Einleitung 1. KULTURPOLITISCHE IMPULSE IN RESTAURATIVER ZEIT. Hermann Lübbe. Deutscher Idealismus als Philosophie Preußischer Kulturpolitik - Walter Jaeschke. Politik, Kultur und Philosophie in Preußen - Kurt Rainer Meist. Zur Rolle der Geschichte in Hegels System der Philosophie - Karlheinz Stierle. Zwei Hauptstädte des Wissens; Paris und Berlin 2. KUNSTTHEORIE UND ÄSTHETIK IN BERLIN. Beat Wyss. Klassizismus und Geschichtsphilosophie im Konflikt. Aloys Hirt und Hegel - Gunter Scholtz. Schleiermachers Theorie der modernen Kultur mit vergleichendem Blick auf Hegel - Frank (...) Jolles. August Wilhelm Schlegel und Berlin: Sein Weg von den Berliner Vorlesungen von 1801-04 zu denen vom Jahre 1827 - Frithjof Rodi. Die Romantiker in der Sicht Hegels, Hayms und Diltheys - Wolfhart Henckmann. Solger und die Berliner Kunstszene - Annemarie Gethmann-Siefert. H. G. Hotho: Kunst als Bildungserlebnis und Kunsthistorie in systematischer Absicht, oder die entpolitisierte Version der ästhetischen Erziehung des Menschen - Gregor Stemmrich. C. Schnaase; Rezeption und Transformation Berlinischen Geistes in der kunsthistorischen Forschung 3. AKTUALITÄT DES LITERARISCHEN UND KÜNSTLERISCHEN ERBES - Hellmut Flashar. Die Entdeckung der griechischen Tragödie für die Deutsche Bühne - Siegfried Grosse. Die Rezeption des Nibelungenliedes im 19. Jahrhundert - Carl Dahlhaus. Hegel und die Musik seiner Zeit - Otto Pöggeler. Der Philosoph und der Maler. Hegel und Christian Xeller - Barbara Stemmrich-Köhler. Die Rezeption von Goethes West-östlichem Divan im Umkreis Hegels. (shrink)
Eva Buddeberg: Verantwortung im Diskurs: Grundlinien einer rekonstruktiv-hermeneutischen Konzeption moralischer Verantwortung im Anschluss an Hans Jonas, Karl-Otto Apel und Emmanuel Lévinas Content Type Journal Article Pages 1-2 DOI 10.1007/s10677-012-9366-3 Authors Norbert Anwander, Humboldt-Universität zu Berlin, Institut für Philosophie, Unter den Linden 6, 10099 Berlin, Germany Journal Ethical Theory and Moral Practice Online ISSN 1572-8447 Print ISSN 1386-2820.
Die Gedanken des folgenden Vortrags wurden erstmals am 11. November 1981 im Otto-Braun-Saal der Staatsbibliothek Preu6ischer Kulturbesitz in Berlin vorge tragen. Mit diesem Vortrag wurde eine Ausstellung eroffnet, in der die Staatsbiblio thek Preu6ischer Kulturbesitz Berlin zusammen mit dem Goethe-Museum Dussel dorf und dem Hegel-Archiv der Ruhr-Universitat Bochum im Rahmen des sog. "Preu6en-Jahres" des 150. Todes 1 tages Hegels gedachte. Der Vortrag wurde in erweiterter und veranderter Form in der Rheinisch-Westfalischen Akademie der Wissenschaften am 20. Januar 1982 (...) gehalten - am Tage der Eroffnung der genannten Ausstellung im Goethe-Museum Dusseldorf. An der Diskussion beteiligten sich die Herren Walter Biemel, Heinz Gollwitzer, Walter Hinck, Georg Kauffmann, Clemens Menze, Detlef Muller, Klaus Wolfgang Niemoller, Ernst Vollrath. Die Diskussionsbeitrage brachten wichtige Prazisierungen, die ich aufzunehmen suche; zum Teil fuhrten die Erorte rungen aber auch zu F ragestellungen, deren Themen uber den Vortrag weit hinaus gehen und der Ausarbeitung bedurfen - zur Frage nach dem Verhaltnis zwischen Hegel und dem Kunsthistoriker Rumohr, nach der Wirkung Wilhelms von Hum boldt und der Hegelianer auf padagogischem Feld, nach dem Verhaltnis zwischen Preu6en und dem Reich im spateren 19. Jahrhundert, nach den kulturpolitischen Bemuhungen von heute. Ich habe zuerst versucht, diesen Vortrag weiter auszuarbeiten, dabei genaue Belege fur das Dargestellte zu geben und auch die vorliegende Literatur aufzuarbei ten. Diesen Versuch habe ich schlie61ich aufgegeben. (shrink)
Vorwort - Einleitung: Welt und Wirkung von Hegels Ästhetik I. KUNSTIDEAL UND KULTURPOLITIK. Otto Pöggeler. System und Geschichte der Künste bei Hegel - Helmut Schneider. Aus der Ästhetikvorlesung Hegels 1820/1821 - Lucia Sziborsky. Schelling und die Münchener Akademie der bildenden Künste. Zur Rolle der Kunst im Staat - Annemarie Gethmann-Siefert. Die Rolle der Kunst im Staat. Kontroverses zwischen Hegel und den Hegelianern II. DIE BILDENDEN KÜNSTE UND DIE HISTORIE. Heinrich Dilly. Hegel und Schinkel - Werner Busch. Wilhelm von Kaulbach (...) -peintre-philosophe und modern painter. Zu Kaulbachs Weltgeschichtszyklus im Berliner Neuen Museum - Gregor Stemmrich/Annemarie Gethmann-Siefert. Hegels Kügelgen-Rezension und die Auseinandersetzung