Light upon Light: Essays in Islamic Thought and History in Honor of Gerhard Bowering brings together studies that explore the richness of Islamic intellectual life in the pre-modern period. Leading scholars around the world present nineteen studies that explore diverse areas of Islamic Studies, in honor of a renowned scholar and teacher: Professor Dr. Gerhard Bowering (Yale University). The volume includes contributions in four main areas: (1) Quran and Early Islam; (2) Sufism, Shiism, and Esotericism; (3) Philosophy; (4) (...) Literature and Culture. These areas reflect the enormous breadth of Professor Bowering's contributions to the field over a lifetime of scholarship, teaching, and mentoring. Contributors: Hussein Ali Abdulsater, Mushegh Asatryan, Shahzad Bashir, Jonathan Brockopp, Yousef Casewit, Jamal Elias, Janis Esots, Li Guo, Matthew Ingalls, Tariq Jaffer, Mareike Koertner, Joseph Lumbard, Matthew Melvin-Koushki, Mahan Mirza, Bilal Orfali, Gabriel Reynolds, Nada Saab, Amina Steinfels & Alexander Treiger. (shrink)

Human Dignity The mercurial concept of human dignity features in ethical, legal, and political discourse as a foundational commitment to human value or human status. The source of that value, or the nature of that status, are contested. The normative implications of the concept are also contested, and there are two partially, or even wholly, … Continue reading Human Dignity →.

What are our obligations towards future generations who stand to be harmed by the impact of today’s environmental crises? This book explores ecological sustainability as a human rights issue and examines what our long-term responsibilities might be.

The Comfort of the Mystics: A Manual and Anthology of Early Sufism. Edited by Gerhard Böwering and Bilal Orfali. Islamic History and Civilization, vol. 98. Leiden: Brill, 2013. Pp. ix + 34 + 686. $282.

This book addresses the metaphysics of Armstrongian states of affairs, i.e. instantiations of naturalist universals by particulars. The author argues that states of affairs are the best candidate for truthmakers and, in the spirit of logical atomism, that we need no molecular truthmakers for positive truths. In the book's context, this has the pleasing result that there are no molecular states of affairs. Following this account of truthmaking, the author first shows that the particulars in (first-order) states of affairs are (...) bare particulars. He then argues that the properties in states of affairs are simple, non-relational and concrete universals. Next, he argues that (material) relations in states of affairs are external relations. Lastly, he argues that a state of affairs is unified by a distinctive formal relation without giving rise to Bradley’s regress. (shrink)

A new approach to Hume's problem of induction that justifies the optimality of induction at the level of meta-induction. Hume's problem of justifying induction has been among epistemology's greatest challenges for centuries. In this book, Gerhard Schurz proposes a new approach to Hume's problem. Acknowledging the force of Hume's arguments against the possibility of a noncircular justification of the reliability of induction, Schurz demonstrates instead the possibility of a noncircular justification of the optimality of induction, or, more precisely, of (...) meta-induction (the application of induction to competing prediction models). Drawing on discoveries in computational learning theory, Schurz demonstrates that a regret-based learning strategy, attractivity-weighted meta-induction, is predictively optimal in all possible worlds among all prediction methods accessible to the epistemic agent. Moreover, the a priori justification of meta-induction generates a noncircular a posteriori justification of object induction. Taken together, these two results provide a noncircular solution to Hume's problem. Schurz discusses the philosophical debate on the problem of induction, addressing all major attempts at a solution to Hume's problem and describing their shortcomings; presents a series of theorems, accompanied by a description of computer simulations illustrating the content of these theorems (with proofs presented in a mathematical appendix); and defends, refines, and applies core insights regarding the optimality of meta-induction, explaining applications in neighboring disciplines including forecasting sciences, cognitive science, social epistemology, and generalized evolution theory. Finally, Schurz generalizes the method of optimality-based justification to a new strategy of justification in epistemology, arguing that optimality justifications can avoid the problems of justificatory circularity and regress. (shrink)

