Gehen zu können, wenn man will – das ist für viele Menschen eine Kurzformel für Freiheit. Wegzugehen bedeutet in vielen Fällen aber auch einen verlustreichen Abschied von Personen und einer gemeinsamen Lebenspraxis. Die Freiheit zu gehen ist deshalb vor allem als Option wichtig, von der wir Gebrauch machen können, aber nicht müssen. Ausstiegsoptionen sind ein wichtiger Bestandteil freiheitlicher Gesellschaften und Lebensformen. Oft sind sie mit Konflikten verbunden, wenn Freiheits- und Autonomiebestrebungen auf eingespielte Verbindlichkeiten und Abhängigkeiten treffen. Für jede Gesellschaft und (...) jede soziale Beziehung stellt sich daher die Frage, inwieweit und in welchen Bereichen Ausstiege zugelassen und unterstützt werden.Dieser Band bietet eine kontextübergreifende Analyse von Ausstiegsoptionen, sowohl ihrer generellen Aspekte als auch ihrer spezifischen Erscheinungsformen. Er ermöglicht es, ihre Bedeutung für eine freiheitliche Gesellschaft besser zu verstehen. Der Inhalt · ​Einleitung · Politische Ausstiege · Ausstiege aus persönlichen Beziehungen · Der Ausstieg aus dem Leben Die Herausgeber Prof. Dr. Simone Dietz lehrt Praktische Philosophie an der Heinrich-Heine-Universität Düsseldorf. Hannes Foth promoviert an der Heinrich-Heine-Universität Düsseldorf und ist Wissenschaftlicher Mitarbeiter am Institut für Medizingeschichte und Wissenschaftsforschung der Universität zu Lübeck. Svenja Wiertz hat an der Heinrich-Heine-Universität Düsseldorf promoviert und ist Wissenschaftliche Mitarbeiterin am Internationalen Zentrum für Ethik in den Wissenschaften der Universität Tübingen. (shrink)

ArgumentLinking up with recent studies on the experience of space and place in modern youth literature, this article analyzes how the “journey” as a narrative line and motif transformed Dutch early modern travel books for children from classical teaching instruments into explorative knowledge places. In the popular seventeenth-century Glorious and Fortunate Journey to the Holy Land, young readers were invited to travel within the book, which was presented as a place that covers material pages to observe as well as imagined (...) places to read about. Eighteenth-century travel books, for example written by Joachim Heinrich Campe, shifted from an inner to an empirical mode of travelling. They raised the suggestion that they offered unmediated observations and travel experiences, as if reading about places was equal to seeing places. Since travel literature facilitated active knowledge quisition among youngsters, but also left little room for autonomous innovations or different interpretations, this article reveals the emancipatory as well as restrictive character of such places of learning. By turning reading into a kind of travelling, travel books served as a substitute for travel. (shrink)

Imagination has recently attracted considerable attention from epistemologists and is recognized as a source of belief and even knowledge. One remarkable feature of imagination is that it is often and typically agentive: agents decide to imagine. In cases in which imagination results in a belief, the agentiveness of imagination may be taken to give rise to indirect doxastic control and epistemic responsibility. This observation calls for a proper understanding of agentive imagination. In particular, it calls for the development of a (...) semantics of imagination ascriptions. In the present paper an earlier suggestion by Ilkka Niiniluoto for a logic of imagination is considered. This proposal does not capture the agentive nature of imagination, and an alternative semantics is suggested. The new semantics combines the modal logic of agency with the neighbourhood semantics from alethic modal logic. (shrink)

book I. The nature of the state.-- book II. The social foundations of the state.-- book III. The constitution of the state.-- book IV. The administration of the state.-- book V. The state in international intercourse.

In this paper, Graham Priest’s understanding of dialetheism, the view that there exist true contradictions, is discussed, and various kinds of metaphysical dialetheism are distinguished between. An alternative to dialetheism is presented, namely a thesis called ‘dimathematism’. It is pointed out that dimathematism enables one to escape a slippery slope argument for dialetheism that has been put forward by Priest. Moreover, dimathematism is presented as a thesis that is helpful in rejecting the claim that logic is a normative discipline.

In this paper, we shall consider the so-called cancellation view of negation and the inferential role of contradictions. We will discuss some of the problematic aspects of negation as cancellation, such as its original presentation by Richard and Valery Routley and its role in motivating connexive logic. Furthermore, we will show that the idea of inferential ineffectiveness of contradictions can be conceptually separated from the cancellation model of negation by developing a system we call qLPm, a combination of Graham Priest’s (...) minimally inconsistent Logic of Paradox with q-entailment as introduced by Grzegorz Malinowski. (shrink)

In this paper we will consider the existing notions of bilateralism in the context of proof-theoretic semantics and propose, based on our understanding of bilateralism, an extension to logical multilateralism. This approach differs from what has been proposed under this name before in that we do not consider multiple speech acts as the core of such a theory but rather multiple consequence relations. We will argue that for this aim the most beneficial proof-theoretical realization is to use sequent calculi with (...) multiple sequent arrows satisfying some specific conditions, which we will lay out in this paper. We will unfold our ideas with the help of a case study in logical tetralateralism and present an extension of Almukdad and Nelson’s propositional constructive four-valued logic by unary operations of meaningfulness and nonsensicality. We will argue that in sequent calculi with multiple sequent arrows it is possible to maintain certain features that are desirable if we assume an understanding of the meaning of connectives in the spirit of proof-theoretic semantics. The use of multiple sequent arrows will be justified by the presence of congruentiality-breaking unary connectives. (shrink)

In a recent article, Mario Günther presented a conditional that is claimed to be connexive. The aim of this short discussion note is to show that Günther’s claim is not without problems.

