_In Defense of Anarchism_ is a 1970 book by the philosopher Robert Paul Wolff, in which the author defends individualist anarchism. He argues that individual autonomy and state authority are mutually exclusive and that, as individual autonomy is inalienable, the moral legitimacy of the state collapses.
First published in 1962. Kant’s philosophical works, and especially the _Critique of Pure Reason_, have had some influence on recent British philosophy. But the complexities of Kant’s arguments, and the unfamiliarity of his vocabulary, inhibit understanding of his point of view. In _Kant’s Theory of Knowledge _an attempt is made to relate Kant’s arguments in the _Critique of Pure Reason _to contemporary issues by expressing them in a more modern idiom. The selection of issues discussed is intended to present a (...) continuous argument, of an epistemological kind, which runs centrally through the _Critique_. The argument deals with essentially with the problems, raised in the Transcendental Analytic, about the status of categories. It deals with certain preliminary assumptions made in setting these problems, and discusses the way in which the various sections of the Analytic contribute to their solution. It also deals with Kant’s criticisms of traditional metaphysics, and ends with an account of his effort in the Third Antinomy to resolve the conflict between freedom and causality, and so to effect a transition of knowledge to moral philosophy. (shrink)
What is philosophy? -- Theory of knowledge -- Metaphysics and philosophy of mind -- Philosophy of science -- Ethical theory -- Social and political philosophy -- Philosophy of art -- Philosophy of religion.
Karl Marx's great work, Capital, has intrigued and puzzled readers for more than a century by its mystifyingly intricate arguments and dramatic literary embellishments. In this book, Robert Paul Wolff dispels much of the mystery surrounding Capital by providing a literary-philosophical analysis of the text and of Marx's intentions. Writing in a lively, often satirical, sometimes comical style that echoes Marx's own use of language Wolff shows that Marx was at the very same time and in the very same texts (...) a brilliant theoretical economist and a powerfully imaginative writer and that he deliberately forged an ironic voice in Capital in order to better communicate his theoretical arguments. (shrink)
The question 'Why should I obey the law?' introduces a contemporary puzzle that is as old as philosophy itself. The puzzle is especially troublesome if we think of cases in which breaking the law is not otherwise wrongful, and in which the chances of getting caught are negligible. Philosophers from Socrates to H.L.A. Hart have struggled to give reasoned support to the idea that we do have a general moral duty to obey the law but, more recently, the greater number (...) of learned voices has expressed doubt that there is any such duty, at least as traditionally conceived. (shrink)
In Neutrality and the Academic Ethic, distinguished philosopher Robert L. Simon explores the claim that universities can and should be politically neutral. He examines conceptual questions about the meaning of neutrality, distinguishes different conceptions of what neutrality involves, and considers in what sense, if any, institutional neutrality is both possible and desirable. In Part II, a collection of original and previously published essays provides different views on these and related issues.
In recent years, philosophers trained in the techniques and constrained by the style of what is known in the Anglo-American world as ‘analytic philosophy’ have in growing numbers undertaken to include within their methodological ambit the theories and insights of Karl Marx.
Page generated Sat Jul 31 10:14:29 2021 on philpapers-web-65948fd446-659hb
cache stats: hit=22998, miss=20529, save= autohandler : 1290 ms called component : 1269 ms search.pl : 1124 ms render loop : 1116 ms next : 557 ms addfields : 509 ms publicCats : 406 ms quotes : 90 ms save cache object : 87 ms menu : 84 ms retrieve cache object : 67 ms search_quotes : 49 ms autosense : 44 ms match_cats : 39 ms prepCit : 27 ms initIterator : 6 ms applytpl : 6 ms match_other : 2 ms match_authors : 1 ms intermediate : 1 ms init renderer : 0 ms setup : 0 ms auth : 0 ms writelog : 0 ms