Interest in sensory atmospheres and architectural and urban ambiances has been growing for over 30 years. A key figure in this field is acclaimed German philosopher Gernot Böhme whose influential conception of what atmospheres are and how they function has been only partially available to the English-speaking public. This translation of key essays along with an original introduction charts the development of Gernot Böhme's philosophy of atmospheres and how it can be applied in various contexts such as scenography, commodity aesthetics, (...) advertising, architecture, design, and art. The phenomenological analysis of atmospheres has proved very fruitful and its most important, and successful, application has been within aesthetics. The material background of this success may be seen in the ubiquitous aestheticization of our lifeworld, or from another perspective, of the staging of everything, every event and performance. The theory of atmospheres becoming an aesthetic theory thus reveals the theatrical, not to say manipulative, character of politics, commerce, of the event-society. But, taken as a positive theory of certain phenomena, it offers new perspectives on architecture, design, and art. It made the spatial and the experience of space and places a central subject and hence rehabilitated the ephemeral in the arts. Taking its numerous impacts in many fields together, it initiated a new humanism: the individual as a living person and his or her perspective are taken seriously, and this fosters the ongoing democratization of culture, in particular the possibility for everybody to participate in art and its works. (shrink)

This paper defends the case against (sparse) disjunctive properties by means of four Armstrongian arguments. The first of these is a logical atomist argument from truthmaking, which is, broadly speaking, ‘Armstrongian’ (Armstrong 1997). This argument is strong – although it stands or falls with the relevant notion of truthmaking, as it were. However, three arguments, which are prima facie independent of truthmaking, can be found explicitly early in Armstrong’s middle period. Two of these early arguments face a serious objection put (...) forward forcefully by Louise Antony (2003) and Alan Penczek (1997), respectively. I consider these objections and argue that they fail. Thus, even if the argument from truthmaking is indecisive, disjunctive properties should be rejected. (shrink)

What I call Mellor’s Question is the problem of whether determinables are properties of their determinates or properties of the particulars that possess these determinates. One can distinguish two basic competing theories of determinables that address the issue, implicitly if not explicitly. On the second-order theory, determinables are second-order properties of determinate properties; on the second-level theory, determinables are first-order properties of the particulars with these determinate properties. Higher-order properties are prima facie ontologically uneconomical, and in line with my general (...) view that ontological parsimony is vital to metaphysics, I consider it highly important which of the two theories is true. Firstly, I argue that the second-level theory offers the best explanation of the explananda (though the race is close), including the important but neglected phenomenon of ‘intermediate determinables’. Secondly, by paying attention to intermediate determinables and instantiation of higher-order properties, I argue that the second-level theory also is more ontologically economical. For these two reasons, this theory is preferable. (shrink)

In this paper, I relate key features of Adolf Reinach’s abundant ontology of propositional states of affairs of his to Armstrong’s—or an Armstrongian—state of affairs ontology, with special regard to finding out how sparse or abundant the latter is with respect to negative states of affairs. After introducing the issue, I clarify the notion of a propositional state of affairs, paying special attention to the notion of abstract versus concrete. I show how Reinach’s states of affairs are propositional, and how (...) they compare with Chisholm’s well-known propositional states of affairs. In the next section, I outline Reinach’s five roles for states of affairs and show that only one of them is relevant to Armstrongian state of affairs ontology. In the following section, I utilise this role to create a ranking of state of affairs ontologies according to how abundant they are. It is, however, unclear which level Armstrongian state of affairs ontology is at, since it is unclear if, like Reinach’s ontology, it includes negative states of affairs. In the final section, I argue that the answer is a qualified ‘yes’, i.e. it does not occupy the sparsest level. (shrink)

This paper is concerned with what I call the ‘problem of unity’ . This is the puzzle of how Armstrong‐like states of affairs are unified. The general approach is ‘relational internalism’: the unifier of such a state of affairs is a relation of some sort in it. A view commonly associated with relational internalism is that if such a relation satisfies a certain ‘naive’ expectation to a relation – that it is related to its relata – then Bradley's regress results. (...) As I argue, for one very natural species of relational internalism, this is indeed the case. Influential writers on the topic have therefore maintained that this relation is not related to its relata. But, as we shall see, while this ‘classic’ relational internalism obviously avoids Bradley's regress, intuitively, it fails completely to solve the problem of unity. I argue, however, that given the rejection of a natural, but unfounded, assumption of conventional relational internalism, a unique relation can unify states of affairs without leading to Bradley's regress. I consequently propose a novel version of relational internalism on which states of affairs are unified by such an entity. (shrink)

