet somit erst die Möglichkeit, sich wissenschaftlich mit der systematischen Konzeption der Hegelschen Geschichtsphilosophie zu beschäftigen. Der Band enthält zusätzlich einen umfangreichen Anmerkungsteil über die orientalische Welt, in dem ausführlich die zum großen Teil schwer zugänglichen Quellen nachgewiesen worden sind, die Hegel als Material für seine Vorlesung benutzt hat.

Historians of Reformational philosophy often claim that Abraham Kuyper obtained the idea of sovereignty in its own sphere from Guillaume Groen van Prinsterer. But very little historical research has been done on Groen’s sources for and development of this idea. The first use of the Dutch phrase souvereiniteit in eigen sfeer is much earlier than previously thought; it was used in 1853 by J.I. Doedes, an associate of the “ethical theologian” Daniël Chantepie de la Saussaye. Groen became aware of the (...) ideas of Franz von Baader through journals founded by them, and by reading and corresponding with them and others, such as J.H. Gunning Jr. and Friedrich Fabri. Groen himself owned some of Baader’s books. He also relied strongly on the work of the jurist Friedrich Julius Stahl, who was 37 years younger than Baader but taught for a while at the same Munich university and shared Baader’s anti-revolutionary ideas. (shrink)

À l'orée du xvme siècle, Wilhelm Gottfried Leibniz et Friedrich Hoffmann critiquent la théorie médicale de Georg Ernst Stahl. Ils trient le vrai du faux. En l'occurrence, ils reprennent à leur compte la définition stahlienne de la respiration en l'extirpant de ses fondements animistes pour la placer dans une épistémologie soumise au principe de raison suffisante et au modèle mécanique. La découverte stahlienne consiste à penser la respiration comme ventilation calorifique à l'encontre de la conception antique ; les (...) iatromécaniciens reconnaissent la justesse de la notion stahlienne, ils essaient alors de la transposer dans un modèle mécanique de la ventilation. Cette reprise dans un contexte épistémologique différent implique une analyse critique de l'idée de découverte« vraie» dans son contenu, mais « fausse» dans ses hypothèses. Elle oblige en outre à interroger l'épistémologie de la connaissance médicale, en tant que science et thérapeutique, et ses liens avec les autres disciplines. En effet, si Leibniz philosophe et Hoffmann médecin prennent au sérieux la théorie animiste de Stahl, c'est que l'importance de ses découvertes met en cause les fondements de la médecine. (shrink)

_The first unabridged English translation of the correspondence between Gottfried Wilhelm Leibniz and Georg Ernst Stahl detailing their opposing philosophies_ The correspondence between the eighteenth-century mathematician and philosopher G. W. Leibniz and G. E. Stahl, a chemist and physician at the court of King Friedrich Wilhelm I of Prussia, known as the Leibniz-Stahl Controversy, is one of the most important intellectual contributions on theoretical issues concerning pre-biological thinking. Editors François Duchesneau and Justin E. H. Smith offer (...) readers the first fully annotated English translation of this fascinating exchange of philosophical views on divine action, the order of nature, causality and teleology, and the soul-body relationship. (shrink)

_The first unabridged English translation of the correspondence between Gottfried Wilhelm Leibniz and Georg Ernst Stahl detailing their opposing philosophies_ The correspondence between the eighteenth-century mathematician and philosopher G. W. Leibniz and G. E. Stahl, a chemist and physician at the court of King Friedrich Wilhelm I of Prussia, known as the Leibniz-Stahl Controversy, is one of the most important intellectual contributions on theoretical issues concerning pre-biological thinking. Editors François Duchesneau and Justin E. H. Smith offer (...) readers the first fully annotated English translation of this fascinating exchange of philosophical views on divine action, the order of nature, causality and teleology, and the soul-body relationship. (shrink)