um den eigentlichen historischen Stil in der Malerei - Wolfgang Beyrodt. Ansichten vom Niederrhein. Zum Verhältnis von Carl Schnaases Niederländischen Briefen zu Georg Forster III. MUSIK UND POESIE. Konrad Schüttauf. Melos und Drama. Hegels Begriff der Oper - Jürgen Söring. Hegel und die Romantheorie R. Wagners IV. POESIE UND WELTKULTUR. Hans-Georg Gadamer. Die Stellung der Poesie im System der Hegelschen Ästhetik und die Frage des Vergangenheitscharakters der Kunst - Dieter Bremer. Hegel und Aischylos - Clemens Menze. Das indische Altertum in der Sicht Wilhelm von Humboldts und Hegels - Barbara Stemmrich-Köhler/Annemarie Gethmann-Siefert. Von Hammer, Goethe und Hegel über Firdausi. Literaturkritik. Geschichtsbild und kulturpolitische Implikation der Ästhetik - Karlheinz Stierle. Malerei und Literatur der italienischen Renaissance in Hegels Ästhetik - Ursula Rautenberg. Ein Hegelianer unter Germanisten. Karl Rosenkranz' mediaevistische Studien. (shrink)
Jacoby's exceptionally well written essay is a study of psychoanalysis and political engagement. The central figure in his research is Otto Fenichel (1897-1946) and a circle of friends who first clustered around him in Berlin, who were then dispersed by the rise of Fascism and the coming of WWII. Several in the circle arrived in America. These seven colleagues (Annie Reich, Edith Jacobson, Kate Friedlander, Georg Gero, Barbara Lantos, Edith Gyomroi, and possibly Berta Bornstein) shared a number of (...) things in common besides the cohort experience of being born around 1900; they represented the second generation of European psychoanalysis. (shrink)
Ever since the first meeting of the proponents of the emerging Logical Empiricism in 1923, there existed philosophical differences as well as personal rivalries between the groups in Berlin and Vienna, headed by Hans Reichenbach and Moritz Schlick, respectively. Early theoretical tensions between Schlick and Reichenbach were caused by Reichenbach's (neo) Kantian roots (esp. his version of the relativized a priori), who himself regarded the Vienna Circle as a sort of anti-realist "positivist school"—as he described it in his Experience (...) and Prediction (1938). One result of this divergence was Schlick's preference of Carnap over Reichenbach for a position at the University of Vienna (in 1926), and his decision not to serve as a co-editor with Reichenbach for the journal Erkenntnis that they jointly established in 1930 (which was then co-edited by Carnap and Reichenbach from 1930 to 1938). A second split rooted in different views on induction and probability, which culminated in the Hans Reichenbach's refusal to serve as an invited author on probability within the International Encyclopedia of Unified Science series ed. by Rudolf Carnap, Charles Morris and Otto Neurath from 1938 onwards. In this regard it is remarkable that also Richard von Mises, who was the second leading figure of Logical Empiricism in Turkish exile, criticized the theory of probability put forward by his former Berlin colleague. In this paper I analyse this controversial exchange, drawing on the relevant correspondence and asking whether these (meta) philosophical differences were a typical feature of the pluralism inherent in Logical Empiricism in general. (shrink)
Ever since the first meeting of the proponents of the emerging Logical Empiricism in 1923, there existed philosophical differences as well as personal rivalries between the groups in Berlin and Vienna, headed by Hans Reichenbach and Moritz Schlick, respectively. Early theoretical tensions between Schlick and Reichenbach were caused by Reichenbach’s Kantian roots, who himself regarded the Vienna Circle as a sort of anti-realist “positivist school”—as he described it in his Experience and Prediction. One result of this divergence was Schlick’s (...) preference of Carnap over Reichenbach for a position at the University of Vienna, and his decision not to serve as a co-editor with Reichenbach for the journal Erkenntnis that they jointly established in 1930. A second split rooted in different views on induction and probability, which culminated in the Hans Reichenbach’s refusal to serve as an invited author on probability within the International Encyclopedia of Unified Science series ed. by Rudolf Carnap, Charles Morris and Otto Neurath from 1938 onwards. In this regard it is remarkable that also Richard von Mises, who was the second leading figure of Logical Empiricism in Turkish exile, criticized the theory of probability put forward by his former Berlin colleague. In this paper I analyse this controversial exchange, drawing on the relevant correspondence and asking whether these philosophical differences were a typical feature of the pluralism inherent in Logical Empiricism in general. (shrink)
