A lengthy critique of Kant's apriorism precedes discussions on the ethical principles of eudaemonism, utilitarianism, pragmatism, and positivism.

The central theme is a hitherto unknown explanation of the “temporality” of the person as proposed by the late Max Scheler. The first part deals with the meaning of “absolute time” in general. The second part shows how the temporality of the person is to be seen as “absolute” time on the basis of two opposing principles in man: the “life-center” or impulsion, and “mind” which, without the former, remains powerless, but conjoined with it “become” personal in absolute time.

Evil is a noticeably absent concept in modern and contemporary literature. The author protrays Scheler’s approach to the question of evil as that which has existence only in or on the substrate of person. Furthermore, this “dis-value” of evil, like the person, is a phenomeon of temporality.

Es sei an dieser Stelle Frau Maria Scheler für die von ihr er­ laubten Einblicke in den Nachlass ihres Mannes gedankt, ins­ besondere für die langen und eingehenden Gespräche, die mir für die Erkenntnis der wahren Intentionen Max Schelers unerlässlich gewesen sind. Ich danke nochmals Herrn Professor Dr. Martin Heidegger für die wertvollen Hinsweise bezüglich Max Schelers Aufnahme von Sein und Zeit. Für einige Berichtigungen in der deutschen Ausdrucksweise, die dem Verfasser durch seine langjährige Tätigkeit in Amerika einerseits, und durch (...) den deutschen Sprachgebrauch Max Schelers und Martin Heideggers andererseits, erschwert wurde, danke ich Herrn Professor Dr. Wilhelm Dupre, De Paul University, Chicago, und Frau Dr. Ingeborg Schüssler von der Universität Köln. Für einige technische Hilfe danke ich Herrn Professor Dr. Henry J. Koren, St. Leo College, Florida, und Herrn Professor Dr. K. H. Volkmann-Schluck, Universität Köln. Chicago, im Februar rg6g M.S.F. EINLEITUNG Das Nichtgesagte eines Fragmentes gehört zu dem, was es sagt. Zu dem, was das Fragment Sein und Zeit (SZ) sagt, gehört das Offenbleiben einer Reihe von Fragen. Eine dieser Fragen lautet: "Was besagt ontologisch Wert"? Auf dem Boden der materialen Wertethik versteht sich diese Frage als eine nach der sittlichen Seinsweise der Person. Dies nicht nur, weil die Person ein aus­ gezeichneter Träger von bestimmten Wertarten ist, sondern weil zum Menschen überhaupt - gleich wie man ihn ontologisch freilegt - personales Wertsein gehört. Jede Ontologie vom Menschen muss deshalb dem Personsein und seiner sittlichen Seinsart Rechnung tragen. (shrink)

Luther, A. R. The articulated unity of being in Scheler's phenomenology : basic drive and spirit.--Funk, R. L. Thought, values, and action.--Emad, P. Person, death, and world.--Smith, F. J. Peace and pacifism.--Scheler, M. Metaphysics and art.--Scheler, M. The meaning of suffering.

The anchor of CBS evening news collects the best life tips from a host of accomplished leaders, thinkers, artists and more, including Chelsea Handler, Malcolm Gladwell, Mario Batali, Colin Powell, Ken Burns, Barbara Walters, Beyoncé, Google's Eric Schmidt, Mike Bloomberg and many more.

This book is designed to fill a long-standing gap in the general literature of 20th century philosophy in that it offers a comprehensive view of the philosophy of Max Scheler (1874-1928) and opens up substantial discussions that have hitherto been largely overlooked. The book is solely based on the original texts of the German Collected Edition as well as posthumous and untranslated materials. References to English translations have been made whenever available. -- from back cover.

I offer an analysis of the notion of violence one of whose consequences may be that violence might be moral under some circumstances.

It will be recalled that Mr. Mattick stated that Marxism does not derive its social theory from physical theory, and that any attempt to do so is an aberration from marxism. It is maintained that Marx is not a determinist or indeterminist in the ususal sense of these terms. Furthermore, it was argued that ideologies are no longer decisive weapons and that Marxists put little trust in the dialectical course of history.

Evil is a noticeably absent concept in modern and contemporary literature. The author protrays Scheler’s approach to the question of evil as that which has existence only in or on the substrate of person. Furthermore, this “dis-value” of evil, like the person, is a phenomeon of temporality.

I offer an analysis of the notion of violence one of whose consequences may be that violence might be moral under some circumstances.

There is little more than a decade left before the bells allover the world will be ringing in the first hour of the twenty-first century, which will surely be an era of highly advanced technology. Looking back on the century that we live in, one can realize that generations of people who have already lived in it for the better parts of their lives have begun to ask the same question that also every individual person thinks about when he is (...) faced with the first signs of the end of his life. It is the question: "Why did everything in my life happen the way it did?" Or, "It would have been so easy to have channelled events into directions other than the way they went. " Or, "Why, in all the world, is my life coming to an end as it does, or, why must all of us face this kind of end of our century?" Whenever human beings take retrospective views of their lives and times - when they are faced with their own personal "fin du siecle" - there appears to be an increasing anxiety throughout the masses asso ciated with a somber feeling of pessimism, which may even be mixed with a slight degree of fatalism. There is quite another feeling with those persons who were born late in this century and who did not share all the events the older generation experi enced. (shrink)