Wilhelm Dilthey in WrocławThe article above discusses 11 years of Wilhelm Dilthey’s creative presence in Wrocław, a philosopher whose contribution to the European culture has been never questioned. Dilthey was appointed to the University of Wrocław in March 1871. Same year in October, he moved to Wrocław, took over the department of philosophy from Christlieb Julius Braniβ and started academic lectures in autumn. Acclimatizing in the Silesian capital was dif ficult for the philosopher, in his letters he complained about the (...) climate and provinciality of the city. It has changed over time, so that Dilthey finally adjusted to the environment. It happened because of numerous connections with the people from the university, among others with Graf Yorck von Wartenburg, but not only. In Dilthey’s biography, years in Wrocław were extremely prolific. In Wrocław Dilthey matured to the work of his life: Introduction to the Human Sciences, called in the subject literature the “crowning of the period in Wrocław”. He presented the concept of his work in a letter, among others, to Theodor Althof f, an of ficial from the Prussian Ministry of Culture. The preserved sketch of the letter is interesting because of its concept, but also because it shows a certain dependence of onetime philosophers on the state system. The article above contains an annex—a translation of this letter into Polish. Dilthey was a lecturer at the University of Wrocław until the end of the summer semester in 1882, after that he was appointed to Berlin in July 1882. (shrink)
Theodor W. Adorno's innovative understanding of nature and the historical constitutes the core of the two contributions that follow. This chapter illuminates the understanding of nature in Adorno by excavating the manifold relations between him and Georg Wilhelm Friedrich Hegel's concepts of nature. The chapter's argument in this essay concerns Adorno's surprising critique of Negative Dialectics, surprising because for a brief interval Adorno appears to side with nature against Hegel. This is not precisely the move one might have expected (...) of Adorno, for whom nature ought to have been aligned with the material and experimental culture of knowledge that he, like Hegel, opposed to the work of what Hegel called Spirit and the work of dialectic. However, Adorno charges Hegel with a “rage against nature,” and, in the course of a long section of Negative Dialectics, he makes that charge stick. (shrink)
The article analyses the history of the Einfühlung concept. Theories of ‘feeling into’ Nature, works of art or feelings and behaviours of other persons by German philosophers of the second half of the nineteenth century Robert and Friedrich Vischer and Theodor Lipps are evoked, as well as similar theory of understanding (Verstehen) by Wilhelm Dilthey and Friedrich Schleiermacher, to which Dilthey refers. The meaning of the term Einfühlung within Edith Stein’s thought is also analysed. Both Einfühlung and Verstehen were (...) criticized as non-objective and naive methods consisting only in the identification of the subject with the object or the projection of feelings onto the object. The article refers to criticism by Georg Gadamer and Bertolt Brecht and proposes ways to restitute the concept of Einfühlung after this criticism, recalling the theory of empathy by Dominick Lacapra, in terms of its advantages for the historical enquiry, or the myth of Narcissus analyzed in the spirit of psychoanalysis by Julia Kristeva. The article proposes a reformulation of the concept of mimesis, connected to the Einfühlung, understood as the identification, analogy, imitation of feelings (as it was described by Lipss and Vischer). Mimesis does not necessarily mean a passive repetition and reconstruction of the feelings of the object, but serves only as a starting point for the interest of the subject for the outside world or for experiences of historical protagonists. Then there is no identification or projection of feelings, but the creative, active and critical reformulation of knowledge. It is stated that empathy is not a passive, uncritical process, but that it deals with the critical choice of the object of empathy and with an active approach to the perceived feelings and appearances. In addition to this cognitive aspect, empathy may also contribute to the analytical and valuable introspection. Furthermore empathy allows us to connect the analysis of the facts with a personal narrative and understanding of individual identity in historical knowledge. (shrink)
The historical techniques of theodor gomperz, Friedrich jodl, Wilhelm jerusalem, And rudolf eisler are described. All four excelled at expositing and comparing widely divergent doctrines. Gomperz and jerusalem discussed how social practices influenced doctrines. Eisler was perhaps the most encyclopedic historian of philosophy ever. Johnston's book "the austrian mind" (berkeley, 1971) relates the four philosophers to seventy other austrian thinkers.
