This volume is a superb addition to the voluminous literature engendered by the enigmatic treatise--"Job." The first section is an introduction by the editor to the study of "Job." It briefly outlines the various traditions of interpretive material. Glatzer's major criticism of this literature is two-fold: there is a general avoidance of direct confrontation with the text; interpreters tend to abuse "Job" to validate a previously held intellectual stance. Glatzer also provides the reader with a sketch of his own viewpoint, (...) but unfortunately the sketch is skeletal. The second section provides thirty-two modern selections on various aspects of "Job." The editor has combined these selections under headings designed to define more precisely an area of interest or to demonstrate the spectrum of thought among one tradition's spokesmen. Glatzer's familiar thoroughness is manifest right down to the index and bibliography.--F. J. N. (shrink)
This paper gives an account of the debate between F.A. Hayek and J.M. Keynes in the 1930s written for the general public. The purpose of this is twofold. First, to provide the general reader with a narrative of what happened, … More ›.
Some notices to Thibaut's Science of Pandects. For A. F. J. Thibaut, the main concern was a "philosophical" approach to the interpretation and systematization of the positive Roman Law in his time. In his eyes, the object of a subjective right is an action, not a thing or person. Therefore he was cautious not to use abstractions, definitions, and deductions from "dreamt" postulates. Regarding the logical texture of an institute of private law as a "Gestalt", it follows that the "equity (...) of the reason," of a law, for different cases, is the same thing as that "Gestalt". The "philosophical" interpretation of a law is then an interpretation in respect to its "Gestalt". Although Thibaut's main concern was the interpretation of the positive Roman Law in his time (the "Gemeinrecht") he did not disregard the history of Roman Law before and especially after Justinian. (shrink)
Christology seems to fall fairly clearly into two divisions. The first is concerned with the truth of the two propositions: ‘Christ is God’ and ‘Christ is a man’. The second is concerned with the mutual compatibility of these propositions. The first part of Christology tends to confine itself to what is sometimes called ‘positive theology’: that is to say, it is largely given over to examining the Jons revelationis —let us not prejudge currently burning issues by asking what this is—to (...) see what evidence can be found for the truth of these propositions. Clearly, the methods used will be above all those of New Testament exegesis. The second part of Christology will necessarily consist entirely of that speculative theology which is contrasted with positive theology. Even if the earliest speculation on this topic is to be found in the New Testament itself and thus becomes fair game for the exegetes, any attempt to relate the primary truths, ‘Christ is God’ and ‘Christ is a man’, to eachother is a work of reflection, and in the terminology I am using speculative. (shrink)
The speculative power of theoretical reason is not only incapable of grounding itself, but is also powerless to integrate and unify all of the different aspects of our intellectual and spiritual life. This impotency of what Schelling called negative philosophy gives rise to the demand for a positive philosophy that supplies the integrative grounding in which das Unvordenkliche—that before which nothing can be thought—is rooted. I contrast what Schelling calls an “inverted concept” with Huineng’s account of wu-nien (no-thought) found in (...) the Platform Sutra (Tun-Huang Manuscript). Both Schelling and Huineng advance their respective ideas as not only the necessary basis of their thinking, but as a necessary experience one must undergo in order to realize and thus truly comprehend their teaching. Huineng connects this lived knowing with sudden enlightenment, while Schelling speaks of the exuberant fullness of ecstasy. I close with a brief account of Schelling’s appeal for pluralistic tolerance among different philosophical and religious traditions, in which he argues that such traditions are in error to the degree they lay claim to exclusive and infallible truth. (shrink)
Pretendo apresentar uma versão para o português da Introdução ao Jornal Crítico de Filosofia, texto de autoria de Hegel e Schelling. A versão traduzida é antecedida por uma introdução geral na qual procuro esclarecer, em linhas gerais, o contexto intelectual e biográfico no qual o texto surgiu, o significado geral da noção de Unphilosophie, a cuja crítica se dirige o esforço do Jornal ; e, finalmente, o argumento perseguido pelo texto.