Growing out of concerns for environment-development interlinkages expressed at the United Nations Conference on the Human Environment, 1972, this volume is a compilation of edited versions of statements made at that conference and at the ...

Die Frühe Neuzeit hat in den Geschichts- und Kulturwissenschaften ein eigenes Profil gewonnen. Die Buchreihe Frühe Neuzeit dient der Grundlagenforschung in Gestalt von Editionen, Monographien und Sammelbänden. Sie strebt nicht die großräumige Überschau an, die vorschnelle Synthese oder prätentiöse Konstruktion, sondern nimmt den Umweg über die Arbeit am Detail und die Erkundung verschütteter Traditionszusammenhänge. Ein besonderer Akzent liegt auf Untersuchungen, welche die Grenzen der Fachdisziplin überschreiten.

Jenseits von Gut und Böse? - Ein provozierendes Plädoyer für einen realistischen Moralkodex - Eine Autopsie der menschlichen Moralfähigkeit - Argumente wider eine Diktatur der Moral Finanzkrise, Doping-Skandale, Wissenschaftsbetrug, Kriege, Mord und Totschlag - ist es wirklich so, dass die Moral schwindet? Oder ist der Mensch überfordert, weil er möglicherweise weniger Moral verträgt, als er sich selbst verordnet? Wie alle anderen Lebewesen sind Menschen Egoisten, die in erster Linie das Problem des Überlebens zu lösen haben. Dazu benötigt der Mensch Ressourcen, (...) um die er mit anderen im Wettbewerb steht. Von Natur aus ist der Mensch also weder gut noch böse, sondern er macht nur, was ihm sein biologischer Imperativ gebietet. Als soziales Lebewesen ist nun der Mensch auf ein Miteinander mit Artgenossen angewiesen und kann obendrein sein Verhalten und Handeln kritisch reflektieren, was zur Schaffung eines Wertesystems geführt hat. Franz M. Wuketits untersucht Herkunft und Zweck moralischen Verhaltens und macht Vorschläge für eine Werteordnung, die an die Bedürfnisse des Individuums angepasst sein muss, wenn sie in der Realität unserer gesellschaftlichen Verhältnisse eine Chance haben soll. (shrink)

Charles Darwin can be regarded as one of the most prominent advocates of an evolutionary approach to ethics or moral philosophy in the nineteenth century and a forerunner of modern evolutionary ethics. Unlike many evolutionists of his days he consequently expanded the theory of evo- lution by natural selection to moral phenomena. He argued that such phenom- ena are deeply rooted in human nature and that humans are endowed with “social instincts.” Also, he maintained that with the aid of our (...) intellect we can strengthen and refine our natural sympathy for others. Darwin believed in moral progress, defended the ideas of justice and solidarity and gave substan- tial support to an evolutionary humanism. His views on morality are still refreshing and deserve full attention of moral philosophers. (shrink)

Abstract:Charles Darwin died in 1882—more than a hundred years ago. His doctrine, however, is still alive. Recently there has been particular interest in his ideas among philosophers. These ideas are indeed a challenge to (traditional) philosophy: To take Darwin seriously means to revise—or even to destroy—some positions in (traditional) philosophy. Among the philosophical disciplines which have been affected by Darwin's ideas are epistemology and moral philosophy (ethics). In the present paper I shall discuss the epistemological and ethical consequences of Darwin's (...) doctrine from the point of view of contemporary philosophy of biology; I shall give a brief outline of evolutionary epistemology and evolutionary ethics which both have caused many controversies. (shrink)

Since the 19th century the theory of evolution has been the guide not only of biological research, but of the explanation of man's psychic and mental abilities, too. In particular Herbert Spencer's and Charles Darwin's works gave rise to an evolutionary view of human mind (evolutionary psychology). This view was generalized to the explanation of epistemic structures like science and was adopted by many philosophers and scientists, e. g. Boltzmann, Mach, and others. Under the influence of Darwin's theory of natural (...) selection a selective elimination model was established in order to explain epistemic activities. Thus, in the 19th century we find expressed the basic ideas of today's evolutionary epistemology. The modern evolutionary theory of (human) knowledge therefore turns out to be the more precise and elaborated formulation of the fundamental postulates of an evolutionary psychology. (shrink)

A revision of the author's thesis, Vienna, 1978.