The article analyzes Petro Kudriavtsev’s historical philosophical conception in the context of basic tendencies and reference points of development of historical philosophical science in Europe in 19th – the beginning of 20th cent. For this purpose, the place and significance of reception of European philosophy in the P. Kudriavtsev’s historic philosophical works are identified. Furthermore, the article discusses the complex of philosophical and historical ideas that appeared to be productive for development of Kudriavtsev’s original historical philosophical conception. The latter is (...) proved to be formulated in the process of deep creative interpretation of European historical philosophical studies achievements (Hegel, Wilhelm Windelband, Kuno Fisсher), such as ethics and philosophical constructions of the European thought (Kant, Theodor Lipps, Friedrih Paulsen, Joseph Petzold, Ernst Mach, Herbert Spencer, Auguste Comte). The author finds out the particularity of the P. Kudriavtsev’s original approach to understanding of historical philosophical process, based on comprehension of rationalism and empiricism (positivism), two opposite models of historical philosophical knowledge. Besides, the author argues for the similarity in approach to the history of philosophy between P. Kudriavtsev and the representatives of historical-philosophical tradition after Hegel (Wilhelm Windelband, Kuno Fisсher). Reconstruction of P. Kudriavtsev’s historical philosophical conception allows the author to conclude, on the one hand, that conception reflected one of the central problems in Western European philosophy on the edge of 19 th – 20 th centuries – the problem of values. On the other hand, the conception was aimed to oppose the relativistic and nihilistic tendencies, which dominated in Modern European philosophy. (shrink)
1. Bosanquet, who relished paradox, does not disappoint us about history. The late nineteenth century was a golden age of historical inquiry. Historians — Ernst Curtius, J.G. Droysen, Theodor Mommsen in Germany, William Stubbs, E.A. Freeman and F.W. Maitland in England, Jules Michelet and others in France — were establishing history as a credible and esteemed academic discipline. This increasing respectability of the practice of history was matched by a sophisticated theorisation of history, a theorisation which took two directions. (...) On the one hand were Marx’s brilliant and bewitching historical projections. On the other the logic and methodology of history as an autonomously valid form of knowledge and inquiry were being elaborated. This last was largely a process in which the hermeneutic inquiries of Friedrich Schleiermacher, Droysen and Wilhelm von Humboldt came to fruition in the work of such writers as Philip August Boeckh, Wilhelm Dilthey and — not to forget The Presuppositions of Critical History — our own F.H. Bradley. (shrink)
The West's foremost translator of the I Ching, Richard Wilhelm thought deeply about how contemporary readers could benefit from this ancient work and its perennially valid insights into change and chance.
Contains a collection of the essays of the great Viennese Hellenist Theodor Gomperz concerning the Herculanean Papyri of Epicurus and Philodemus. The Introduction presents a concise biography of Gomperz and a careful discussion of his work on Hellenistic philosophy. Das Buch enthalt eine Auswahl der _Herculanensia minora_ von Theodor Gomperz. Die kurze Einleitung erhebt sich nicht den Anspruch, ein systematisches und vollständiges Bild der herkulanensischen Studien von Gomperz zu zeichnen; sie soll lediglich zur Orientierung und Einführung in die (...) Lektüre dienen. (shrink)
This collection of writings on aesthetics includes selections from Theodor Adorno, Walter Benjamin, Mikhail Bakhtin, Sigmund Freud, Martin Heidegger, Amy Mullin, Friedrich Nietzsche, and Frederich Wilhelm Joseph von Schelling. This collection may still be available as a print-on-demand title at the Ryerson University bookstore.
Pythagoras -- Confucius -- Heracleitus -- Parmenides -- Zeno of Elea -- Socrates -- Democritus -- Plato -- Aristotle -- Mencius -- Zhuangzi -- Pyrrhon of Elis -- Epicurus -- Zeno of Citium -- Philo Judaeus -- Marcus Aurelius -- Nagarjuna -- Plotinus -- Sextus Empiricus -- Saint Augustine -- Hypatia -- Anicius Manlius Severinus Boethius -- Śaṅkara -- Yaqūb ibn Ishāq aṣ-Ṣabāḥ al-Kindī -- Al-Fārābī -- Avicenna -- Rāmānuja -- Ibn Gabirol -- Saint Anselm of Canterbury -- al-Ghazālī -- (...) Peter Abelard -- Averroës -- Zhu Xi -- Moses Maimonides -- Ibn al-'Arabī -- Shinran -- Saint Thomas Aquinas -- John Duns Scotus -- William of Ockham -- Niccolò Machiavelli -- Wang Yangming -- Francis Bacon, Viscount Saint Alban (or Albans), Baron of Verulam -- Thomas Hobbes -- René Descartes -- John Locke -- Benedict de Spinoza -- Gottfried Wilhelm Leibniz -- Giambattista Vico -- George Berkeley -- Charles-Louis de Secondat, baron de La Brède et de Montesquieu -- David Hume -- Jean-Jacques