L'Æsthetica de Baumgarten est restée depuis plus de deux cents ans dans l'ombre de la «révolution» au moins nominale qu'elle a représentée pour l'histoire de la philosophic moderne. Et de fait, Baumgarten doit moins son importance historique à l'évaluation rigoureuse qu'on a pu faire des concepts qu'il a contribué à développer, qu'à l'ouverture d'un champ théorique et philosophique particulier. Car quelles que soient les limites et les lacunes historiques de son projet théorique, il n'en reste pas moins qu'une (...) grande partie de la tradition philosophique de l'esthétique, en particulier dans le contexte de la philosophie allemande, y a trouvé la possibilité d'une unification et comme la marque d'une «origine». C'est Baumgarten qui, le premier en Allemagne, a réuni les conditions nécessaires pour assurer à la théorie de l'art et du beau une cohérence systématique qui lui avait été auparavant refusée et, par voie de conséquence, pour lui permettre de former un champ théorique et philosophique distinct. On a souvent fait remarquer que Baumgarten avait «inventé» très peu de thèmes nouveaux en esthétique; et il est indéniable qu'il s'est contenté la plupart du temps de réorganiser, dans ses observations, un matériau à la fois ancien et restreint, qu'il tire presque exclusivement de la rhétorique et de la poétique traditionnelles. Mais la pertinence historique de sa pensée tient plutôt au fait qu'il crée une nouvelle perspective unifiée, un nouveau centre de gravité qui permet d'organiser de façon neuve un ensemble de phénomènes qui avaient été traités avant lui de façon indépendante. (shrink)

Text of 1735 and 1936 eds. of the Meditationes, with concordances, reproducedon 3 microfiches (11 x 15 cm.) in pocket.

English summary: How can something which is absolutely unrepresentable be represented for the senses? In her studies of historical semantics of the concept of representation between 1750 and 1800, Petra Bahr shows that in the fields of aesthetics and religious theory this was a central question in the 18th century. From the perspective of the philosophy of religion, the significance of Baumgarten's Aesthetica and Kant's Critique of Judgment, two works which as a rule are perceived as competing philosophies of (...) art, has been reconstructed here in such a manner that Kant's lasting reference to Baumgarten's insights remains visible even in his overcoming of them. The discussion concerning the role of the productive power of imagination and the redefinition of the understanding of symbols functions as a link between the two philosophers. German description: Wie wird das schlechthin Undarstellbare sinnlich darstellbar? Petra Bahr zeigt in ihren Studien zur historischen Semantik des Darstellungsbegriffs zwischen 1750 und 1800, dass diese Frage das 18. Jahrhundert nicht nur in asthetischer, sondern auch in religionstheoretischer Perspektive beschaftigt. Die religionsphilosophische Dignitat von Baumgartens Aesthetica und Kants Kritik der Urteilskraft, zweier in der Regel nur als konkurrierende Philosophien der Kunst wahrgenommenen Werke, wird dabei so rekonstruiert, dass der bleibende Bezug Kants auf die Einsichten Baumgartens auch noch in deren Uberwindung sichtbar bleibt: die Rolle der produktiven Einbildungskraft, die Neubestimmung des Symbolverstandnisses und die Umbesetzung des Begriffs der sinnlichen Reprasentation. Mit einem sinngeschichtlichen Zugang wird die reiche und wechselvolle Vorgeschichte rekonstruiert, die die Kritik der Urteilskraft zu allererst als die Antwort Kants auf ausstehende Probleme der sinnlichen Darstellung des Undarstellbaren verstehbar macht. (shrink)

German description: Wie wird das schlechthin Undarstellbare sinnlich darstellbar? Petra Bahr zeigt in ihren Studien zur historischen Semantik des Darstellungsbegriffs zwischen 1750 und 1800, dass diese Frage das 18.

