Überblick über die theologische briefliteratur der frühscholastik.-Die theologischen Briefe Walters von Mortagne.-Die theologischen Briefe Hugos von St. Viktor.-Die theologischen Briefe Richards von St. Viktor.

We propose a philosophical theory of scientific models. Our main claim is that they should be understood as fictions. We illustrate the relevance of the claim by illustrations drawn from the history of science, and we propose a typology.

Tractatus Logico-Philosophicus by Ludwig Wittgenstein: three parallel tree-structured editions. (1) Tree-structured arrangement of the German text, edited by David G. Stern, Joachim Schulte and Katia Saporiti. (2) Tree-structured arrangement of the English translation by Ogden and Ramsey, edited by David G. Stern. (3) Tree-structured arrangement of the English translation by Pears and McGuinness, edited by David G. Stern.

Bd. 1. Mit Beiträgen von Ernst Bloch, Joseph M. Bochenski, Alois Dempf, Hermann Glockner, Hans-Eduard Hengstenberg, Pascual Jordan, Werner Marx, Josef Pieper, Helmut Plessner.

This work has been selected by scholars as being culturally important and is part of the knowledge base of civilization as we know it. This work is in the public domain in the United States of America, and possibly other nations. Within the United States, you may freely copy and distribute this work, as no entity (individual or corporate) has a copyright on the body of the work. Scholars believe, and we concur, that this work is important enough to be (...) preserved, reproduced, and made generally available to the public. To ensure a quality reading experience, this work has been proofread and republished using a format that seamlessly blends the original graphical elements with text in an easy-to-read typeface. We appreciate your support of the preservation process, and thank you for being an important part of keeping this knowledge alive and relevant. (shrink)

This chapter reviews Donald Davidson's contributions to the philosophy of language, and especially to the theory of meaning.

Immanuel Kants "Grundlegung" ist ohne Zweifel einer der bedeutendsten Texte der abendlandischen Moralphilosophie. Sie gilt mitunter allerdings auch als einer der "dunkelsten" Texte Kants - wenn nicht sogar der abendlandischen Philosophie uberhaupt. Der Kommentar macht deutlich, dass die vorgebliche Dunkelheit im Wesentlichen der Tatsache geschuldet ist, dass der Text seit langem im Schatten der falschen Annahme gelesen wird, Kant wolle eine Begrundung (oder Rechtfertigung) des Sittengesetzes liefern, um damit den moralischen Skeptizismus abzuwehren. Liest man ihn stattdessen unter der (auch historisch (...) angemesseneren) Perspektive, dass Kant mit dem kategorischen Imperativ 'nur' eine neue Formel fur das Prinzip der allgemein im Schwange gehenden Sittlichkeit 'angeben und rechtfertigen' will, um so den moralischen Eudaimonismus durch eine Moral der Autonomie zu ersetzen - dann zeigt sich, dass der Text nicht bloss ein philosophisches, sondern zugleich ein schriftstellerisches Meisterwerk ist. (shrink)

David Hume behauptet im Kapitel X der ersten Enquiry, eine "ewige Schranke" gegen den Wunderglauben entdeckt zu haben. Das Argument beruht wesentlich auf Humes innovativer, strikter Unterscheidung von demonstration, proof und probability, sowie dem Nachweis, daß jedem Wunder um seines Wundercharakters willen immer schon ein proof entgegensteht. Wunderzeugnisse hingegen können, aufgrund ihres speziellen Gegenstandes und angesichts der menschlichen Natur, diesem proof allenfalls eine probability entgegensetzen : Wunder lassen sich somit grundsätzlich nicht durch fremde Zeugnisse belegen.—Anders als in der Hume-Literatur zumeist (...) unterstellt, hängt Humes Argument grundsätzlich nicht von einer Abwägung einander entgegenstehender Wahrscheinlichkeiten ab, sondern ausschließlich von seiner inhaltlichen Unterscheidung zwischen proof und probability. Nach einer genauen Bestimmung dieser zumeist vernachlässigten Unterscheidung wird das Humesche Argument als unter diesen Voraussetzungen schlüssig nachgewiesen; abschließend wird seine Reichweite bestimmt. (shrink)

Contributions from an international team of experts revisit and update the concept of linguistic ecology in order to critically examine current theoretical approaches to language contact. Language is understood as a part of complex socio-historical-cultural systems, and interaction between the different dimensions and levels of these systems is considered to be essential for specific language forms. This book presents a uniform, abstract model of linguistic ecology based on, among other things, two concepts of Edmund Husserl's philosophy. It considers the individual (...) speaker in the specific communication situation to be the essential heuristic basis of linguistic analysis. The chapters present and employ a new, transparent and accessible contact linguistic vocabulary to aid reader comprehension, and explore a wide range of language contact situations in Europe, Africa, the Middle East, Latin America, Asia and the Pacific. This book will be fascinating reading for students and researchers across contact linguistics and cultural studies. (shrink)

According to the phenomenal intentionality research program, a state’s intentional content is fixed by its phenomenal character. Defenders of this view have little to say about just how this grounding is accomplished. I argue that without a robust account of representation, the research program promises too little. Unfortunately, most of the well-developed accounts of representation – asymmetric dependence, teleosemantics, and the like – ground representation in external relations such as causation. Such accounts are inconsistent with the core of the phenomenal (...) intentionality program. I argue that, however counter-intuitive it may seem, the best prospect for explaining how phenomenal character represents appeals to resemblance. (shrink)

[1] Tractatus logico-philosophicus. Tagebücher 1914-1916. Philosophische Untersuchungen. --3. Wittgenstein und der Wiener Kreis von Friedrich Waismann.--4. Philosophische Grammatik.--5. Das blaue Buch. Eine philosophische Betrachtung. Zettel.--6. Bemerkungen über die Grundlagen der Mathematik. --8. Bemerkungen über die Philosophie der Psychologie.