Jakob Friedrich Fries (1773-1843): A Philosophy of the Exact Sciences -/- Shortened version of the article of the same name in: Tabula Rasa. Jenenser magazine for critical thinking. 6th of November 1994 edition -/- 1. Biography -/- Jakob Friedrich Fries was born on the 23rd of August, 1773 in Barby on the Elbe. Because Fries' father had little time, on account of his journeying, he gave up both his sons, of whom Jakob Friedrich was the elder, to (...) the Herrnhut Teaching Institution in Niesky in 1778. Fries attended the theological seminar in Niesky in autumn 1792, which lasted for three years. There he (secretly) began to study Kant. The reading of Kant's works led Fries, for the first time, to a deep philosophical satisfaction. His enthusiasm for Kant is to be understood against the background that a considerable measure of Kant's philosophy is based on a firm foundation of what happens in an analogous and similar manner in mathematics. -/- During this period he also read Heinrich Jacobi's novels, as well as works of the awakening classic German literature; in particular Friedrich Schiller's works. In 1795, Fries arrived at Leipzig University to study law. During his time in Leipzig he became acquainted with Fichte's philosophy. In autumn of the same year he moved to Jena to hear Fichte at first hand, but was soon disappointed. -/- During his first sojourn in Jenaer (1796), Fries got to know the chemist A. N. Scherer who was very influenced by the work of the chemist A. L. Lavoisier. Fries discovered, at Scherer's suggestion, the law of stoichiometric composition. Because he felt that his work still need some time before completion, he withdrew as a private tutor to Zofingen (in Switzerland). There Fries worked on his main critical work, and studied Newton's "Philosophiae naturalis principia mathematica". He remained a lifelong admirer of Newton, whom he praised as a perfectionist of astronomy. Fries saw the final aim of his mathematical natural philosophy in the union of Newton's Principia with Kant's philosophy. -/- With the aim of qualifying as a lecturer, he returned to Jena in 1800. Now Fries was known from his independent writings, such as "Reinhold, Fichte and Schelling" (1st edition in 1803), and "Systems of Philosophy as an Evident Science" (1804). The relationship between G. W. F. Hegel and Fries did not develop favourably. Hegel speaks of "the leader of the superficial army", and at other places he expresses: "he is an extremely narrow-minded bragger". On the other hand, Fries also has an unfavourable take on Hegel. He writes of the "Redundancy of the Hegelistic dialectic" (1828). In his History of Philosophy (1837/40) he writes of Hegel, amongst other things: "Your way of philosophising seems just to give expression to nonsense in the shortest possible way". In this work, Fries appears to argue with Hegel in an objective manner, and expresses a positive attitude to his work. -/- In 1805, Fries was appointed professor for philosophy in Heidelberg. In his time spent in Heidelberg, he married Caroline Erdmann. He also sealed his friendships with W. M. L. de Wette and F. H. Jacobi. Jacobi was amongst the contemporaries who most impressed Fries during this period. In Heidelberg, Fries wrote, amongst other things, his three-volume main work New Critique of Reason (1807). -/- In 1816 Fries returned to Jena. When in 1817 the Wartburg festival took place, Fries was among the guests, and made a small speech. 1819 was the so-called "Great Year" for Fries: His wife Caroline died, and Karl Sand, a member of a student fraternity, and one of Fries' former students stabbed the author August von Kotzebue to death. Fries was punished with a philosophy teaching ban but still received a professorship for physics and mathematics. Only after a period of years, and under restrictions, he was again allowed to read philosophy. From now on, Fries was excluded from political influence. The rest of his life he devoted himself once again to philosophical and natural studies. During this period, he wrote "Mathematical Natural Philosophy" (1822) and the "History of Philosophy" (1837/40). -/- Fries suffered from a stroke on New Year's Day 1843, and a second stroke, on the 10th of August 1843 ended his life. -/- 2. Fries' Work Fries left an extensive body of work. A look at the subject areas he worked on makes us aware of the universality of his thinking. Amongst these subjects are: Psychic anthropology, psychology, pure philosophy, logic, metaphysics, ethics, politics, religious philosophy, aesthetics, natural philosophy, mathematics, physics and medical subjects, to which, e.g., the text "Regarding the optical centre in the eye together with general remarks about the theory of seeing" (1839) bear witness. With popular philosophical writings like the novel "Julius and Evagoras" (1822), or the arabesque "Longing, and a Trip to the Middle of Nowhere" (1820), he tried to make his philosophy accessible to a broader public. Anthropological considerations are shown in the methodical basis of his philosophy, and to this end, he provides the following didactic instruction for the study of his work: "If somebody wishes to study philosophy on the basis of this guide, I would recommend that after studying natural philosophy, a strict study of logic should follow in order to peruse metaphysics and its applied teachings more rapidly, followed by a strict study of criticism, followed once again by a return to an even closer study of metaphysics and its applied teachings." -/- 3. Continuation of Fries' work through the Friesian School -/- Fries' ideas found general acceptance amongst scientists and mathematicians. A large part of the followers of the "Fries School of Thought" had a scientific or mathematical background. Amongst them were biologist Matthias Jakob Schleiden, mathematics and science specialist philosopher Ernst Friedrich Apelt, the zoologist Oscar Schmidt, and the mathematician Oscar Xavier Schlömilch. Between the years 1847 and 1849, the treatises of the "Fries School of Thought", with which the publishers aimed to pursue philosophy according to the model of the natural sciences appeared. In the Kant-Fries philosophy, they saw the realisation of this ideal. The history of the "New Fries School of Thought" began in 1903. It was in this year that the philosopher Leonard Nelson gathered together a small discussion circle in Goettingen. Amongst the