This paper deals with various substructural propositional logics, in particular with substructural subsystems of Nelson's constructive propositional logics N– and N. Doen's groupoid semantics is extended to these constructive systems and is provided with an informational interpretation in terms of information pieces and operations on information pieces.

The topic of identity of proofs was put on the agenda of general (or structural) proof theory at an early stage. The relevant question is: When are the differences between two distinct proofs (understood as linguistic entities, proof figures) of one and the same formula so inessential that it is justified to identify the two proofs? The paper addresses another question: When are the differences between two distinct formulas so inessential that these formulas admit of identical proofs? The question appears (...) to be especially natural if the idea of working with more than one kind of derivations is taken seriously. If a distinction is drawn between proofs and disproofs (or refutations) as primitive entities, it is quite conceivable that a proof of one formula amounts to a disproof of another formula, and vice versa. A notion of inherited identity of derivations is introduced for derivations in a cut-free sequent system for Almukdad and Nelson’s constructive paraconsistent logic N4 with strong negation. The notion is obtained by identifying sequent rules the application of which has no effect on the identity of derivations. Then the notion of inherited identity is used to define a bilateralist notion of synonymy between formulas, which is a relation drawing more fine-grained distinctions between formulas than strong equivalence. (shrink)

This is a purely conceptual paper. It aims at presenting and putting into perspective the idea of a proof-theoretic semantics of the logical operations. The first section briefly surveys various semantic paradigms, and Section 2 focuses on one particular paradigm, namely the proof-theoretic semantics of the logical operations.

According to Suszko’s Thesis, there are but two logical values, true and false. In this paper, R. Suszko’s, G. Malinowski’s, and M. Tsuji’s analyses of logical twovaluedness are critically discussed. Another analysis is presented, which favors a notion of a logical system as encompassing possibly more than one consequence relation. [A] fundamental problem concerning many-valuedness is to know what it really is. [13, p. 281].

The paper provides a uniform Gentzen-style proof-theoretic framework for various subsystems of classical predicate logic. In particular, predicate logics obtained by adopting van Behthem''s modal perspective on first-order logic are considered. The Gentzen systems for these logics augment Belnap''s display logic by introduction rules for the existential and the universal quantifier. These rules for x and x are analogous to the display introduction rules for the modal operators and and do not themselves allow the Barcan formula or its converse to (...) be derived. En route from the minimal modal predicate logic to full first-order logic, axiomatic extensions are captured by purely structural sequent rules. (shrink)

Curry’s paradox is well known. The original version employed a conditional connective, and is not forthcoming if the conditional does not satisfy contraction. A newer version uses a validity predicate, instead of a conditional, and is not forthcoming if validity does not satisfy structural contraction. But there is a variation of the paradox which uses “external validity”. And since external validity contracts, one might expect the appropriate version of the Curry paradox to be inescapable. In this paper we show that (...) this is not the case. We consider two ways of formalising the notion of external validity, and show that in both of these the paradox is not forthcoming without the appropriate forms of contraction. (shrink)

A well-known art historian and an intimate friend of Heidegger's, Heinrich Wiegand Petzet provides a rich portrait of Heidegger that is part memoir, part biography, and part cultural history.

Pars 1. Contemplativa -- Pars 2. Activa.

Reprint. Originally published: T'ubingen: C.F. Osiander, 1822.

"Die Grundlage... ist... ein Programm, welches ich im vorigen Jahre unter dem Titel: "Historische und philosophische Beitr'age zur Erl'auterung des Spinozismus' ausgegeben habe. Aber... hier... sehr erweitert.".

On cover: Zusammenhang des Spinozismus mit der Cartesianischen Philosophie.

This chapter is concerned with logical aspects of negation, i.e. with the role of negation in valid inferences and hence with the contribution negation makes to the truth and falsity conditions of declarative expressions. Negation is an important philosophical and logical concept. Often differences between logical systems can ‐ at least partially ‐ be described as differences between the notions of negation used in these logics.

A version of strong negation is introduced into Categorial Grammar. The resulting syntactic calculi turn out to be systems of connexive logic.

Although it is not younger than other areas of non-classical logic, paraconsistent logic has received full recognition only in recent years, largely due to the work of, among others, Newton da Costa, Graham Priest, Diderik Batens, and Jerzy Perzanowski. A logical system Λ is paraconsistent if there is a set of Λ-formulas Δ ∪ {A} such that in Λ one may derive from Δ both A and its negation, and the deductive closure of Δ with respect to Λ is different (...) from the set of all formulas. If from Δ one may derive a formula and its negation, Δ is said to be syntactically inconsistent. But is every syntactically inconsistent set of formulas contradictory? In classical logic and many non-classical logics, every syntactically inconsistent set is unsatisfiable, that is, semantically inconsistent. If contradictoriness means semantical inconsistency, there is, up to logical equivalence, only one contradiction. In paraconsistent logics, there are usually many non-equivalent formulas representing the semantically unique contradiction in a non-paraconsistent logic. So when is a formula the contradiction of another formula, and, moreover, how does the notion of contradiction relate to the notions of contrariety and negation? (shrink)