Characterizations of Kant's legal and political philosophy with regard to its affinity toward basic socio-political positions generally range between the two extremes of a social welfare state, on the one hand, and a libertarian laissez-faire state, on the other. The purpose of this article is to provide a three-tiered analysis showing that the issue of "social justice" is not raised at all within the narrower framework of Kant's legal philosophy, that instead Kant's legal philosophy is mainly neutral in the socio-political (...) sense and that Kant makes a move toward imposing an obligation on the state to attain social equality only as an issue of ethics sensu stricto. Kant's indifference toward matters of social justice are considered in relation to his concept of human nature. Finally, the author discusses the need for adopting a theory of social justice, if necessary independently from Kantian premises. Die Einordnung der Kantischen Rechts- und Staatsphilosophie hinsichtlich ihrer Affinität zu sozialphilosophischen Grundpositionen schwankt gemeinhin zwischen der Zuordnung zu den extremen Positionen des Wohlfahrtsstaats einerseits und des liberalen Nachtwächterstaates andererseits. In einer dreistufigen Analyse wird herausgarbeitet, daß sich die Frage 'sozialer Gerechtigkeit' im engeren Rahmen der Kantischen Rechts-Philosophie gar nicht stellt, daß letztere vielmehr sozialpolitisch weitestgehend neutral ist und daß sich bei Kant überhaupt nur in der Ethik sensu stricto Ansätze einer staatlichen Verpflichtung zum sozialen Ausgleich zeigen. Die Kantische Indifferenz gegenüber Fragen sozialer Gerechtigkeit wird in Bezug gesetzt zu Kants Auffassung von der menschlichen Natur; und es wird zuletzt verwiesen auf die Notwendigkeit, eine Theorie sozialer Gerechtigkeit ggf. unabhängig von Kantischen Vorgaben zu entwickeln. (shrink)

The conception of a ‘law of nature’ is a human product. It was created to play a role in natural philosophy, in the Cartesian tradition. In light of this, philosophers and scientists must sort out what they mean by a law of nature before evaluating rival theories and approaches. If one’s conception of the laws of nature is yoked to metaphysical notions of truth and explanation, that connection must be made explicit and defended. If, on the other hand, one’s aim (...) is to disentangle laws from truth or from explanation, that must be stated and defended as well. If philosophers do not make such assumptions, intuitions, and methodological commitments clear, then it will be impossible to identify the source of disagreement in debates about the laws of nature. Are the conflicts rooted in disagreement about the conclusions reached, or do the background commitments of the combatants block any resolution to the dispute in principle or in practice? (shrink)

Commentary on Charles Siewert's The Significance of Consciousness (Princeton, 1998). I discuss three issues about the relation of phenomenal consciousness, in the sense Siewert isolates, to intentionality. The first is whether, contrary to Siewert, phenomenal consciousness requires higher-order representation. The second is whether intentional features of conscious states are identical with phenomenal features, as Siewert argues, or merely conceptually supervene on them, with special attention to cross modal representations of objects in space. The third is whether phenomenal features are identical (...) with what we can have first person access to, with special attention to features of thoughts that are individuated by reference to the self and the present time. (shrink)

John Locke’s claims about relations (such as cause and effect) and mixed modes (such as beauty and murder) have been controversial since the publication of the Essay. His earliest critics read him as a thoroughgoing anti-realist who denies that such things exist. More charitable readers have sought to read Locke’s claims away. Against both, I argue that Locke is making ontological claims, but that his views do not have the absurd consequences his defenders fear. By examining Locke’s texts, as well (...) as the intellectual context in which they were written, I show that Locke’s position is at once radical and thoroughly traditional. (shrink)

It can seem obvious that we live in a world governed by laws of nature, yet it was not until the seventeenth century that the concept of a law came to the fore. Ever since, it has been attended by controversy: what does it mean to say that Boyle's law governs the expansion of a gas, or that the planets obey the law of gravity? Laws are rules that permit calculations and predictions. What does the universe have to be like, (...) if it is to play by them? This book sorts the most prominent answers into three families. Laws first arose in a theological context; they govern events only because God enforces them. Those wishing to reverse the order of explanation, and argue that the powers of objects fix the laws, struggled to claim for themselves the results of new science. The stand-off between these two families bred a third which rejects any kind of enforcer for the laws. On this view, laws summarize events; they do not govern anything. This book traces the fortunes of the three families, from their origins to the present day. It uses objections - and the revisions needed to answer them - to produce the best representative of each. Along the way, it tries to settle the rules of this game, the debate over laws of nature. What should we expect from an account of laws? The book aims to help readers develop their own desiderata and judge the merits of the competing positions. (shrink)

Contemporary Humeans treat laws of nature as statements of exceptionless regularities that function as the axioms of the best deductive system. Such ‘Best System Accounts’ marry realism about laws with a denial of necessary connections among events. I argue that Hume’s predecessor, George Berkeley, offers a more sophisticated conception of laws, equally consistent with the absence of powers or necessary connections among events in the natural world. On this view, laws are not statements of regularities but the most general rules (...) God follows in producing the world. Pace most commentators, I argue that Berkeley’s view is neither instrumentalist nor reductionist. More important, the Berkeleyan Best System can solve some of the problems afflicting its Humean rivals, including the problems of theory choice and Nancy Cartwright’s ‘facticity’ dilemma. Some of these solutions are available in the contemporary context, without any appeal to God. Berkeley’s account deserves to be taken seriously in its own right. (shrink)