In der vorliegenden Arbeit wird der Versuch unternommen, folgende Frage zu beantworten: Welche Bedingungen sind notwendig dafür, dass es objektiv gerechtfertigt ist, jemandem moralische Verantwor-tung im Sinne einer Pflicht zuzurechnen? Durch die Beantwortung dieser Frage soll ein kleiner, aber wesentlicher Bereich der Verantwortungsproblematik geklärt werden. Dies zu tun, erscheint allein schon deshalb notwendig, weil die Häufigkeit, mit welcher die Ausdrücke 'verantwortlich' und 'Verantwortung' verwendet werden, mit einer gewissen Unbestimmtheit in Bezug darauf einher geht, was damit jeweils gemeint sein könnte. Diese (...) Unbestimmtheit betrifft nicht zuletzt die Fragen, ob sich die Rede von jemandes Verantwortung auf eine Pflicht der betreffenden Person bezieht oder nicht und ob eine solche Pflicht als moralische Angelegenheit zu sehen ist oder als eine des Rechts oder anderer Normsysteme. Um moralische Verantwortung im Sinne einer Pflicht zu bestimmen, ist insbesondere notwendig, die Bedingungen anzugeben, die erfüllt sein müssen, damit es objektiv gerechtfertigt ist, jemandem Verantwortung im Allgemeinen zuzurechnen, andererseits aber ist zu klären, in welchem Sinne sich Menschen dabei auf Moral berufen. Eine solche Analyse ist notwendig, um zu erkennen, auf welche Weise die Rede von moralischer Verantwortung in unser Leben eingreifen kann und soll. (shrink)

Von allen Briefwechseln, die Bernard Bolzano (1781?1848) führte, war der mit seinem Schüler und Freund Michael Josef Fesl (1788?1864) bei weitem der umfangreichste. Insgesamt tauschten die beiden etwa 730 Briefe aus. Da wegen der grossen Zahl der Briefe in der Bernard-Bolzano-Gesamtausgabe ab dem Jahr 1831 nur noch die Briefe des Lehrers an seinen Schüler veröffentlicht werden, erscheinen die Briefe Fesls an Bolzano in den Beiträgen zur Bolzano-Forschung. 0Der vorliegende Band enthält Fesls Briefe der Jahre 1831?1836. Ihr Hauptthema sind Bolzanos Publikationsprojekte, (...) darunter die Religionsbekenntnisse zweier Vernunftfreunde (1835), die Lebensbeschreibung (1836) und die Wissenschaftslehre (1837). Dazu kommt ein Austausch über die Zensur, über politische Ereignisse, über Cholera und andere Epidemien jener Zeit sowie über Heilmittel wie Homöopathie oder Kaltwasserkuren. Philosophische Fragen im eigentlichen Sinne spielen eine kleinere, aber nicht zu vernachlässigende Rolle. (shrink)

When this edition was published, all competent students of the history of jurisprudence and political thought at once recognized that Professor Barker had made ...

Are Scientists responsible for the usage of the results of their research? Scientists belong to the most favourite group of people who are declared to be responsible for many various things. On the other hand, there is severe disagreement with regard to the question what it is that scientists are responsible for. According to some people, scientific responsibility essentially covers the correct acquisition, processing and publication of information, whereas others make scientists responsible for almost all consequences of their research, even (...) if they cannot influence them. This disagreement is exemplified by the attitudes towards Otto Hahn’s research on nuclear fission which range from blaming him for the development of the nuclear bomb to acquitting him from any responsibility because of the (alleged) lack of knowledge on the possible consequences of his research. In order to (dis-) solve this problem it is necessary to formulate clearly the conditions for ascribing responsibility to someone. By doing so, it is shown in the present paper, (i) that it is indeed possible to ascribe to scientists responsibility for certain consequences of their research (including the usage of its results), and (ii) that, as a matter of fact, it is implausible to make Hahn responsible for the nuclear bomb, but that it isn’t justified either to regard him as a kind of “naive country scientist”, because there is a lot of information he could and should have had as a (responsible) scientist. (shrink)

Are Scientists responsible for the usage of the results of their research? Scientists belong to the most favourite group of people who are declared to be responsible for many various things. On the other hand, there is severe disagreement with regard to the question what it is that scientists are responsible for. According to some people, scientific responsibility essentially covers the correct acquisition, processing and publication of information, whereas others make scientists responsible for almost all consequences of their research, even (...) if they cannot influence them. This disagreement is exemplified by the attitudes towards Otto Hahn’s research on nuclear fission which range from blaming him for the development of the nuclear bomb to acquitting him from any responsibility because of the lack of knowledge on the possible consequences of his research. In order to solve this problem it is necessary to formulate clearly the conditions for ascribing responsibility to someone. By doing so, it is shown in the present paper, that it is indeed possible to ascribe to scientists responsibility for certain consequences of their research, and that, as a matter of fact, it is implausible to make Hahn responsible for the nuclear bomb, but that it isn’t justified either to regard him as a kind of “naive country scientist”, because there is a lot of information he could and should have had as a scientist. (shrink)

Gerechtigkeit ist ein Thema, das Wissenschaft und Politik, Geistes- und Sozialwissenschaften und viele philosophische Schulen gleichermaßen interessiert. Aufgrund seiner Relevanz und integrativen Kraft wurde "Gerechtigkeit" zum Thema eines internationalen Kongresses, den die Österreichische Gesellschaft für Philosophie im Februar 2004 ausgerichtet hat. Namhafte internationale Gäste haben ihre Gedanken zu Fragen der Gerechtigkeit dargelegt. So entsteht eine tour d'horizon des gegenwärtigen Fragens nach Gerechtigkeit. Neben den Hauptvorträgen des Kongresses (Wolfgang Kersting, Peter Koller, Avishai Margalit, Onora O'Neill) umfasst der Band Highlights des Kongresses, (...) die um das Thema "Gerechtigkeit" kreisen. (shrink)