Rousseau -- Immanuel Kant -- Moses Mendelssohn -- Marie-Jean-Antoine-Nicolas de Caritat, marquis de Condorcet -- Jeremy Bentham -- Georg Wilhelm Friedrich Hegel -- Arthur Schopenhauer -- Auguste Comte -- John Stuart Mill -- Søren Kierkegaard -- Karl Marx -- Herbert Spencer -- Wilhelm Dilthey -- William James -- Friedrich Nietzsche -- Friedrich Ludwig Gottlob Frege -- Edmund Husserl -- Henri Bergson -- John Dewey -- Alfred North Whitehead -- Benedetto Croce -- Nishida Kitarō -- Bertrand Russell -- G.E. Moore -- Martin Buber -- Ludwig Wittgenstein -- Martin Heidegger -- Rudolf Carnap -- Sir Karl Popper -- Theodor Wiesengrund Adorno -- Jean-Paul Sartre -- Hannah Arendt -- Simone de Beauvoir -- Willard Van Orman Quine -- Sir A.J. Ayer -- Wilfrid Sellars -- John Rawls -- Thomas S. Kuhn -- Michel Foucault -- Noam Chomsky -- Jürgeb Gabernas -- Sir Bernard Williams -- Jacques Derrida -- Richard Rorty -- Robert Nozick -- Saul Kripke -- David Kellogg Lewis -- Peter (Albert David) Singer. (shrink)
Early Modern German Philosophy (1690-1750) makes some of the key texts of early German thought available in English, in most cases for the first time. The translations range from texts by the most important figures of the period, including Christian Thomasius, Christian Wolff, Christian August Crusius, and Georg Friedrich Meier, as well as texts by consequential but less familiar thinkers such as Dorothea Christiane Erxleben, Theodor Ludwig Lau, Friedrich Wilhelm Stosch, and Joachim Lange. The topics covered range across a (...) number of areas of theoretical philosophy, including metaphysics (the immortality of the soul, materialism and its refutation, the pre-established harmony), epistemology (the principle of sufficient reason, the limits of reason with respect to matters of faith), and logic (the role of prejudices in cognition and the doctrine of truth). (shrink)
This unique anthology brings together readings from the works of the most significant post-Leninist Marxist thinkers. The selections reflect the diversity and high intellectual accomplishment of twentieth-century Marxism and show how these theorists have transformed traditional Marxism's general philosophical orientation, interpretation of historical materialism, models of socialist political practice, and conception of human liberation. The writings reveal the evolution of a sophisticated and democratic Marxism with a theoretical emphasis on class consciousness and subjectivity, a resistance to all forms of domination--including (...) sexism--and a belief in the political power of consciousness-raising. The selections include the work of forerunners Karl Korsch, George Lukacs, and Antonio Gramsci; figures from the 1930s, including Max Horkheimer, Theodor Adorno, and Wilhelm Reich; post-war and New Left thinkers Jean-Paul Sartre, Andre Gorz, Herbert Marcuse, and Jurgen Habermas; and contemporary socialist-feminists Sheila Rowbotham, Juliet Mitchell, Barbara Ehrenreich, Heidi Hartmann, and Ann Ferguson. Gottlieb places the readings in historical and theoretical context, providing a clear and insightful account of the intellectual problems and historical events that gave rise to the Western Marxism, and describing how it both anticipated and influenced contemporary radical movements. Each selection is prefaced by a biographical sketch and the book concludes with a bibliography suggesting further research. (shrink)
En revendiquant le rôle méthodologique fondateur de la philosophie, dans ce célèbre Discours de 1894, très cité dans le cadre du « Débat sur l'historicisme », Windelband procède à une remise en perspective des théories de la connaissance en place à son époque. En polémiquant tout à la fois avec les philosophies positivistes et avec Dilthey, en critiquant notamment l'opposition établie par celui-ci entre Sciences de l'Esprit et Sciences de la Nature, Windelband défend ici l'idée que les sciences contemporaines demandent (...) à être différenciées non pas sur la base de leur objet spécifique (l'esprit ou la nature), mais de leur méthode d'approche des objets, méthode qui varie selon qu'elle soit généralisante (ou nomothétique) ou singularisante (ou idiographique). In his famous Address of 1894 — often cited within the contextual framework of the so-called « Debate on historicism » —, Windelband asserts the methodological and founding role of philosophy. He sets about putting into perspective the theories of knowledge that were current at the time. In arguing with both the positivistic philosophies and Dilthey, notably in criticizing the opposition brought about by the latter between « Sciences of the Mind » and « Sciences of Nature », Windelband champions here the idea that contemporary sciences have to be differentiated not on the basis of their specific object (mind, or nature), but on the basis of their method of approach of these objects — a method that varies, depending on whether it is totalizing (or nomothetic) or singularizing (or ideographic). (shrink)