Flach bringt Kants geltungs- und prinzipientheoretische Freiheitslehre zur Darstellung und sucht zu zeigen, welches Erklärungspotential diese Lehre in puncto Humanität hat. Krijnen bringt Hegels logische und geistphilosophische Freiheitslehre zur Darstellung und sucht zu zeigen, daß und wie in ihr ein fundamentaler Aspekt der Freiheit thematisch wird, der in Kants Lehre unterbeleuchtet bleibt. Die Diskussionsbeiträge zeigen, welchen Stellenwert dem einen und dem anderen Paradigma im aktuellen Urteil zuerkannt wird. Flach presents Kant’s conception of freedom as well as its potential for understanding (...) what it means to be human. Krijnen presents Hegel’s conception of freedom and shows that Kant’s conception underestimates an essential feature of freedom. The contributions of other authors assess the results. (shrink)
Both Kant’s and Hegel’s conceptions of normativity have shown to be extremely thorough and influential until today. Against the background of the much-disputed issue of ‘formalism’, _Concepts of Normativity: Kant or Hegel?_ explores limits and perspectives of their deliberations.
Contemporary philosophy of recognition represents probably the most prominent direction that presently claims to introduce an updated version of classical German idealism into ongoing debates, including the debate on the nature of sociality. In particular, studies of Axel Honneth offer triggering contributions in Frankfurt School fashion while at the same time rejuvenating Hegel’s philosophy in terms of a philosophy of recognition. According to Honneth, this attempt at a rejuvenation also involves substantial modification of Hegelian doctrines. It is shown that Honneth (...) underestimates the implications of Hegel’s thoughts about the theme, method and systematic form of philosophy. As a consequence, Honneth’s social philosophy is, on the one hand, in need of a plausible foundation. This leads, on the other hand, to a different construction of the social within philosophy than Honneth offers. (shrink)
Résumé — Bien que le « social » ne soit pas un thème central du néokantisme de Bade, il est néanmoins l’occasion de développer, dans le contexte de ce courant philosophique, ce qu’on appelle aujourd’hui une ontologie sociale, qui peut être élaborée de manière exemplaire dans la perspective de Rickert. La conception fondamentale de la philosophie de l’histoire, que j’analyse, offre chez Rickert la clef d’une détermination formelle de l’ontologie sociale. En outre, Rickert offre une base systématique qui permet de (...) définir le « social ». Les tenants de l’école de Bade, tels Windelband, Bauch, Cohn, voient, comme Rickert, dans le « social » la condition de la réalisation de la culture ; mais à la différence de ce dernier, cette sphère revêt chez eux une coloration éthique.— Although the « social » is not a core concept of the Southwest school of Neo-Kantianism, this philosophy offers beginnings for the development of what is nowadays called social ontology. I develop this point by presenting an analysis of Rickert’s concept of the philosophy of history. He turns out to be the key for a formal determination of a social ontology. Moreover, Rickert also offers a systematic beginning as far as the content of the social is concerned. Like Rickert also other thinkers of the Southwest school conceive the social as a condition for realizing values, but unlike Rickert in their model the sphere of realization has an « ethical » flavour. (shrink)
Le néokantisme – souvent critiqué de façon polémique par Heidegger et ses disciples –, en particulier le néokantisme de son maître, Heinrich Rickert, présente une théorie de la compréhension humaine plus approfondie que celle de Heidegger. D’une part, Heidegger est replacé dans son temps, puis les principes de la théorie de Rickert sur le sens et les valeurs sont esquissés. D’autre part, un problème de base de la phénoménologie est analysé ; il apparaît en fin de compte que la validité (...) – notion fondamentale du néokantisme – fonctionne implicitement aussi comme le fondement du projet ontologique de Heidegger, bien que celui-ci, pour des raisons méthodologiques, ne parvient pas suffisamment à justifier l’usage de cette notion. (shrink)
What is commonly known as neo-Kantianism is in fact a philosophical movement comprising many philosophers and different approaches. This movement established itself in the 1870s and dominated the philosophical developments and debates until the 1930s. The label ‘neo-Kantianism’ or ‘critical philosophy’ is unanimously and unquestionably applied to the Marburg School—whose main representatives are Hermann Cohen, Paul Natorp and Ernst Cassirer—and the Southwest German School, also called the Baden School or Heidelberg School—whose protagonists are Wilhelm Windelband, Heinrich Rickert, Emil Lask, Jonas (...) Cohn and Bruno Bauch. Although these two schools represent what may be called the main theories of neo-Kantian philosophy, there has always been discussion about the main features of neo-Kantianism and the philosophers fitting this label. Even the view that the Marburg and the Southwest German Schools are the essential r .. (shrink)
Recognition -- German Idealism as an Ongoing Challenge seeks to answer the question: does the present philosophical debate about recognition incorporate sufficiently the systematical requirements of the philosophy it pretends to inherit and rejuvenate, i.e. German idealism?
