Wilhelm Windelband (1848-1915) war Ordinarius der Philosophie im Deutschen Kaiserreich, Haupt der südwestdeutschen Schule des Neukantianismus und einflussreicher Kathederfürst. Dem Neukantianismus wird Gegnerschaft zur Psychologie nachgesagt, und Windelband gilt in der Wissenschaftsgeschichte als jemand, der eine ausgeprägte Abneigung gegen die Psychologie hegte und diese polemisch von sich gab. Die hier erstmalig untersuchte Wirklichkeit sah anders aus. Er setzte sich frühzeitig für die Selbständigkeit der Psychologie ein, arbeitete an einem Buch zur Psychologie und hielt mehr als zwanzig Hauptvorlesungen zur (...) Psychologie. Institutionelle Hintergründe des problematischen Verhältnisses zwischen Philosophie und Psychologie werden untersucht und gezeigt, weshalb Windelband kein Einzelfall in der Geschichte des Faches Philosophie war. (shrink)

This paper analyzes the shifts in Wilhelm Windelband’s ‘critical philosophy of values’ as it developed hand in hand with his understanding of relativism. The paper has two goals. On the one hand, by analyzing the role that relativism played in his philosophical project, it seeks to contribute to a better understanding of Windelband's intellectual development in the context of historicism and Neo-Kantianism. On the other hand, by highlighting Windelband’s contribution to the understanding of relativism, it sheds light (...) on an important episode in the history of that problem. The paper distinguishes between three phases in Windelband’s thinking and shows that his views about relativism changed in close connection with his conception of history. The early Windelband thought that historicism was compatible with absolute validity because he was firmly convinced of historical progress. The mature Windelband rejected progress as a means for justifying validity and put the problem of relativism into sharp relief. In response to the failure of his mature philosophy to fend off relativism, the later Windelband strengthened the role of history again. The paper concludes that Windelband’s significance lies not in his arguments against relativism, but rather in having furthered philosophical understanding of the problems at stake. (shrink)

Unter dem Titel „Windelbands Psychologie-Projekte“ schließt Jörn Bohr mit seinem philosophiehistorischen Überblick zur Lage der Psychologie zwischen 1872 und 1915 am Beispiel Windelbands an die vorangehende Einleitung an und zeichnet damit in eins die wissenschaftliche Landschaft vor, in welche die folgenden Beiträge eingebettet sind. Bohr zeigt neben dem wissenschaftlichen Werdegang des Protagonisten dessen Bemühungen um einen eigenen Entwurf einer Psychologie und deren Wendungen. Desgleichen betont er seine bildungspolitische Funktion in Bezug auf den Lehrstuhlstreit im März 1913. Ein Positionsstreit, der nicht (...) allein den Versuch einer Selbstbehauptung der Philosophie gegenüber der experimentellen Psychologie betrifft, sondern vielmehr die Philosophie selbst in eine Krise stürzt, welche nicht zuletzt in der Gebundenheit der Philosophie an die Wissenschaften begründet liegt. Während Windelband anfangs Funktionen des Denkens als auf Naturgesetze gegründete versteht und später wiederholt Versuche unternahm, die Psychologie in die Philosophie zurückzuholen, wendet er sich gegen Ende seines Schaffens unter den Vorzeichen einer Philosophie der Werte gegen die Möglichkeit einer Gründung der Geschichtswissenschaft auf Psychologie. (shrink)

The article analyzes Wilhelm Windelband’s views on the problem of the relation of philosophy to its history. Windelband’s essay “History of philosophy” (1905) is put as a starting point. The main motive for this research is the idea that the history of philosophy is an organon and a component of philosophy. The article critically examines Windelband’s interpretation of (1) Hegel’s conception of the history of philosophy, (2) the question about the grounds of philosophers’ interest in the history (...) of philosophy, (3) the problem of development of the history of philosophy as a science (Wissenschaft). The author assesses Windelband’s role in the development of the history of philosophy as a science is important, despite some accusations of partisanship. The main merit of Windelband, according to the author, is (1) a critique of Psychologism and Historical Relativism and (2) the justification of the history of philosophy’s main role in education as a whole and in the philosophical education in particular. (shrink)

The present research paper aims at clarifying the relationship between systematic thinking and historiographical practices in the works of the Neo-Kantian philosopher Wilhelm Windelband. According to the judgment of his successors, Windelband’s work is characterized by a systematical deficit grounded on an excess of historiographical labors. The aim of this study is to show that, in Windelband’s case the history of philosophy becomes a true impulse for systematical thinking. Besides, an attempt is made to show how (...) class='Hi'>Windelband's works make a contribution to the elaboration of a concept of historical philosophy, that is, to carry out the historicization of philosophical thought. (shrink)

This paper examines the transformation of Windelband’s Neo-Kantian program into a variety of Neo-Hegelianism. The paper shows that, for Windelband, the rehabilitation of philosophy in terms of a theory of knowledge is insufficient in the face of the pervasive crisis-consciousness of 19th-century philosophy. By Windelband’s account, the overcoming of this crisis requires the appropriation of distinctive Hegelian themes and a new understanding of the role of history in philosophical reflection. Based on this exposition, the final section of (...) the paper advances an interpretation on the meaning and conditions for the renewal of philosophy. (shrink)

Harry van der Linden's contribution to The Cambridge Dictionary of Philosophy. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

In the 19th century, the history of philosophy becomes the history of a particular science. Modern philosophical historiography is an ambivalent project. On the one hand, we find an affirmative concept of Bildung through tradition and historical insight; on the other, there arises a critical reflection on historical education in the light of an emerging critique of modern culture. The book offers a comprehensive overview of the debate.

The professionalization of the study of history in the Nineteenth Century made possible a new way of thinking about the history of philosophy: the thought emerged that philosophy itself might be relative to time, historical culture, and nationality. The simultaneous demise of speculative metaphysics scattered philosophers’ confidence that the historical variance of philosophical systems could be viewed in terms of the teleological self-realization of reason. Towards the late Nineteenth Century, philosophers began to explicitly address the worry that all philosophical systems (...) might have only relative validity. This paper compares two key figures in late-nineteenth-century debates concerning historical relativism: Wilhelm Windelband and Wilhelm Dilthey. Beneath the deep disagreements between these two authors, it reveals their common concern to immunize philosophy from the threat of historical relativism. The paper traces how both philosophers sought to fend off relativism by defending the idea of an ahistorical and permanent stratum of philosophical thinking. And it argues that although they succeeded in blocking historical versions of relativism, they did so at the cost of incurring a relativism vis-à-vis philosophical systems. This relativism turned out to be rooted not in the historicity of philosophy but in the timeless essence of philosophical reasoning itself. (shrink)

This article intend to elucidate how Wilhelm Windelband employed the Kantian critic method without devoid its typical features, going through this, what is fundamental for the approach from speculative reason to practical reason would be identified. We understand that practical reason, as a theoretical interest, is prefigured on the first critic, and that the Kantian system suffers mutations until his second critic formulation. Windelband’s critical view, can offer the tips of how to interpreter Kant’s passage from speculative to (...) practical reason, observing the elements witch are kept, as constant elements, the third antinomy for stance, and witch one changes among the course, as the ideas of liberty and nature in both theoretical and practical sense. Windelband can unfold to notice those variations and help to understand them in the development of Kantian theories as elements not contradictories with the canon of speculative reason. (shrink)