Las filosofías de Wolff y Baumgarten han sido tradicionalmente evaluadas como una mera sistematización de las doctrinas de Leibniz, carente de toda originalidad. Se revisa esta opinión, concentrándose en el problema específico de la interacción de las sustancias naturales. Se muestra que ellos no siguen a Leibniz con el mismo grado de cercanía en algunos de los principios centrales de la teoría de la armonía preestablecida. Se problematiza así el uso de la etiqueta "leibnizianismo" como referida a un cuerpo (...) homogéneo e indiferenciado de doctrinas. The philosophies of Wolff and Baumgarten have been traditionally evaluated as mere systematizations of the doctrines of Leibniz, and, therefore, as lacking all originality. The paper revises that opinion, focusing on the specific problem of the interaction of natural substances, in order to show that they do not follow Leibniz as closely with respect to some of the central principles of pre-established harmony. It also questions the use of "Leibnizianism" as a label to refer to a homogeneous and undifferentiated body of doctrines. As filosofias de Wolff e Baumgarten têm sido tradicionalmente avaliadas como uma mera sistematização das doutrinas de Leibniz, carente de toda originalidade. Neste artigo, revisa-se essa opinião concentrando-se no problema específico da interação das substâncias naturais. Mostra-se que eles não seguem Leibniz com o mesmo grau de aproximação em alguns dos princípios centrais da teoria da harmonia preestabelecida. Problematiza-se, assim, o uso da etiqueta "leibnizianismo" como referência a um corpo homogêneo e indiferenciado de doutrinas. (shrink)

I argue that curiosity about the world deserves attention as a moral virtue, even apart from the role it may play in (the more generally praised) love of wisdom. First, close relationships and caring are reasonably considered part of a well-lived life, and curiosity is important for caring both about people and about things in the world. Second, curiosity helps us to define an appropriate way for persons to be affected by certain situations. Perhaps most important, curiosity can help one (...) to live well because it addresses the most fundamental existential task humans face, the need to see their lives as meaningful. I argue that curiosity is a distinctive virtue but suggest that related virtues (e.g., receptivity, reverence) may contribute to different kinds of worthy engagement with the world. (shrink)

A. G. Baumgarten's foundation of aesthetics as a branch of philosophical reflection is itself deeply rooted in Leibnizian metaphysics. From this starting-point Baumgarten comes to a kind of monadological concept of the work of art, that gets now an inexhaustible and thruthrepresenting meaning. This truth of the work of art however cannot be recognized rationally, for it is impossible for human beings to be aware of a beautiful object's 'metaphysical truth', which can only be perceived by the senses (...) as - to quote Baumgarten - 'aesthetical truth'. Still it is possible, by rational and scientific hermeneutics, to transfer some aspects of aesthetical to logical truth. The interest in art is therefore at the same time an interest in the cognition of the metaphysical cosmic order, and Baumgarten's aesthetics similarly are the first foundation of philosophical hermeneutics of art. (shrink)

