In the introduction to the third and last volume of his Philosophy of Symbolic Forms of 1929,entitled “Phenomenology of Knowledge,” Ernst Cassirer remarks that the meaning in which he employs the term ‘phenomenology’ is Hegelian rather than according to “the modern usage of the term.”1 What sense can it make, then, to invoke Edmund Husserl’s phenomenology in this context? Yet if, roughly speaking, phenomenology can be characterized as the logosof phenomena,that is, of being insofar as it appears (phainesthai)to a conscious (...) subject, then the sense of phenomenology need not be so different from what Cassirer terms “the modern usage.”2 Phenomenology in this more liberal sense would be an account of how consciousness experiences the world through different forms of experience and in different spaces of meaning. The addition ‘hermeneutic’, moreover, points to a broader methodological scope. (shrink)

Das Metameta-Paradox ist darauf zurückzuführen, daß man die Eigenständigkeit jeder Realität annimmt, während es in Wirklichkeit nur eine Realität gibt, zu deren Beschreibung eine Sprache genutzt wird, die jedoch keine Metasprache im Verhältnis zu sich selbst sein kann, weil sie aus Elementen besteht, die zu gleicher Klasse angehören. Daher ist jede Beschreibung der Realität der Realität untergeordnet, und ihre Beschreibung sowie die Beschreibung ihrer Beschreibung u.s.w. dürfen nicht als eigenständige Klassen im Sinne der Gruppentheorie eingestuft werden.

Lakatos claimed that Popper wrote of beliefs; thus ascribing subjectivism to him Popper flatly denied this, treating it a willful distortion.1 Ironically, it is the theory of Lakatos that is subjec...

In his recent paper, C. Fuchs formulates QBism in the form of eight postulates. We criticise QBism as an anti-realist position and propose an alternative – contextual quantum realism (QCR). 1. A quantum state is not “an agent’s personal judgement” (QBism), nor is it subjective (QBism), but objective (QCR). It describes not the current experience (QBism), but a state of a physical system in context (QCR). 2. A quantum measurement is a (literally) measurement of quantum reality (QCR), rather than an (...) agent’s action upon its external world (QBism). It can only be regarded as an action in the sense in which a cognitive Wittgensteinian language game is an action (QCR). 3. The result of a quantum meas- urement is objective, though context-sensitive (QCR), rather than subjective (QBism), personal to the agent performing the action (QBism). 4. The quantum formalism is normative (QCR and QBism) and at the same time descriptive (QCR). The wave function tells us what to expect and how a quantum experiment should be conducted (i.e. plays the role of a norm), and also describes the state of a quantum system in context (QCR). 5. Unitary evolution is objective (QCR), not subjective (QBism). It does not express an agent’s degrees of belief (QBism). 6. Probability 1 is ontic (QCR), not an agent’s maximum degree of subjective certainty without ontic content (QBism). 7. In general, measurement outcomes are not predetermined (QCR and QBism), i.e. “unperformed measurements have no outcomes” (for QCR, this is an analytical judgement; for QBism this is a thesis), but they are predeter- mined in the case of probabilities 1 and 0 (QCR). In the case of probabilities 0 and 1, one can speak of performed measurements (QCR). 8. Quantum theory is a universal Wittgen- steinian rule (norm), i.e. a rule (norm) rooted in experience, reality (QCR). It can be used by any competent subject (QCR and QBism). We illustrate the difference between QCR and QBism on the example of how they treat “Wigner’s friend” thought experiment and consider their attitude to phenomenology. (shrink)

Thought insertion is a common delusion in schizophrenia. People affected by it report that there are thoughts in their heads that have been inserted by a third party. These thoughts are self-generated but subjec-tively experienced as alien (hereafter, we shall call them alien thoughts for convenience). In chapter 5 of Transparent Minds, Jordi Fernández convincingly argues that the phenomenon of thought insertion can be accounted for as a pathology of self-knowledge. In particular, he argues that the application of the bypass (...) model of self-knowledge can shed light on what is amiss in people with thought insertion. In this brief commentary, we examine the proposal by Fernández, highlight some of its strengths, and raise one main objection to it. In mainstream philosophical accounts of thought insertion, people who report the delusion are thought to have ownership of the alien thoughts, but to lack a sense of agency with respect to such thoughts, and this is supposed to explain why they ascribe the thoughts to some-one else. Fernández correctly identifies the limitations of mainstream accounts of thought insertion. First, to claim that people with the delu-sion of thought insertion own the alien thoughts does not sit well with the phenomenology of thought insertion as it is reflected in people’s self-reports. Second, people do not need to experience a sense of agency with respect to a thought in order to ascribe the thought to themselves. Sense of agency is too demanding a condition for self-ascription. Fernández puts forward a novel account of thought insertion, at-tempting to solve the problems identified with mainstream accounts. He defends the view that thought insertion is a failure of self-knowledge that consists in the person failing to ascribe one of her be-liefs to herself. Similar accounts to the one Fernández develops in the chapter have been defended by Bortolotti and Broome (2009) and Pickard (2010). For Fernández, the failure in self-ascription is due to the fact that the person with thought insertion does not feel pressured to endorse the content of a belief that she has [Fernández (2013), p. 142]. Fernández explains this phenomenon in detail by reference to the bypass model of self-knowledge. When Fernández develops his own proposal, he relies on the claim that the alien thought is a belief. We challenge this claim.We agree with Fernández that, in thought insertion, the person does not ascribe the alien thought to herself and does not commit to the content of the thought being true, in spite of the thought being self-generated. Such considerations powerfully suggest to us that the alien thought is not a belief. Given the elusive nature of mental states in general and beliefs in particular, this may seem just a terminological issue. But in the present context, whether the alien thought is a belief is important in order to offer a characterisation of thought insertion that makes jus-tice to the first-person reports and other behavioural manifestations of people with the delusion. One may also argue that, as the model of self-knowledge Fernández applies to alien thoughts, that is, the bypass model, is a model of self-knowledge for beliefs, such a model could only feature in the explanation of thought insertion if alien thoughts were beliefs. But we do not think this is necessarily the case, as in the book Fernández successfully applies his bypass model to other types of mental states, such as desires. (shrink)

