David Lewis‘s Parts of Classes is a great book, in all respects. But one of its most interesting thesis, in my mind, is not its core thesis that standard set theory — ZFC — reduces to classical mereology + plural quantification + a primitive singleton-relation, but rather its sub-thesis of how to understand classical mereology, what Lewis calls the thesis of Composition as Identity: (CAI): a whole is the same portion of reality as its many parts taken together; it is (...) them collectively, they collectively are it. CAI is needed as an assumption for the core thesis of Parts of Classes — the reduction of ZFC — on pain of it being unmotivated.1 But CAI is the most interesting in its own right. It is also as such it is presented by Lewis, and received in the literature. In what follows, I critically assess CAI as Lewis presents it in Parts of Classes. I first argue that Lewis‘s presentation of CAI has been misunderstood in the literature (section 1). I then argue that the best (if not the only) way to understand it entails a slightly revisionary semantics for a certain form of predication (section 2). I finally end by showing that this might create more trouble than it solves for Lewis (section 3). (shrink)

Some believe that there is a God who is the source of all things; and some believe that there are necessarily existing abstract objects. But can one believe both these things? That is the question of this Element. First, Einar Duenger Bøhn clarifies the concepts involved, and the problem that arises from believing in both God and abstract objects. Second, he presents and discusses the possible kinds of solutions to that problem. Third, Bøhn discusses a new kind of solution to (...) the problem, according to which reality is most fundamentally made of information. (shrink)

Les uns sont fascinés par la hardiesse et la constance de sa pensée, les autres la rejettent au motif que sa métaphysique est extravagante et son raisonnement obscur. Mais alors, quel profit tirer de la lecture de l'œuvre de Plotin? Mieux que tout autre, Plotin réussit à faire le point sur les doctrines philosophiques qui l'ont précédé, y compris le scepticisme. Et il y parvient avec une perspicacité et une originalité exceptionnelles, tout en restant un strict partisan du platonisme. Interpréter (...) Plotin dans sa confrontation avec ses prédécesseurs, c'est prendre part à un passionnant débat et soumettre à une évaluation les acquis et les limites de chacun. Telle est la démarche à laquelle invite ce livre qui est consacré à la théorie du savoir. Après que le doute sceptique ait ébranlé les théories antérieures, Plotin innove en faisant coïncider savoir objectif et connaissance de soi. Ce geste théorique, ses antécédents et ses conséquences sont au cœur de ce travail de recherche"--P. [4] of cover. (shrink)

This chapter examines the influence of German idealism on the works of Soren Kierkegaard. It suggests that Kierkegaard's essential concepts and ideas were influenced by Johann Gottlieb Fichte, Friedrich Wilhelm Joseph Schelling, and Georg Wilhelm Friedrich Hegel, and that his oeuvre can be best understood in the context of classical German philosophy. The chapter also considers Kierkegaard's views about the theology of sin and the problems in his reception of German idealism.

Der Bogen der radikalphänomenologischen Zeitkritik spannt sich von der Auseinandersetzung mit der kantischen Rezeptivitätsproblematik über die Analyse einer affektiven Historialität vor jeder Zeit bis hin zur Aufhebung der Geschichtlichkeit als Primat des originär phänomenologischen Wahrheitszugangs. Auf diesem Weg übernimmt die absolute Lebensselbstaffektion immer konkreter die Aufgabe der immanenten Urphänomenalisierung als inner-narrative Primärindividuierung.

- This book pursues an in-depth discussion between Eckhart's mysticism and Henry’s radical or material phenomenology of life.

That a symbolic object or work of art participates in what it signifies, as a part within a whole, was a controversial claim discussed with particular intensity in the wake of Immanuel Kant's Critique of Judgment. It informed the aesthetic theories of a constellation of writers in Jena and Weimar around 1800, including Moritz, Goethe, Schelling and Hegel. Yet the twin concepts of symbol and intuition were not only tools of literary and mythological criticism: they were integral even to questions (...) of epistemology and methodology in the fields of theology, metaphysics, history and natural philosophy. The international contributors to this volume further explore how both the explanatory potential and peculiar dissatisfactions of the symbol entered the Anglo-American discourse, focusing on Coleridge, Crabb Robinson and Emerson. Contemporary debates about the claims of symbolic as opposed to allegorical art are kept in view throughout. (shrink)

1. T. Grundbegriffe und Methode autonomer Wertbetrachtung--2. T. Der autonome Grundcharakter des Theoretischen, Ethischen und Ästhetischen und seine Abwandlung, mit Anhang: Die Bedeutung des Religiösen für die Begründung der Wertgebiete.

En radicalisant le projet d'une phénoménologie de l'affectivité, en interrogeant l'abîme intérieur de l'éprouver, et en y resaissisant la source de toute création possible, cet ouvrage fait de la question du pâtir le point de départ d'une nouvelle théorie de l'agir.