This chapter considers the ‘hosting question’ of how immanent universals, in contrast to transcendent universals, are ‘brought down to earth’ from ‘Plato’s heaven’. It explores the thesis that the hosting amounts to their being constituents of the states of affairs that result from their instantiations. These states of affairs are concrete complexes consisting of particulars and universals, and perhaps something that links them together. The traditional view that immanent universals are concrete is briefly defended against a recent prominent objection. On (...) relationalism, states of affairs are unified by a relation of some sort; on non-relationalism they are unified non-relationally. Roughly, these two conceptions of states of affairs are equivalent to Armstrong’s relational and non-relational versions of immanent realism, respectively. Armstrong mostly criticises the former and defends the latter. It is argued, however, that relationalism, at least potentially, answers the hosting question, whereas non-relationalism realism does not. (shrink)

A 'social trap' is a situation where individuals, groups or organisations are unable to cooperate owing to mutual distrust and lack of social capital, even where cooperation would benefit all. Examples include civil strife, pervasive corruption, ethnic discrimination, depletion of natural resources and misuse of social insurance systems. Much has been written attempting to explain the problem, but rather less material is available on how to escape it. In this book, Bo Rothstein explores how social capital and social trust are (...) generated and what governments can do about it. He argues that it is the existence of universal and impartial political institutions together with public policies which enhance social and economic equality that creates social capital. By introducing the theory of collective memory into the discussion, Rothstein makes an empirical and theoretical claim for how universal institutions can be established. (shrink)

It is a common view that arguments from analogy can only be evaluated on a case-by-case basis. However, while this reflects an important insight, I propose instead a relatively simple method for their evaluation based on just (i) their general form and (ii) four core questions. One clear advantage of this proposal is that it does not depend on any substantial (and controversial) view of similarity, unlike influential current alternative methods, such as Walton’s. Following some initial clarification of the notion (...) of analogy and similarity, I demonstrate the strength of this method by analysing and evaluating three prominent arguments from analogy. (shrink)

William Vallicella (2020) puts forward three arguments against self-relating internalism, my theory of the unity of states of affairs. His first objection is that there can be no constituent of a state of affairs with the required unifying power given the need for ‘ontological analysis’, or at least that such an entity is mysterious. His second objection is that self-relating internalism violates the principle of the Indiscernibility of Identicals. His final objection is that my explanation of the unity of states (...) of affairs is viciously circular. In this note, I argue that each of challenges can be met. (shrink)

Ernst-Wolfgang Böckenförde is one of Europe's foremost legal scholars and political thinkers. As a scholar of constitutional law and a judge on Germany's Federal Constitutional Court, Böckenförde has been a major contributor to contemporary debates in legal and political theory, to the conceptual framework of the modern state and its presuppositions, and to contested political issues such as the rights of the enemies of the state, the constitutional status of the state of emergency, citizenship rights, and challenges of European integration. (...) His writings have shaped not only academic but also wider public debates from the 1950s to the present, to an extent that few European scholars can match. As a federal constitutional judge and thus holder of one the most important and most trusted public offices, Böckenförde has influenced the way in which academics and citizens think about law and politics. During his tenure as a member of the Second Senate of the Federal Constitutional Court, several path-breaking decisions for the Federal Republic of Germany were handed down, including decisions pertaining to the deployment of missiles, the law on political parties, the regulation of abortion, and the process of European integration. In the first representative edition in English of Böckenförde's writings, this volume brings together his essays on constitutional and political theory. The volume is organized in four sections, focusing respectively on the political theory of the state; constitutional theory; constitutional norms and fundamental rights; and the relation between state, citizenship, and political autonomy. Each of these four cornerstones of Böckenförde's legal and political thinking features introductions to the articles as well as a running editorial commentary to the work. A second volume will follow this collection, focusing on the relation between religion, law, and democracy. (shrink)