The object of this t e xt is to present human rights as subjec t i ve rights, and therefore, as an appropriate fo r m of discourse in mode r n socie t y . Subject i v e rights are a discourse strat e gy through w hich ind i viduals h a ve lost contact with their companions in c i vil socie t y , and th e y f ind themsel v es isolate d , (...) in a relationship that e xists on l y with a f iction that the l a w calls "state". Citizens h a ve been stripped of the possibilities of addressing the other members of c i vil socie t y , and forced in the conflicts with them to go through special c i vil ser v ants w h o are in cha r ge of suppressing the conflict b y the use of force a g ainst some of the liti g ants. This discourse strat e gy ma k es the ind i vidual a citizen, and it tu r ns into a linguistic manner of being in the mode r n or bou r geois w orld. The strat e gy of subject i v e rights is w hat ma k es mode r n l a w modern. Human rights, for their pa r t, are all the e xpectations and aspirations of ind i viduals of a capitalist socie t y , that can on l y be mentioned in te r ms of "rights , " since it is this discourse that ma k es them into citizens. In this w a y , all human aspirations are co n v er ted - or can be co n v e r ted- into "rights", w hich is the peculiar linguistic manner that modernity o f fers to ind i viduals to talk about their aspirations. (shrink)

This article analyzes positive scientific thought in modernity in order to study how ways of knowing through scientific certainties helped to make up pragmatic and objective thought. Later, it approaches post-modernity as an age that inaugurated some ways of knowing by means of uncertainties, subjec..

The narratives about Khadija in Islamic History sources may be very divided. One of these subjecs is Khadija’s children. Besides there is little information about her daughters, accounts about her sons are diversified. This article approaches the narratives in İslamic History sources about Khadija’s sons.

This article explores projects of art and biology as joyful acts of insurrection. It presents critical and creative perspectives to generate alternative structures of subjec-tivity. These alternative structures gain relevance when intersectional variables of privilege and discrimination as political tools are set in crisis by a postanthropocen-tric awareness. The thesis of this article is that in order to understand and develop postanthropocentric intersectional positions, the microbial posthuman joins thecartographies of the posthuman as a material possibility from microscopic biologicalmatter and philosophical (...) and artistic thought. This microbial posthuman also allows for a reframing in the light of microbiopolitics, a redistribution of pain, life and deathwithin a broader notion of life. (shrink)

Patočka’s phenomenology of world and life in the early 1940s – This article addresses Patočka’s early phenomenology of life and world. It begins with an introduction that situates Patočka’s reflections on the meaning of the world against the background of Husserl’s phenomenology. Next, it analyzes a rarely studied manuscript, The inwardness and the world, written during an often overlooked period of his thought: the 1940s. The originality of Patočka’s thinking in this period emerges through answering a series of questions about (...) the text: How does the Czech philosopher describe the world? What is reality from the perspective of the manuscript? How does Patočka present experience? Finally, the paper concludes by highlighting the implications of Patočka’s turn away from the relationship between world and subjectivity in this text. His reflections on the naturalness of the world in relation to human and non-human life suggest that, even before Merleau-Ponty, Henry and Levinas – and perhaps more faithfully than Husserl – Patočka was working to revise the concept of transcendental phenomenology. (shrink)

Fred Sommers passed away in October of 2014 in his 92nd year. Having begun his teaching at Columbia University, he eventually became the Harry A. Wolfson Chair in Philosophy at Brandeis University, where he taught from 1963 to 1993. During his long and productive career, Sommers authored or co-authored over 50 books, articles, reviews, etc., presenting his ideas on numerous occasions throughout North America and Europe. His work was characterized by a commitment to the preservation and application of historical insights (...) and to the value of a well-articulated, coherent logical system. He was recognized for his independence and refusal to accept any view on the basis of authority alone. This made him a formidable critic but accounted in part for his many innovative and original ideas. In spite of his general contrariness in logic, Sommers earned the respect of the majority of his contemporaries, including Russell, Quine, van Benthem, Hacking, Suppes, and Strawson. In 2005, he was the subjec... (shrink)

Th e autho r brief ly e xplain s th e epistemol o gica l line s an d methodol o gica l principle s of th e theo r y h e d e v elop s i n Principi a iuris . T eori a de l diritt o e dell a democ r acia . Th e author ha s bee n w orkin g o n thi s subjec t fro m th e 1960 s an (...) d i n thi s a r ticl e h e brief ly set s ou t the metho d adopte d , th e objec t o r un i v ers e o f th e theoretica l discours e an d th e aim s pursued by hi s theo r y . Thi s theo r y i s a r ticulate d i n t w o pa r ts : th e theo r y o f l a w d e v elope d usin g a axiomati c metho d an d th e theo r y o f constitutiona l democra c y , w hic h i s a n empirica l and no r mat i v e inte r pretatio n o f th e fo r me r , bot h connecte d by th e isomo r phi c relationshi p that join s democra c y an d th e constitutiona l paradig m o f th e r ul e o f l a w. (shrink)