SummaryThe present paper is devoted to the problem of teleology in modern biology. Teleology is restricted to the phenomenon of goal‐directedness, whereas goal‐intended actions are denied. Thus, only the aspect of seemingly material teleology or teleonomy is required which paraphrases functions of certain value for the self maintenance of a system and is explainable without reference to vitalistic premises.Some aspects of evolution and selection are discussed and subsumed under a systems‐theoretically oriented view. Furthermore it is stressed that teleological explanations are (...) compatible with causal ones. The result of these assertions is the possibility of the reconciliation of seemingly irreconcilable positions. This, last not least, means a plea for the re‐assessment of an old and venerable problem.RésuméCet article est consacré au problèm de la finalité dans la biologie moderne, » finalite «étant pris ici dans un sens restreint de »comportement dirigé vers un but«, écartant toute notion d'intention consciente.La finalité matérielle apparente ou téléonomie, qui dénote simplement des fonctions ayant pour effet la conservation de systèmes, suffit donc, sans qu'un recours à des prémisses vitalistes soit nécessaire.Quelques aspects de l'evolution et de la sélection sont discutés dans le cadre de la théorie des systèmes. L'auteur montre aussi que les explications téléologiques n'entrent pas en contradiction avec des explications causales , d'où une synthèse possible de positions apparemment incompatibles. Enfin il plaide pour une réévaluation de ce problème ancien et vénérable.ZusammenfassungVorliegende Arbeit ist dem Problem der Teleologie in der modernen Biologie gewidmet. Die Teleologie wird dabei auf zielgerichtetes Verhalten eingeschränkt, während zielintendiertes Ver‐halten geleugnet wird. Daher genügt der Aspekt der scheinbaren materialen Teleologie oder Teleonomie, die lediglich Funktionen von systemerhaltendem Wert umschreibt und ohne Rückgriff auf vitalistische Pramissen erklart werden kann.Es werden einige Aspekte der Evolution und Selektion diskutiert und unter eine systemtheo‐retisch orientierte Betrachtungsweise subsumiert. Ferner wird hervorgehoben, dass teleologische Erklärungen nicht im Widerspruch zu kausalen Erklärungen stehen, was in einer moglichen Synthese von scheinbar inkompatiblen Positionen resultiert. Dies bedeuted nicht zuletzt ein Plädoyer für die Wieder‐bewertung eines altehrwürdigen Problems. (shrink)

Recently, biologist and philosophers have been much attracted by an evolutionary view of knowledge, so-called evolutionary epistemology. Developing this insight, the present paper argues that our cognitive abilities are the outcome of organic evolution, and that, conversely, evolution itself may be described as a cognition process. Furthermore, it is argued that the key to an adequate evolutionary epistemology lies in a system-theoretical approach to evolution which grows from, but goes beyond, Darwin's theory of natural selection.

Aside from his remarkable studies in psychology and the social sciences, Donald Thomas Campbell (1916–1996) made significant contributions to philosophy, particularly philosophy of science,epistemology, and ethics. His name and his work are inseparably linked with the evolutionary approach to explaining human knowledge (evolutionary epistemology). He was an indefatigable supporter of the naturalistic turn in philosophy and has strongly influenced the discussion of moral issues (evolutionary ethics). The aim of this paper is to briefly characterize Campbells work and to discuss its (...) philosophical implications. In particular, I show its relevance to some current debates in the intersection of biology and philosophy. In fact, philosophy of biology would look poorer without Campbells influence. The present paper is not a hagiography but an attempt to evaluate and critically discuss the meaning of Campbells work for philosophy of biology and to encourage scholars working in this field to read and re-read this work which is both challenging and inspiring. (shrink)

The present volume aims at giving a discussion ot the problems ot reductionism in contemporary life sciences. It contains six papers which deals with reduction/reductionism in different fields ot biological research. Also, the holistic perspective, 1. e. the systems view, is discussed in some ot the papers. The message ot this discussion Is that - whereas reductionism is indeed an important strategy - the systems approach is needed. It is argued by some ot the authors that organisms are complex systems (...) and not just heaps of molecules, 50 that the analytical method does not suffice. Recent developments in systems theory offer the possibility to install a more comprehensive view ot living systems what can be seen particularly in the field ot evolutionary biology. It is true that any organismic activity is molecular, this is to say that it is based on molecular mechanisms. But it is also true that the whole organism displays certain patterns ot behavior which are not just molecular. Any organism can be described as a system ot different levels ot organization different levels ot order and complexity - and it is important, theretore, to study all ot the organizational levels and to see their peculiarities. It should be obvious, however, that there is not one problem ot reduction/reductionism, but that there are many problems linked together and that these problems appear at different levels ot biological research and bio philosophical reflections. (shrink)