Um den geschichtlich maßgebenden Horizont zu streifen, in den das zu besprechende Buch von Stenzel gehört, sollten zunächst Paul Natorps „Platos Ideenlehre“ und Nicolai Hartmanns „Platos Logik des Seins“ als die einfluss¬reichsten neukantianischen Platoarbeiten jener Zeit erwähnt werden. Zur selben Zeit wird das Mathematische bei Platon durch Beiträge von Otto Toeplitz und Oskar Becker sehr stark in den Vordergrund gerückt und ertragreich ausgearbeitet. In diesem geistigen Klima der 1930er Jahre, werden die um drei Aufsätze erweiterten Studien Stenzels veröffentlicht.
A new direction in philosophy Between 1920 and 1940 logical empiricism reset the direction of philosophy of science and much of the rest of Anglo-American philosophy. It began as a relatively organized movement centered on the Vienna Circle, and like-minded philosophers elsewhere, especially in Berlin. As Europe drifted into the Nazi era, several important figures, especially Carnap and Neurath, also found common ground in their liberal politics and radical social agenda. Together, the logical empiricists set out to reform traditional (...) philosophy with a new set of doctrines more firmly grounded in logic and science. Criticism and decline Because of Nazi persecution, most of the European adherents of logical empiricism moved to the United States in the late 1930s. During the 1940s, many of their most cherished tenets became targets of criticism from outsiders as well as from within their own ranks. Philosophers of science in the late 1950s and 1960s rejected logical empiricism and, starting in the 1970s, presented such alternative programs such as scientific realism with evolutionary epistemology. A resurgence of interest During the early 1980s, philosophers and historians of philosophy began to study logical empiricism as an important movement. Unlike their predecessors in the 1960s-for whom the debate over logical empiricism now seems to have been largely motivated by professional politics-these philosopher no longer have to take positions for or against logical empiricism. The result has been a more balanced view of that movement, its achievements, its failures, and its influence. Hard-to-find core writings now available This collection makes available a selection of the most influential and representative writings of the logical empiricists, important contemporary criticisms of their doctrines, their responses, as well as the recent reappraisals. Introductions to each volume examine the articles in historical context and provide importantbackground information that is vital to a full understanding of the issues discussed. They outline prevalent trends, identifying leading figures and summarize their positions and reasoning, as well as those of opposing thinkers. (shrink)
The aim of this article is to elucidate on the role of Georg Kopp, the Bishop of Fulda and later the Bishop of Wrocław, in ending the Kulturkampf, which was the conflict between the German government and the Holy See. The source material is drawn from the German Bishops’ Conferences files, the transcripts of the Sessions of the House of Lords of Prussia and the evaluation materials of Bishop Kopp by his contemporaries. The West German historians dealt with the subject (...) of Kulturkampf after 1945. Also, Polish historians, including Jerzy Krasuski, discussed the issue in the light of its influence on the Polish territories. Despite Hans-Georg Aschoff’ biography, Bishop Kopp’s role in the Kulturkampf has not been sufficiently present, especially in Polish historiography. This article aims to fill that gap. General conclusions were formulated based on the source analysis and the literature on the subject. At the end of the 1870s, Otto von Bismarck, the German Chancellor, decided to put an end to the conflict with the Church. The negotiations on lifting the anti-Church Kulturkampf legislation occurred through the diplomatic channels