The most important and extensive of Bernard Bolzano’s (1781–1848) correspondences is the one with his student and friend Michael Josef Fesl (1788–1864) which comprises altogether some 730 letters. Due to the great number of letters, starting with 1831, only Bolzano’s contributions are contained in his Collected Writings. Therefore, Fesl’s letters to Bolzano are published in the series "Beitraege zur Bolzano-Forschung". The present volume contains 88 letters that Fesl wrote in the years 1839 to 1841 to his “most-beloved teacher and friend”. (...) They focus on the works published by Bolzano during those years as well as on several projects that could not be realized. Moreover, they deal with philosophical trends, theological questions and political problems as well as with the epidemics of that time and their various treatments (including their success). Finally, Fesl also discusses the qualities of three portraits of Bolzano’s created by Áron Pulzer, Heinrich Hollpein und Karl Hoffmann during those years. (shrink)

The 23 papers that were prepared for a 1991 symposium that was cancelled beneath the weight of public and professional protests at some of the speakers invited, particularly Peter Singer. They analyze the application of theoretical considerations arising from philosophical reflection to particular concrete cases and situations of moral conflict in such fields as the environment, biology and medicine, business and professions, politics, law, and society. Among the topics are a philosophical critique of legal rights for natural objects, comparing the (...) value of human and nonhuman life, business ethics as a goal-rights system, liberal society and planned morality, and moral philosophy and its function. No subject index. Annotation copyrighted by Book News, Inc., Portland, OR. (shrink)

This is the first English translation of the first work of Otto von Gierke, arguably the greatest historian of ideas of the nineteenth century. Community in Historical Perspective includes much of the first volume of Das Deutsche Genossenschaftsrecht, originally published in 1868, and the texts translated here have become essential reading for anyone interested not only in the history of ideas and alternatives to conventional socialism and liberalism, but also, as recent experience has shown, contemporary European affairs. Von Gierke's (...) represented an unparalleled attempt to justify a political programme of structural pluralism, and to interpret the entire course of European history from the Dark Ages onwards as a progressive interaction between 'fellowship' (or 'comradeship') and 'lordship' (or 'sovereignty'). This interaction was to generate a polity of autonomous associations within a constitutional state based upon consent and federal unity, and von Gierke here laid the basis for a distinctively Germanic programme of federalism and quasi-pluralism, with a strongly nationalist emphasis upon the unique capacity of Germans, despite long periods of absolute rule, for corporate self-management. (shrink)

Johannes Althusius und die Entwicklung der naturrechtlichen Staatstheorien ist ein unveranderter, hochwertiger Nachdruck der Originalausgabe aus dem Jahr 1880. Hansebooks ist Herausgeber von Literatur zu unterschiedlichen Themengebieten wie Forschung und Wissenschaft, Reisen und Expeditionen, Kochen und Ernahrung, Medizin und weiteren Genres.Der Schwerpunkt des Verlages liegt auf dem Erhalt historischer Literatur.Viele Werke historischer Schriftsteller und Wissenschaftler sind heute nur noch als Antiquitaten erhaltlich. Hansebooks verlegt diese Bucher neu und tragt damit zum Erhalt selten gewordener Literatur und historischem Wissen auch fur die (...) Zukunft bei.". (shrink)

This work has been selected by scholars as being culturally important, and is part of the knowledge base of civilization as we know it. This work was reproduced from the original artifact, and remains as true to the original work as possible. Therefore, you will see the original copyright references, library stamps (as most of these works have been housed in our most important libraries around the world), and other notations in the work. This work is in the public domain (...) in the United States of America, and possibly other nations. Within the United States, you may freely copy and distribute this work, as no entity (individual or corporate) has a copyright on the body of the work.As a reproduction of a historical artifact, this work may contain missing or blurred pages, poor pictures, errant marks, etc. Scholars believe, and we concur, that this work is important enough to be preserved, reproduced, and made generally available to the public. We appreciate your support of the preservation process, and thank you for being an important part of keeping this knowledge alive and relevant. (shrink)

The Straight Edge hardcore movement at the end of the twentieth century managed to achieve a remarkable inversion of lifestyle values. Turning their lifestyle choice of no drinking, smoking, and drugs into a cool thing, not a good thing, they exposed how rebellious ethics mixed with anger and aggressive youth culture can make a powerful and energetic mix. Their inversion of the lifestyle values of the rebel and hedonist generation just before them could in turn be folded upon itself in (...) continuously new ways, turning anger toward many social ills into processes of awareness-raising as well as social mobilization. In the realm of fashion, could a utopia of sustainable consumerism perhaps also be folded and queered in... (shrink)

For I envied the arrogant when I saw the prosperity of the wicked. They have no struggles; their bodies are healthy and strong. They are free from common human burdens; they are not plagued by human ills. Therefore pride is their necklace; they clothe themselves with violence.Fashion is a mimetic phenomenon. It thrives in the pleasures and desires of imitation. As sociologist Yuniya Kawamura notices in her book Fashion-ology, early sociologists, such as Veblen, Tarde, and Simmel, all regard fashion as (...) a "concept of imitation."1 Even if their specific theories differ, Veblen, Tarde, and Simmel saw fashion as an imitative "flow" most dominantly from the superior to inferior, and this became known as the... (shrink)