Die Beitrage dieses Buches knupfen an Stanley Cavells psychoanalytisch inspirierte Studien zu Literatur, Drama und Film als Beitrage zu einer Anthropologie der Endlichkeit an. Cavell interpretiert Kunstformen wie Shakespeares Tragodien, die Hollywood-Komodien der Wiederverheiratung und die Melodramen der Unbekannten Frau als experimentelle Narrative von Menschen, die mit ihrer Endlichkeit hadern. Dabei geht es um die alte philosophische Frage nach dem guten Leben, was die Analyse der Spielarten der Lebensverfehlung einschliesst. Dazu gehort etwa die Unfahigkeit, sich uber die eigenen Wunsche, Anspruche (...) und Interessen in der Beziehung zu einer anderen Person zu verstandigen, was dazu fuhrt, dass man die eigene Perspektive mit einer allgemeinen unparteiischen Sicht der Vernunft und personliches Vertrauen mit Wissen uber eine Person verwechselt, nach einer unerreichbaren Einheit strebt, die Selbststandigkeit der anderen Person als Bedrohung erlebt oder sich selbst in der Beziehung verliert. Dementgegen rekonstruiert Cavell unter dem Titel "moralischer Perfektionismus" eine philosophische und kunstlerische Tradition, die sich mit der Erfahrung einer unbefriedigenden sozialen und privaten Wirklichkeit auseinandersetzt - wobei das Genre Komodie besondere Beachtung findet. Mit Beitragen von Elisabeth Bronfen, Eike Brock, Lorenz Engell, Josef Fruchtl, David Gern, Michael Hampe, Lars Leeten, Dimitri Liebsch, Maria-Sibylla Lotter, Ludwig Nagl und Jochen Schuff. (shrink)

In den letzten Jahren werden in der westlichen Universitätslandschaft und nun auch in Deutschland zunehmend beunruhigte Stimmen laut, welche die Wissenschaftsfreiheit und eine offene Streitkultur bedroht sehen. Dabei steht neben anderen Bedrohungen zunehmend ein Wertkonflikt im Mittelpunkt, in dem Anliegen emanzipativer und partizipativer Gerechtigkeit sowie des Schutzes vulnerabler Gruppen als Anlass für Einschränkungen der freien Rede und der freien wissenschaftlichen Forschung genommen werden. Der Beitrag führt diesen Wertkonflikt einerseits auf die Akademisierung der Emanzipationsbewegungen, andererseits auf eine Wissenschaftskritik, die Wissenschaft als (...) Machtausübung deutet, sowie die schleichende Ausdehnung von Begrifflichkeiten zurück, die Gewalt, Verletzlichkeiten und unzulässige Formen der Machtausübung bezeichnen. Es wird argumentiert, dass das Anliegen eines Schutzes vulnerabler Gruppen zwar legitim ist, das paternalistische Formen der Wissenschaft als Wiedergutmachung jedoch dem Anliegen einer partizipativen Meinungsfreiheit weniger förderlich sind als eine klassische wissenschaftliche Streitkultur. (shrink)

The moral quality of social coexistence and cooperation depends very much on the terms of mutual respect to which the individuals are entitled. Since this entitlement, by modern philosophy, is considered to derive from our very qualities as human beings, everyone being equally entitled to the same amount of respect, it is widely understood to impose a ban on unequal treatment which we associate with pre-modern cultures. This modern understanding of respect is commonly supposed to be the true moral understanding, (...) in contradistinction to the “merely” social understanding of respect in pre-modern cultures. The article aims to present a different view. In distinction to the tendency of modern philosophers to constrict their investigation of respect to a rather abstract discussion of the terms of equal respect, I discuss certain concrete demands of respect which are essential for social cooperation both in modern and pre-modern cultures, proceeding from the assumption that the entitlement to respect is grounded on the social need for it. On the one hand, I argue that the forms of respect must differ corresponding to the social conceptions of this need. Thus in societies in which the individual is considered an independent, selfsustaining being, respect demands to exercise restraint, whereas in societies entertaining the ideas of mutual dependence, respect demands mutual care. On the other hand, I claim that respect is due not only to the human being stripped of all her distinctive qualities, but also to the social being with respect to her roles, and to the individual considered in all her uniqueness. In short, the real demands of respect cannot be derived from the abstract idea of equality but presuppose an image of humanity, attention to the individual and an understanding of the functioning of social institutions. (shrink)