founding members of this circle were: A. Rüstow, C. Brinkmann and H. Goesch. In 1904 L. Nelson, A. Rüstow, H. Goesch and the student W. Mecklenburg travelled to Thuringia to find the missing Fries writings. In the same year, G. Hessenberg, K. Kaiser and Nelson published the first pamphlet from their first volume of the "Treatises of the Fries School of Thought, New Edition". -/- The school set out with the aim of searching for the missing Fries' texts, and re-publishing them with a view to re-opening discussion of Fries' brand of philosophy. The members of the circle met regularly for discussions. Additionally, larger conferences took place, mostly during the holidays. Featuring as speakers were: Otto Apelt, Otto Berg, Paul Bernays, G. Fraenkel, K. Grelling, G. Hessenberg, A. Kronfeld, O. Meyerhof, L. Nelson and R. Otto. On the 1st of March 1913, the Jakob-Friedrich-Fries society was founded. Whilst the Fries' school of thought dealt in continuum with the advancement of the Kant-Fries philosophy, the members of the Jakob-Friedrich-Fries society's main task was the dissemination of the Fries' school publications. In May/June, 1914, the organisations took part in their last common conference before the gulf created by the outbreak of the First World War. Several members died during the war. Others returned disabled. The next conference took place in 1919. A second conference followed in 1921. Nevertheless, such intensive work as had been undertaken between 1903 and 1914 was no longer possible. -/- Leonard Nelson died in October 1927. In the 1930's, the 6th and final volume of "Treatises of the Fries School of Thought, New Edition" was published. Franz Oppenheimer, Otto Meyerhof, Minna Specht and Grete Hermann were involved in their publication. -/- 4. About Mathematical Natural Philosophy -/- In 1822, Fries' "Mathematical Natural Philosophy" appeared. Fries rejects the speculative natural philosophy of his time - above all Schelling's natural philosophy. A natural study, founded on speculative philosophy, ceases with its collection, arrangement and order of well-known facts. Only a mathematical natural philosophy can deliver the necessary explanatory reasoning. The basic dictum of his mathematical natural philosophy is: "All natural theories must be definable using purely mathematically determinable reasons of explanation." Fries is of the opinion that science can attain completeness only by the subordination of the empirical facts to the metaphysical categories and mathematical laws. -/- The crux of Fries' natural philosophy is the thought that mathematics must be made fertile for use by the natural sciences. However, pure mathematics displays solely empty abstraction. To be able to apply them to the sensory world, an intermediatory connection is required. Mathematics must be connected to metaphysics. The pure mechanics, consisting of three parts are these: a) A study of geometrical movement, which considers solely the direction of the movement, b) A study of kinematics, which considers velocity in Addition, c) A study of dynamic movement, which also incorporates mass and power, as well as direction and velocity. -/- Of great interest is Fries' natural philosophy in view of its methodology, particularly with regard to the doctrine "leading maxims". Fries calls these "leading maxims" "heuristic", "because they are principal rules for scientific invention". -/- Fries' philosophy found great recognition with Carl Friedrich Gauss, amongst others. Fries asked for Gauss's opinion on his work "An Attempt at a Criticism based on the Principles of the Probability Calculus" (1842). Gauss also provided his opinions on "Mathematical Natural Philosophy" (1822) and on Fries' "History of Philosophy". Gauss acknowledged Fries' philosophy and wrote in a letter to Fries: "I have always had a great predilection for philosophical speculation, and now I am all the more happy to have a reliable teacher in you in the study of the destinies of science, from the most ancient up to the latest times, as I have not always found the desired satisfaction in my own reading of the writings of some of the philosophers. In particular, the writings of several famous (maybe better, so-called famous) philosophers who have appeared since Kant have reminded me of the sieve of a goat-milker, or to use a modern image instead of an old-fashioned one, of Münchhausen's plait, with which he pulled himself from out of the water. These amateurs would not dare make such a confession before their Masters; it would not happen were they were to consider the case upon its merits. I have often regretted not living in your locality, so as to be able to glean much pleasurable entertainment from philosophical verbal discourse." -/- The starting point of the new adoption of Fries was Nelson's article "The critical method and the relation of psychology to philosophy" (1904). Nelson dedicates special attention to Fries' re-interpretation of Kant's deduction concept. Fries awards Kant's criticism the rationale of anthropological idiom, in that he is guided by the idea that one can examine in a psychological way which knowledge we have "a priori", and how this is created, so that we can therefore recognise our own knowledge "a priori" in an empirical way. Fries understands deduction to mean an "awareness residing darkly in us is, and only open to basic metaphysical principles through conscious reflection.". -/- Nelson has pointed to an analogy between Fries' deduction and modern metamathematics. In the same manner, as with the anthropological deduction of the content of the critical investigation into the metaphysical object show, the content of mathematics become, in David Hilbert's view, the object of metamathematics. -/-. (shrink)

Traditional arguments for privacy in public suggest that intentionally public activities, such as political speech, do not deserve privacy protection. In this article, I develop a new argument for the view that surveillance of intentionally public activities should be limited to protect the specific good that this context provides, namely democratic legitimacy. Combining insights from Helen Nissenbaum’s contextualism and Jürgen Habermas’s theory of the public sphere, I argue that strategic surveillance of the public sphere can undermine the capacity of citizens (...) to freely deliberate in public and therefore conflicts with democratic self-determination. (shrink)