William Vallicella (2020) puts forward three arguments against self-relating internalism, my theory of the unity of states of affairs. His first objection is that there can be no constituent of a state of affairs with the required unifying power given the need for ‘ontological analysis’, or at least that such an entity is mysterious. His second objection is that self-relating internalism violates the principle of the Indiscernibility of Identicals. His final objection is that my explanation of the unity of states (...) of affairs is viciously circular. In this note, I argue that each of challenges can be met. (shrink)

Gerhard Preyer rekonstruiert in diesem essential den harten Kern von Shmuel N. Eisenstadts allgemeiner Soziologie, wie Eisenstadt sie in der Untersuchung der Beziehung zwischen Handeln (Kreativität) und Struktur sowie zwischen Kultur und Sozialstruktur durchgeführt hat. Preyer ordnet seine Untersuchung in dem von ihm sogenannten „semantischen Map“ als eine evolutionäre Universalie des „konstitutiven basalen Bezugsrahmens“ der Erforschung der sozio-strukturellen Evolution an. Aus Eisenstadts Sicht legen die grundlegenden semantischen Maps das zentrale Problem der menschlichen und der sozialen Existenz, die Spezifikation ihrer (...) Lösungen und die Beziehung zu den grundlegenden Annahmen über die soziale Ordnung fest. Das Semantic Map und der Kampf um die Verteilung von Ressourcen ist der forschungsprogrammatische Bezugsrahmen seiner Reformulierung der Modernisierungstheorie, der Kritik an der klassischen Modernisierungstheorie als einer Konvergenztheorie und seiner Fassung des Problems der sozialen Ordnung. Die Studie wird mit einer Modifikation von Eisenstadts Ansatz einer mitgliedschaftstheoretischen Reinterpretation abgeschlossen. (shrink)

Daniel Dennett is arguably one of the most influential yet radical philosophers in America today. In this volume, Dennett is confronted by colleagues and critics, from philosophy, biology and psychology. His reply constitutes an extensive essay which clarifies, and develops further, central themes in his philosophy. The debate ranges over Dennett's whole corpus, but special attention is given to his major work on consciousness, Consciousness Explained. The volume includes a critical assessement of Dennett's views on behaviouralism and the subjectivity of (...) consciousness, the nature of perception and mental representation, intentional laws and computational psychology, the rationality of thought, culture as a virus, the architecture of mind, and the role of artifacts in thinking. Also included is an introduction to Dennett's philosophy and a full bibliography of his publications. (shrink)

This paper asks what should be the basis of a global environmental ethics. As Gao Shan has argued, the environmental ethics of Western philosophers such as Holmes Rolston and Paul Taylor is based on extending the notion of intrinsic value to that of objects of nature, and as such it is not very compatible with Chinese ethics. This is related to Gao’s rejection of most—if not all—Western “rationalist” environmental ethics, a stance that I grant her for pragmatic reasons (though I (...) remain neutral about it theoretically). Gao argues that the Daoist notion of living in harmony with nature can instead become the basis of a Chinese environmental ethics. However, the involved Daoist conception of living in harmony with nature is, in my view, based on an aesthetic property. The paper argues that despite the appeal of the Daoist view for a Chinese environmental ethics, an aesthetic property cannot provide the basis for a global environmental ethics. The paper also considers another version of Daoist environmental ethics, which does not rely on an aesthetic notion, but I argue that it too fails as such a candidate. As an alternative, the paper considers and applies contemporary Western thinkers on gratitude (such as Robert Emmons and Elizabeth Loder), proposing that gratitude to nature (environmental gratitude) can indeed provide the needed basis. (shrink)