In lieu of an abstract, here is a brief excerpt of the content:Journal of the History of Philosophy 39.1 (2001) 149-151 [Access article in PDF] Reinhard Brandt. Kritischer Kommentar zu Kants Anthropologie in pragmatischer Hinsicht (1798). Kant-Forschungen, Band 10. Hamburg: Felix Meiner Verlag, 1999. Pp. 543. Cloth, DM. The appearance of a commentary on Kant's Anthropology is very timely, indeed indispensable, given the advent of a new phase in Kant scholarship, attentive to the writings surrounding the main critical texts as (...) a way of gaining a more comprehensive understanding of his thought. This new approach has been partly precipitated by the 1997 release of Volume 25 of the Academy edition containing the student transcriptions of Kant's anthropology lectures spanning a period of twenty-four years. The Anthropology is especially important for understanding Kant's moral philosophy. From 1773 forward, Kant himself never taught morality without concurrently offering his course in anthropology. His own students were thus cognizant of Kant's conception of human nature. Yet during the last 200 years few have paid attention to what sort of being, in Kant's view, was called upon to fulfill the moral vocation. As Brandt points out, the Anthropology has previously provoked no notable study, no discussion among either advocates or detractors.The precise nature of the relation between the Anthropology and Kant's critical philosophy remains an open question. Brandt himself is skeptical about the importance of the Anthropology for moral philosophy. He argues against seeing an integrated relation between the Anthropology and the critical system. For Brandt, the two stand alongside each other. The pragmatic anthropology serves merely as an "encyclopedia of the Kantian philosophy on an empirical level," providing an empirical discussion of its problems (8). He also argues that the pragmatic anthropology is neither identical with the anthropology required as a discipline supplementary to pure moral philosophy (14) [End Page 149] nor with the transcendental anthropology providing the self-knowledge of understanding reason (17). The seeming hallmarks of Kant's thought, such as the triadic structure of cognition, feeling, and desire, are simply an omnipresent "psychological division of European cultural history" (99-100) and so unpersuasive as evidence for a systematic connection of the texts. Anthropology has no "idea of reason" as its "basis." It begins in empirical psychology (especially Baumgarten's) and in Kant's effort to separate it from this discipline as a distinct, "pragmatic discipline" with the goal of "facilitating the prudent action of future world citizens" (9, 11). Brandt's interpretation probably influences his selection of passages from the critical philosophy referenced in his Kommentar.The commentary sets Kant's Anthropology in the historical context of Western thought, identifying related passages in texts which Kant is known to have read, as well as materials unfamiliar to him, but still pertinent for a given theme. Over 400 primary sources (from Homer and the philosophers of antiquity, to such recent writers as Richard Rorty) are referenced, as well as over 300 authors in the secondary literature. The commentary is critical, including in its textual analysis differences between the 1798 and 1800 published editions of the Anthropology, and comparisons with the manuscript in Kant's own hand (now located in Rostock). Marginalia are noted, and in some cases passages struck from Kant's manuscript are reproduced in the Kommentar; one such particularly long passage pertains to Kant's discussion of sensibility as contrasted with the understanding (175-181). Parallel passages are identified in Kant's other writings, including his published works, Reflexionen, correspondence, and other lecture notes. These include references to the anthropology lecture notes compiled in Volume 25, thus making the commentary helpful for someone investigating shifts and developments in Kant's treatment of a given topic. The historical context is also quite helpful for understanding the very concepts of "anthropology" (49-63), "pragmatic" (53), and "application" (57). Brandt concludes that with regard to its sources, Kant's anthropology is a "literary anthropology" (85) and that its central thematic is "the human being as an acting being" (89).Brandt offers very interesting and helpful discussions of various topics, with helpful citations, which... (shrink)

La filosofía de Wolff y Baumgarten ha sido tradicionalmente evaluada como nada más que una sistematización, carente de toda originalidad, de las doctrinas de Leibniz. El presente trabajo revisa esta opinión generaliza, concentrándose en el problema específico de la interacción de las sustancias naturales. Se muestra que Wolff y Baumgarten no siguen a Leibniz con el mismo grado de cercanía en relación a algunos de los principios centrales de la teoría armonía preestablecida y, con ello, se problematiza el (...) uso de la etiqueta “leibnizianismo” como referida a un cuerpo homogéneo e indiferenciado de doctrinas. (shrink)

Reseña de: Baumgarten, A. G., & Kant, I.. Baumgarten’s Elements of First Practical Philosophy. A Critical Translation with Kant’s Reflections on Moral Philosophy. Edición y traducción: C. D. Fugate y J. Hymers. London, New York: Bloomsbury Academic, 2020. ISBN: 978-1-4742-8265-9, 375 pp.

Se plantea que la estética posmoderna, alejada de la posibilidad de concebirse como estética filosófica o filosofía del arte (al menos como la presentó Alexander G. Baumgarten al inicio de la Modernidad), adquiriría en la era actual la fisonomía de una pop estética, cuya expresión fundante pareciese ser la propia experiencia estética y no otras condiciones atribuibles a un determinado canon estético. En relación a esta conjetura, que por lo visto implica una cierta superación de la idea de obra, (...) se discute, por un lado, la conexión entre arte e inteligencia artificial y, por otro, las implicancias de la Everyday Aesthetics sobre el concepto de experiencia. Una y otra práctica, testimoniarían en la actualidad un renovado sentido común estético. (shrink)