Im Ausgang von der anf änglichen Frage, welche Formen der Empathie zu den Produktionsbedingungen einer gelingenden Komödie gehören, wird zunächst argumentiert, dass Komik generell ›kulturelle Empathie‹ voraussetzt, d.i. ein Gespür dafür, welche Erwartungen und emotionalen Reaktionen bestimmte Themen und situative Konstellationen auslösen werden. Situationskomik und insbesondere die Komik peinlicher familiärer Situationen werden darauf zurückgeführt, dass wir uns sowohl empathisch in die Gefühle und die Peinlichkeit der Lebenslage der Protagonisten hineinversetzen können als auch gleichzeitig selbst die unbeteiligte Perspektive des Beobachters einnehmen. (...) Anschließend untersucht der Beitrag die Filmkomödie Toni Erdmann als Sonderfall einer Wiederverheiratungskomödie, die selbst eine Reflexion über Empathie darstellt. Es wird gezeigt, dass die Form von Empathie, die der Protagonist im Zusammenhang des für die Wiederverheiratungskomödie charakteristischen Erziehungsprozesses für die Protagonistin Ines aufbringt, nicht als ein Sichhineinversetzen in die wirklichen Gefühle oder die Lebenslage von Ines verstanden werden kann – in dieser Hinsicht erscheint er auf komische Weise empathiefrei. Toni Erdmanns Empathie zielt vielmehr auf ihre das eigene verengte Selbstverständnis transzendierenden Möglichkeiten und somit auf ihre Freiheit. Starting from the initial question which forms of empathy are included in the making of a comedy, it is argued that comedy requires ›cultural emphathy‹, i.e. a clear sense of what expectations and reactions would be triggered among the public by certain topics and performances. The comic effects of slapstick and other forms of situational comedy in association with family configurations are attributed to our capacity to put ourselves into the awkward situations of the protagonists and, at the same time, to adopt the perspective of the uninvolved spectator. Subsequently the film comedy ›Toni Erdmann‹ is examined as a special case of remarriage comedy which represents a reflection upon empathy. It is argued that the protagonist Winfried, in the context of the process of education which is typical for remarriage comedies, does not feel emphathy for the protagonist Ines with regard to her actual feelings and living conditions (on the contrary, some comical effects derive from his refusal of empathy). His emphathy is rather directed towards those of her possibilities and capacities which transcend her actual image of herself; in other words, it is directed towards her freedom. (shrink)

Today, most professional philosophers understand philosophy as the analysis of concepts and ideas. Still, there are two critical philosophical concerns which can, for several reasons, not really be resolved by professional philosophy today. First, a critique of the bifurcation of knowledge which resulted from the increasing specialization of the sciences. Second, a critique of importance, i. e. a contesting of what people, knowingly or unknowingly, take to be important or not. In his impressive «Experience and Nature» John Dewey presents these (...) unresolved concerns as a kind of philosophical manifesto. I argue that, for several reasons, Dewey’s idea of philosophy can hardly be realized, the reason being that his claims for philosophy are both over-ambitious and overmodest. Still, there are various philosophical traditions which, by widely differing methods, emphasize certain aspects of the critical task. These include the revisionary metaphysics of Leibniz and Whitehead, the untimely meditation – as Nietzsche called it –, and the late philosophy of Stanley Cavell. Although these traditions differ widely with regard to their emphasis on construction and deconstruction, they concur in emphasizing the development of new encompassing ways of viewing things and understanding importance. (shrink)

Lockes theory of consciousness as the source of self-identity was meant to account for legal responsibility, too. Thus a person is responsible as far - and only as far - as she is conscious of her deeds. This theory of responsibility, however, is doomed to failure, the reason being that Locke attempted to account not only for legal responsibility but also for our existence after death and our responsibility on the Great Day of Divine Judgement. The result is a conception (...) of responsibility which cannot account for the social roots of legal imputation, because it relies much too exclusively on the perspective of the first person. (shrink)

Der Artikel verteidigt den Wert und die Unverzichtbarkeit der freien Debatte gegen neuere Tendenzen, gewisse kontroverse Beiträge zur öffentlichen Diskussion als Schädigungen vulnerabler Menschen zu delegitimieren. In den Abschnitten 1–2 werden zwei elementare Funktionen der Redefreiheit für eine liberale Demokratie vorgestellt: Erstens ist die Möglichkeit zum gewaltfreien politischen Widerspruch gegen Mehrheitsentscheidungen eine Bedingung ihrer Geltung auch für Andersdenkende. Zweitens ist sie eine notwendige Bedingung für die Erzeugung der politischen Kompetenz, die eine Demokratie am Leben hält und vernünftige politische Entscheidungen ermöglicht. (...) In Abschnitt 3 erläutere ich, welche individuellen und sozialen Schwierigkeiten auftreten, und welche Tugenden daher entwickelt werden müssen, damit sich in einer freien Debatte kollektive Kompetenz entwickeln kann. Ausgehend von der Frage nach den Grenzen der Redefreiheit geht der 4. Abschnitt auf neuere Debatten über Hate Speech ein und hinterfragt deren tendenzielle Gleichsetzung mit physischer Gewalt. Der 5. Abschnitt führt die suggestive Kraft der Rhetorik der Vulnerabilität auf Concept Creep zurück und beschreibt die ideologische Nutzung dieser Rhetorik für die Ziele von Interessengruppen, wodurch reale Macht- und Interessenkonflikte als moralische Fragen ausgegeben werden. (shrink)