Ein Leben lang leidet der Mensch an der nie zu überwindenden Endlichkeit seiner Vernunft, die ihn heftig mit Fragen bedrängt, zu deren Beantwortung sie selbst gar nicht in der Lage ist. Im Blick auf den Versuch, dieses Paradoxon aufzulösen, dass nämlich einerseits das metaphysische Bedürfnis der Vernunft zwar von dieser nicht aus eigener Kraft zufriedengestellt werden kann, andererseits aber diese Einsicht keineswegs ihr bohrendes Fragen zum Schweigen bringt, wird die Verführung nachvollziehbar, das Kind mit dem Bade auszuschütten und der Vernunft (...) rundweg und grundsätzlich eine tragfähige lebens- und handlungsleitende Kraft abzusprechen. Grosse Teile der Postmoderne sind von diesem tiefen Misstrauen, das den Abschied von aller Vernunft zu rechtfertigen scheint, geprägt. Die Alternative zu ihrer Verabschiedung im Aufweis der Möglichkeit - ja Notwendigkeit - von Metaphysik auch und gerade angesichts einer stets in ihrer Endlichkeit gefangenen Vernunft wird in diesem Buch gezeichnet."--Page 4 of cover. (shrink)

Das Buch spannt einen Bogen von der Kernfrage der Metaphysik hin zur Ausgangsfrage der Anthropologie: Was ist der Mensch? Ein missratenes Geschöpf, dem nur die blanke Verzweiflung bleibt, weil es für die Welt besser wäre, wenn es ihn gar nicht gäbe? Oder geht, um es mit den Worten von Rémi Brague zu sagen, dem Indikativ des Seins ein Imperativ zum Sein voran, so dass es gute Gründe für das Dasein des Menschen gibt – Gründe, die jenseits aller Selbstrechtfertigung liegen? Wenn (...) es solche Gründe gibt, wird man über sie kaum reden können, ohne zugleich nach dem zu fragen, was sie bedingungslos macht. Aus unterschiedlichen Blickwinkeln heraus wird dieser Frage nach dem Unbedingten – Gott – in ihrer Beziehung zum Sein des Menschen nachgegangen. (shrink)

Inheriting Benjamin otherwise -- Erbsünde: a note on paradoxical inheritance in Benjamin's Kafka essay -- Benjamin's blotting paper: writing and erasing a theological figure of thought -- Critique and the thing: Benjamin and Heidegger -- The work of art and its formal and genealogical determinations: Benjamin's cool place between Kant and Nietzsche -- Going with time: a miniature on time and photography after Benjamin.