Calls for public engagement on emerging agricultural technologies, including genetic engineering of farm animals, have resulted in the development of information that people can interact and engage with online, including “Frequently Asked Questions” (FAQs) developed by organizations seeking to inform or influence the debate. We conducted a frame analysis of FAQs webpages about genetic engineering of farm animals developed by different organizations to describe how questions and answers are presented. We categorized FAQs as having a regulatory frame (emphasizing or challenging (...) the adequacy of regulations), an efficiency frame (emphasizing precision and benefits), a risks and uncertainty frame (emphasizing unknown outcomes), an animal welfare frame (emphasizing benefits for animals) or an animal dignity frame (considering the inherent value of animals). Animals were often featured as the object of regulations in FAQs, and questions about animals were linked to animal welfare regulations. The public were represented using a variety of terms (public, consumer) and pronouns (I, we). Some FAQs described differences between technology terms (gene editing, genetic modification) and categorized technologies as either well-established or novel. This framing of the technology may not respond to actual public concerns on the topic. Organizations seeking to use FAQs as a public engagement tool might consider including multiple viewpoints and actual questions people have about genetic engineering. (shrink)

By providing symbolic (operates by means of signs) and intuitive (operates without signs) types of cognition, G.W. Leibniz in the “Reasoning about cognition, truth and ideas” laid the foundation for the problem of visibility discussions in 18th century. Proceeding from Leibniz’s ideas, Chr. Wolff in the “German metaphysics” built a detailed doctrine about figurative and contemplating cognition, giving priority in the field of application and the degree of clarity to the first type. Wolff’s doctrine almost immediately became classic and found (...) a lot of supporters. J.G. Darjes and G.F. Meier moved the metaphysical distinction of cognition distinctions to logic. A.G. Baumgarten in the “Metaphysics” offered a new criterion of symbolic and intuitive cognition distinction. J.N. Tetens scrutinized the opposition of symbolic and contemplating cognition from the point of a priori and a posteriori opposition. J.H. Lambert in the “New Organon” brings the interest back to the figurative cognition. (shrink)

It is commonly assumed that personalization technologies used by Google for the purpose of tailoring search results for individual users create filter bubbles, which reinforce users’ political views. Surprisingly, empirical evidence for a personalization-induced filter bubble has not been forthcoming. Here, we investigate whether filter bubbles may result instead from a searcher’s choice of search queries. In the first experiment, participants rated the left-right leaning of 48 queries (search strings), 6 for each of 8 topics (abortion, benefits, climate change, sex (...) equality, immigration, nuclear family, Islam, and taxation). An independent sample of participants were then asked to select one of these queries for each of the 8 topics. With the exception of the topic of Islam, participants were significantly more likely to select a query corresponding to their own political leaning, compared to other queries, explaining between 12% and 39% of the variance. A second experiment investigated the effect of the political leaning of the same queries on the overall political leaning of Search Engine Result Pages (SERPs) in Google Search. The top six results of each SERP were rated collectively by a third group of participants, explaining 36.3% of the variance across all 48 search terms (p < .00001). That is, (1) participants in our experiments tended to select own-side search queries, and (2) using those queries tended to yield own-side search results when using the Google search engine. Our results are consistent with the notion of a self-imposed filter bubble in which query selection plays a salient role. (shrink)

This study draws on neo-institutional theory to examine how and why corporate environmental management practices might affect environmental performance. It contributes to the literature by using a large, global data set to investigate the impact of 10 corporate environmental management practices on greenhouse gas emissions or emissions intensity. It focuses on greenhouse gas emissions which pose an existential threat to the people and planet, and the environmental management practices of corporations whose effectiveness has provoked cynicism and claims of “greenwash”. Our (...) results are based on a dynamic, robust and large-scale econometric analysis, which includes tests of association and Granger causation in comparison with earlier research. A key finding, which is of interest not only to the academic literature but also to policymakers and managers, is that environmental performance impacts environmental management practices but not vice versa, supporting the hypothesis that corporations adopt these practices as a symbolic legitimizing device rather than a genuine attempt derived from moral obligation to reduce their greenhouse gases or carbon intensity. (shrink)