Lying in the sense of declaring as true what you believe to be false takes a special position within ethical discourse concerning truthfulness and the virtues and vices of communication. None of the many other ways in which people lack truthfulness is considered nearly as vicious as lying. However, in everyday life our attitude towards lying is far from consistent insofar as we tend to take both an absolutist and a relativist position towards lying. The article shows that our inconsistency (...) derives from several philosophical traditions which have developed widely different concepts and moral attitudes with regard to lying. And with respect to the challenges of present life it is argued that instead of bending all our thoughts on lying, we should rather follow Michel Foucault and Bernard Williams in distinguishing the virtues of veracity we should cultivate in the different areas of modern life. (shrink)

The Special Focus on invitation policy at universities contains a target article by Romy Jaster and Geert Keil, five commentaries, and a response. The question under discussion is what disqualifies a person from being invited to speak at a university. On liberal, Millian approaches, the epistemic benefits of free speech preclude no-platforming policies. More restrictive approaches demand the exclusion of speakers who are considered racist or otherwise hostile against marginalized groups. Jaster and Keil take a virtue-based approach to invitation policy: (...) A person is ineligible as a speaker if she exhibits specific intellectual vices that are detrimental to the pursuit of truth, the university’s raison d’être. The five critics raise various concerns. Birgit Recki deems the virtue-based approach too restrictive: It is prone to exclude some speakers who make intellectually stimulating contributions. Eva von Redecker and Daniel Loick deem the criterion too permissive: It allows for contributions that should have no place on campus. Dieter Schönecker and Maria-Sibylla Lotter object that the approach is silent on all recent actual cases of ‘cancelling’ at universities. In their response, Jaster and Keil address these concerns and clarify their position. (shrink)

Die fünf Kommentare zu unserem Beitrag zeigen, dass wir uns mit unserem tugendbezogenen Kriterium für Vortragseinladungen zwischen alle Stühle gesetzt haben. Birgit Recki hält unser Kriterium für zu eng: Es schließe Personen aus, die erkenntnisbefördernde Beiträge leisten. Eva von Redecker und Daniel Loick halten unser Kriterium für zu weit: Es lasse bestimmte Formen von Rassismus zu, die an der Universität keinen Platz haben sollten. Dieter Schönecker und Maria-Sibylla Lotter sind der Meinung, wir argumentierten an den tatsächlich strittigen (...) Fällen vorbei. (shrink)

In this chapter the explanatory value of four conceptions of human dignity to account for two seemingly contradictory intuitions is tested. One is that many people think poverty violates the humanity of poor people. The other intuition is that poor people often act with remarkable dignity despite their trying circumstances. First Immanuel Kant’s influential view on human dignity that claims it is grounded in humans’ capability to make moral judgments is examined. Next, Martha Nussbaum’s theory of the capability approach is (...) tested, which is hugely influential across many academic disciplines and in the world of economic development. Thereafter, two related, though distinctly different African theories of human dignity, as offered by Thaddeus Metz and Polycarp Ikuenobe are assessed. Both base their theories on the core capacity of humans to engage in harmonious relationships within communities. Last, it is investigated the theory that Avishai Margalit provides of honour and humiliation as concepts that illuminate the value and risks for humans’ possession of dignity. His theory is linked to aspects of the recognition theory of Axel Honneth. In the end, it is concluded that these theories either cannot fully, or adequately, explain the complex relationship between poverty and human dignity. (shrink)

Policymakers and institutions have developed an increasing interest in applying principles from cognitive science to encourage individuals to adopt behaviors, attitudes and perspectives that enable them to reach higher levels of personal and collective well-being. We focused on the value of nudging people to adopt a broader farsighted view when making their day-to-day decisions, overcoming the temporal discounting bias which leads them to prefer smaller immediate gains to larger future rewards. Following recent advances in the literature, we tried to mitigate (...) this myopia promoting the connection that individuals feel between their present and future selves through a nudge which capitalizes on their natural tendency to illusory superiority. We defined and tested a paradigm to exploit persuasively this optimistic bias to mitigate temporal discounting through the mediation of an increased future self-continuity. Implications for well-being and public policies are discussed. (shrink)