Alle Ideologie beruht auf Verdrängung der Gewalt; noch dort, wo sie Gewalt fetischisiert, bildet der blinde Fleck des Souveräns den Ursprung. Denn ausgeblendet wird ja nicht Gewalt als solche, sondern dass durch sie die Einheit der Gesellschaft erst Bestand hat. An diesem blinden Fleck tritt im Politischen selbst zutage, wie Aufklärung sich weigert, ihre eigenen Bedingungen zu begreifen – darin ist sie zunächst nichts anderes als die frühe Gestalt des Engagements. In dieser ›Dialektik des Leviathan‹, wie sie der erste Teil (...) des Buchs im Anschluss an die Dialektik der Aufklärung zu umreißen versucht, erhält die Gegenüberstellung von Hobbes und Spinoza eine Schlüsselrolle. Die These lautet, dass ein kritischer Begriff des Staats ohne die Kritik der spinozistischen Auffassung von Substanz nicht zu haben sei, deren problematische Aspekte nicht zufällig in der französischen (und italienischen) Linken (Althusser, Deleuze, Negri…) wiederkehrten. Umgekehrt war es gerade die Problematik dieses Substanzbegriffs, die es Marx erst ermöglichte – zusammen mit der Hegelschen Dialektik und zugleich gegen sie gerichtet – die Kritik der politischen Ökonomie zu entfalten. Wenn die neueste Ideologie der Linken wie der Rechten, in Frankreich wie in Deutschland, vielfach das Heideggersche »Sein« und den Carl Schmitt’schen »Begriff des Politischen« an die Stelle von Substanz und Souveränität setzt (Agamben, Badiou, Mouffe…), ist es mit jener ›Dialektik des Politischen‹ auf dem Boden der klassischen Metaphysik und Aufklärung nicht mehr getan. Dem heutigen Triumph Heideggers und Schmitts zu widersprechen, geht es im zweiten Teil des Buchs: Jean-Paul Sartres »Engagement gegen den Tod« und Jean Amérys Appell, den Leib zu »substantiieren« (wie das Manfred Dahlmann jüngst ausgedrückt hat), bedeuten einerseits Annäherung an die entscheidenden Fragen einer Philosophie nach Auschwitz – gerade auch, was die Frage des Souveräns betrifft. Andererseits verkehrte sich bei beiden regelmäßig die kritische Intention, sobald man den Gegenstand des Engagements mit der politischen Linken teilen und also Politik machen wollte. Dass sie vielmehr zu sabotieren sei, hat allerdings Améry – ohne sich dessen unbedingt bewusst zu sein – in seiner Parteinahme für Israel vorgeführt wie kaum ein anderer. Der von Adorno formulierte kategorische Imperativ, der zugleich das Politische als »Stand der Unfreiheit« begreift, erweist sich als die einzige Möglichkeit, dieser Sabotage auf den Grund zu gehen. Hier spannt sich aber auch der Bogen zum ersten Teil des Buchs zurück: Aus der Kritik an Spinozas Substanzbegriff lässt sich keine Kritik an Heideggers Sein zum Tode entwickeln, so wie auch der Gegensatz zwischen der Vernunft als Selbsterhaltung, die in der Dialektik der Aufklärung kritisiert wird, und der Vernichtung um der Vernichtung willen, die das Selbstopfer einschließt, dialektischer Vermittlung nicht mehr zugänglich ist, sondern zur Intervention nötigt. Davon legt jener Imperativ Zeugnis ab. Nur wer sich dabei jedoch die eigene Ohnmacht immer wieder eingesteht, die im notwendigen Engagement gegen den Antisemitismus so fatal wie nirgendwo hervortritt – spätestens dann, wenn der eben erst bezwungene Antisemit in neuer Gestalt wiederaufersteht –, wird auch die antisemitische bzw. antizionistische Gewalt nicht unterschätzen. (Diese Unterschätzung ist das Merkmal aller liberalen Anstrengungen, die Antisemiten zurückzudrängen.) Der dritte Teil schließlich versammelt – in Anlehnung an Adornos Engagement-Essay – Einzelstudien zur Kritik des politischen Engagements, wie sie sich an und in den Werken von Literatur und Essay, Musik und Film erschließt (Thomas Bernhard, Berthold Brecht, Hanns Eisler, Jean-Luc Godard, Elfriede Jelinek, Imre Kertész, Claude Lanzmann, Georg Lukács…). (shrink)

Max Weber ist ein Klassiker der Kultur- und Sozialwissenschaften. Sein Werk gehört weltweit zum Kernbestand von Forschung und Lehre, und dies gilt besonders für seine methodologischen Schriften, denen auch 100 Jahre nach ihrer Publikation nachhaltige Aufmerksamkeit beschieden ist. Allerdings gibt es immer noch kein einvernehmliches Verständnis von Webers Position. Der Grund dafür liegt in der mangelnden Aufarbeitung der Quellen. Viele wichtige Autoren, deren Werke Weber rezipierte, sind in Vergessenheit geraten. Sie in Erinnerung zu rufen, ist dringend notwendig, um seine Wissenschaftslehre (...) in ihrer ganzen Komplexität zu verstehen. 0Das vorliegende Sammelwerk leistet einen Beitrag zur Schließung dieser Forschungslücke. Es rekonstruiert den Denkraum des späten 19. und frühen 20. Jahrhunderts, in dem sich Weber bewegte, und zeigt anhand von Studien zu ausgewählten Autoren, wie umfassend und interdisziplinär sein Denken tatsächlich war. Dabei werden nicht nur Autoren aus den Kultur- und Sozialwissenschaften berücksichtigt, sondern auch solche aus den Naturwissenschaften, denn Weber war mit dem Fortschritt dieser Disziplinen ebenfalls vertraut. (shrink)