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)

l. Bd. Logik, Dialektik, Metaphysik.--2. Bd. Naturphilosophie auf dem Grunde der Erfahrung.--3. Bd. Philosophie des Geistes.--4.-5. Bd. Philosophie der Geschichte. l. Abt.: Die Urwelt, der Orient, Griechenland. 2. Abt.: Rom, das christliche Europas, America, die Nachwelt.

Bd. 1. Des Vernunftrechts erster Theil enthaltend die Grundrechte und das Einzelrecht.--Bd. 2. Des Vernunftrechts zweiter Theil enthaltend das öffentliche Recht und die allgemeine Rechtsgeschichte.

Hegel's aim in this work is to interpret the varied phenomena of Nature from the standpoint of a dialectical logic. Those who still think of Hegel as a merely a priori philosopher will here find abundant evidence that he was keenly interested in and very well informed about empirical science.

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 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. Scholars believe, and we concur, that this work is important enough to be (...) preserved, reproduced, and made generally available to the public. To ensure a quality reading experience, this work has been proofread and republished using a format that seamlessly blends the original graphical elements with text in an easy-to-read typeface. We appreciate your support of the preservation process, and thank you for being an important part of keeping this knowledge alive and relevant. (shrink)

Die Beiträge behandeln in systematischer und historischer Sicht epistemologisch orientierte Fragen nach dem gesellschaftlichen und kulturellen Standort von Theorie zwischen Wissenschaftskultur und Kulturwissenschaft. Sie gehen dem Eindruck nach, demzufolge die Ambivalenz theoretischer 'Passion' entweder eher zu ereignisträchtigen kulturellen Formen oder aber ins Abseits theoretisch-organisatorischer Betriebsamkeit führt. Nicht nur in den Geisteswissenschaften lässt sich beobachten, dass Theoriebildungsprozesse innerhalb einer vielfach unterschätzten Bandbreite von Denkstilen vonstatten gehen - zwischen Intuition und Konstruktion. Diese Vor- und Nachrationalisierungen theoretischen Denkens hat die bisherige Theoriegeschichte weitgehend (...) unbeachtet gelassen; auch für diese Denkstil-Bandbreite steht der Platzhalter 'kulturell'. Es sind mithin sowohl die gesellschaftlich-institutionellen Einbindungsformen als auch die möglichen kulturellen Ressourcen von Theorie, denen die einzelnen Beiträge des Bandes paradigmatisch (u.a. Dilthey, Valéry, Bachtin, Adorno, Luhmann, Feyerabend) nachgehen. (shrink)

This is a broad-ranging and ambitious attempt to rethink aesthetic and literary studies in terms of an “anthropology” of symbolic media generally. Central to the author’s argument is the proposition that the idea of literature—at least as it has been understood in the West since the eighteenth century—as the paradigm for artistic experience is both limited and limiting. In its place, the author offers a more general theory of aesthetic experience appropriate to a wide range of media and geared toward (...) performativity and bodily experience. The author develops the idea of the “protoliterary” as a cultural-aesthetic discourse prior to and external to the “literary” as traditionally conceived in Western aesthetics. Manifestations of the protoliterary tend to occur within forms of multimedia theatricalization in which suggestive images of the body loom large. The appeal of the protoliterary lies in its ability to function on both cognitive and somatic levels, thereby neutralizing such distinctions as self/society and reality/fiction. The author’s argument is indebted to John Dewey’s belief in a basic human need for aesthetic experience, a need that can be met in a variety of ways, from tattoos and scarification, through sports, parades, and cosmetics, to literature, opera, and film. From this basis the book theorizes a history of the development of separate, hierarchical arts in the West while suggesting that independent histories of single arts and artistic experience are no longer desirable or even possible. Although the genesis of particular forms of media are inextricably linked to specific historical, sociological, and technological conditions, their potential functions and effects are not tied to those conditions, nor should they be. (shrink)

Zu Hegels verschiedenen Vorlesungen über die «Philosophie des Rechts» gab es bisher jeweils nur eine Mit- oder Nachschrift seiner Schüler. Deshalb ließ sich schwer einschätzen, inwieweit diese die sich ändernden Vorstellungen Hegels über Recht und Staatsverfassung authentisch wiedergaben. Die neu aufgetauchte und erstmals kritisch edierte Nachschrift K. W. L. Heyses stammt aus dem Wintersemester 1822/23, aus dem es bisher die Mitschrift H. G. Hothos gab. Beide ergänzen sich gegenseitig und zeigen, daß Hotho und Heyse Hegels Darlegungen genau verfolgt und in (...) verkürzter Form notiert haben. Damit ist für Hegels Haltung wenige Jahre nach den Karlsbader Beschlüssen eine sicherere Textgrundlage als bisher gegeben. (shrink)

Johann Gottlieb Fichte (1762–1814) was never Kant's student. But when he, as a private teacher without any university degree, anonymously published his first book, the Kritik aller Offenbarung (Critique of all revelation, 1791), even some of the most prominent German philosophers took it to be Kant's long‐expected philosophy of religion. Three years later he became the successor of one of the most influential Kantian philosophers, Karl Leonhard Reinhold, at the famous University of Jena. There he taught and published his (...) theory of the “Science of Knowledge,” which the famous poet and critic Friedrich Wilhelm Schlegel hailed as among the “greatest influences of the age,” together with the French Revolution and Goethe's Wilhelm Meister. It became the origin of post‐Kantian philosophy, later called “German Idealism.” Fichte himself supported the French Revolution and soon got into trouble with conservative student “orders” and with the church authorities (because of his Sunday lectures). In 1798, an article by a friend in his Philosophisches Journal was accused of atheism. Fichte defended it and withdrew from the university in Jena, after troubles with Goethe – the “minister of education” in Weimar – and Herder. (shrink)

The introduction (pp. 7-29) discusses Nazi denigration of "Jewish philosophy, " from Spinoza to Bergson and Husserl, and the elevation of "German" philosophers, particularly Eckhart and Nietzsche, to the role of forerunners of Nazism. The chapters on the work of the four Jewish philosophers mention briefly their murder by the Nazis (in the case of Benjamin, his death while fleeing the Nazis).