Human nature has always been a foundational issue for philosophy. What does it mean to have a human nature? Is the concept the relic of a bygone age? What is the use of such a concept? What are the epistemic and ontological commitments people make when they use the concept? In What’s Left of Human Nature? Maria Kronfeldner offers a philosophical account of human nature that defends the concept against contemporary criticism. In particular, she takes on challenges related to (...) social misuse of the concept that dehumanizes those regarded as lacking human nature (the dehumanization challenge); the conflict between Darwinian thinking and essentialist concepts of human nature (the Darwinian challenge); and the consensus that evolution, heredity, and ontogenetic development results from nurture and nature. After answering each of these challenges, Kronfeldner presents a revisionist account of human nature that minimizes dehumanization and does not fall back on outdated biological ideas. Her account is post-essentialist because it eliminates the concept of an essence of being human; pluralist in that it argues that there are different things in the world that correspond to three different post-essentialist concepts of human nature; and interactive because it understands nature and nurture as interacting at the developmental, epigenetic, and evolutionary levels. On the basis of this, she introduces a dialectical concept of an ever-changing and “looping” human nature. Finally, noting the essentially contested character of the concept and the ambiguity and redundancy of the terminology, she wonders if we should simply eliminate the term “human nature” altogether. (shrink)

This paper revisits Donnellan’s distinction between referential and attributive uses of definite descriptions and argues that it is not exhaustive. Donnellan characterizes the distinction in terms of two criteria: the speaker’s intentions and the type of content the speaker aims to express. I argue that contrary to the common view, these two criteria are independent and that the distinctive features may be coinstantiated in more than two ways. This leaves room for nonattributive and nonreferential uses of definite descriptions. Kripke’s notions (...) of general and specific intentions provide a framework that accommodates such cases. Additionally, it proves useful for the analysis of the use of proper names with specific nonsingular intentions. The paper also discusses how the interpretation of the use of definite descriptions as attributive or referential (or neither) is sensitive to which theory of singular thoughts one adopts. (shrink)

"Dr. Montessori was par excellence the great interpreter of the child; and though she herself has passed on from the scene of her labours her work will still go on."-- Westminster Cathedral Chronicle One of the landmark books in the history of education--and one of the least expensive editions now available--this volume describes a new system for educating youngsters. Based on a radical concept of liberty for the pupil and highly formal training of separate sensory, motor, and mental capacities, the (...) system enabled youngsters to master reading, writing, and arithmetic rapidly and substantially. Included are discussions of scientific pedagogy; discipline; the importance of proper diet, gymnastics, and manual labor; and many other topics. Unabridged reprint of the classic 1912 edition. (shrink)

Wenn es um „den Kapitalismus“ geht, regieren schnell die Gefühle. Die Philosophen Sabine Döring und Lars Neth appellieren an die Vernunft. -/- Interview: Wolf Lotter.

This paper reflects on the notion and structural components of two concepts: the human condition and human nature. Likewise, it is proposed that both concepts should be included in the basic themes not only in the field of Educational Philosophy, but also in all disciplines where the human being occupies a privileged place. Human condition is understood as a state of subjection to everything with which human beings interact and represents the starting point to ascend to three natures that correspond (...) to human beings. Hegel emphasizes two natures of man. The first is characterized by having a biological structure governed by instincts. The second is culture and to ascend to it requires processes of intellection that can be objectified through consciousness. The third human nature proposed in this paper is rooted in Ernst Bloch’s principle of hope. It is materialized by human actions tending to the construction of the future from the discovery of what is not-yet-conscious that, when identified, is achieved through actions. (shrink)

This paper addresses whether the often-bemoaned loss of unity of knowledge about humans, which results from the disciplinary fragmentation of science, is something to be overcome. The fragmentation of being human rests on a couple of distinctions, such as the nature-culture divide. Since antiquity the distinction between nature (roughly, what we inherit biologically) and culture (roughly, what is acquired by social interaction) has been a commonplace in science and society. Recently, the nature/culture divide has come under attack in various ways, (...) in philosophy as well as in cultural anthropology. Regarding the latter, for instance, the divide was quintessential in its beginnings as an academic dis-cipline, when Alfred L. Kroeber, one of the first professional anthropologists in the US, rallied for (what I call) the right to ignore—in his case, human nature—by adopting a separationist epistemic stance. A separationist stance will be understood as an epistemic research heuristic that defends the right to ignore a specif-ic phenomenon (e.g., human nature) or a specific causal factor in an explanation typical for a disciplinary field. I will use Kroeber’s case as an example for making a general point against a bias towards integration (synthesis bias, as I call it) that is exemplified, for instance, by defenders of evolutionary psychology. I will claim that, in principle, a separationist stance is as good as an integrationist stance since both can be equally fruitful. With this argument from fruitful sepa-ration in place, not just the separationist stance but also the nature/culture di-vide can be defended against its critics. (shrink)