The meaning and validity of Kant’s Kant’s doctrine of schematism remains contested until today. In neo-Kantianism and post-War transcendental philosophy, Kant’s schematism of the pure concepts of understanding is transformed drastically. Kant’s thesis of heterogeneity is overcome by taking it back into the internal relationships of the structure of cognition. The spontaneity of thought, performing schematizations, is retained, but Kant’s project of conceiving of the foundations of knowledge in the fashion of a theory of apperception of the I as well (...) as the externality of the given and the determination of the given that goes along with it is sublated by an objective order of validity-noematic constitution and regulation. Kant’s doctrine of schematism, then, shows to be methodology. (shrink)
In _The Very Idea of Organization_ Krijnen develops a new philosophical methodology for a social ontology in general and an organizational ontology in particular by rejuvenating the Kantian and Hegelian tradition of philosophy.
The contemporary debate on the social ontological foundations of organization does not, for methodological reasons, sufficiently get a grip on the phenomenon of organization. The original determinacy of organization remains presupposed. To render this implicit meaning of organization explicit, another, more embracing and in-depth methodology is needed. German idealist types of philosophy provide an extremely powerful methodology. In the philosophy of German idealism from Kant to Hegel, along with neo-Kantianism and up to contemporary transcendental philosophy, however, the idea of organization (...) is not addressed. Indeed, it is a challenge to construct the idea of organization from the perspective of German idealism: the perspective of reason, and with that, of freedom. It results in a new framework for dealing with organization in theory and practice. The article constructs the idea of organization within the framework of G.W.F. Hegel. It shows where the issue of organization should be addressed topologically in Hegel?s system of philosophy and what, then, organization shows to be here speculatively. nema. (shrink)
In the history of Chinese and European philosophy, metaphysics has played an outstanding role: it is a theoretical framework which provides the basis for a philosophical understanding of the world and the self. A theory of the self is well integrated in a metaphysical understanding of the totality of nature as a dynamic process of continuous changes. According to this view, the purpose of existence can be conceived of as the development and realization of the full potential given to the (...) individual by its nature. In regard to human nature specifically, this idea of self-realization includes the development of all cognitive faculties as well as of the moral character. Metaphysics has, however, suffered a loss of importance in current debates, especially in ethics. As a result, we observe the emergence of such philosophical views as moral skepticism and even nihilism. The consequence of this tendency has been the renunciation of a claim to understanding and to providing a solid ground for ethics. Yet an intercultural dialogue can provide us with some hope as the consolidation of debates on crucial topics of our traditions might indeed serve as the basis for a more powerful philosophy in the future. (shrink)
Page generated Fri Aug 6 00:33:06 2021 on philpapers-web-65948fd446-wp78j
cache stats: hit=95, miss=61, save= autohandler : 764 ms called component : 731 ms search.pl : 452 ms render loop : 445 ms next : 229 ms addfields : 192 ms autosense : 191 ms match_other : 169 ms publicCats : 112 ms menu : 77 ms quotes : 73 ms search_quotes : 41 ms save cache object : 35 ms match_cats : 20 ms retrieve cache object : 14 ms prepCit : 10 ms initIterator : 5 ms applytpl : 3 ms intermediate : 1 ms match_authors : 1 ms init renderer : 0 ms setup : 0 ms auth : 0 ms writelog : 0 ms