between the government in Berlin and the Roman Curia. In 1882, there was a conflict in the Prussian bishopric because Georg Kopp turned out to be a supporter of concessions to the government. After this experience, he became involved in the negotiations in Rome. In 1880, 1882 and 1883, the so-called “mitigating laws” were passed to end the Kulturkampf policy. After the third law had been passed, there was an impasse in the relations between Berlin and the Holy See, as a result of which both sides had to make concessions. Kopp continued his diplomatic mission without the knowledge of other bishops and politicians from the Centre Party. However, his attempt to negotiate in the House of Lords was unsuccessful. The initiative was then taken over by Otto von Bismarck and due to his efforts the so-called First Peace Act was passed in May 1886. Some bishops criticized Bishop Kopp for his involvement. Yet, under the pressure from the Pope, the Center Party supported the Bismarck project. Thanks to Kopp’s efforts, who took responsibility for the decisions unpopular in the Church circles, Bismarck managed to end up the Kulturkampf policy. (shrink)
The Viennese-born polymath Otto Neurath died on 22 December 1945 in Oxford, a few months after the end of World War Two. A social engineer and sociologist of happiness, Neurath was not only a socially sensitive educator, advocating for any institute and organization that was concerned with the well-being of people; he was also a trained scientist and philosopher. Studying mathematics, economics, history, philosophy, and physics in Vienna and then in Berlin during the early years of the long (...) twentieth century, Neurath became involved in many of the disputes among social and natural scientists that shaped the course of the fields. This short introduction provides the context and describes the aims of the volume. Short summaries of the chapters are also included. (shrink)
Do the terms “logical positivism” and “logical empiricism” mark a philosophically real and significant distinction? There is, of course, no doubt that the first term designates the group of philosophers known as the Vienna Circle, headed by Moritz Schlick and including Rudolf Carnap, Herbert Feigl, Philipp Frank, Hans Hahn, Otto Neurath, Friedrich Waismann and others. What is debatable, however, is whether the name “logical positivism” correctly distinguishes their doctrines from related ones called “logical empiricism” that emerged from the (...) class='Hi'>Berlin Society for Scientific Philosophy around Hans Reichenbach which included Walter Dubislav, Kurt Grelling, Kurt Lewin and a young Carl Gustav Hempel.1 The .. (shrink)
Scientific Philosophy: Origins and Development is the first Yearbook of the Vienna Circle Institute, which was founded in October 1991. The book contains original contributions to an international symposium which was the first public event to be organised by the Institute: `Vienna--Berlin--Prague: The Rise of Scientific Philosophy: The Centenaries of Rudolf Carnap, Hans Reichenbach and Edgar Zilsel.' The first section of the book - `Scientific Philosophy - Origins and Developments' reveals the extent of scientific communication in the inter-War years (...) between these great metropolitan centres, as well as presenting systematic investigations into the relevance of the heritage of the Vienna Circle to contemporary research and philosophy. This section offers a new paradigm for scientific philosophy, one which contrasts with the historiographical received view of logical empiricism. Support for this re-evaluation is offered in the second section, which contains, for the first time in English translation, Gustav Bergmann's recollections of the Vienna Circle, and an historical study of political economist Wilhelm Neurath, Otto Neurath's father. The third section gives a report on current computer-based research which documents the relevance of Otto Neurath's `Vienna method of pictorial statistics', or `Isotypes'. A review section describes new publications on Neurath and the Vienna Circle, as well anthologies relevant to Viennese philosophy and its history, setting them in their wider cultural and political perspective. Finally, a description is given of the Vienna Circle Institute and its activities since its foundation, as well as of its plans for the future. (shrink)
