An exploration of the meaning and role of the concepts of empathy and sympathy in Herder’s thought, showing that the two concepts permeate his entire philosophy.

Many proposals for logic-based formalisations of argumentation consider an argument as a pair (Φ,α), where the support Φ is understood as a minimal consistent subset of a given knowledge base which has to entail the claim α. In case the arguments are given in the full language of classical propositional logic reasoning in such frameworks becomes a computationally costly task. For instance, the problem of deciding whether there exists a support for a given claim has been shown to be -complete. (...) In order to better understand the sources of complexity (and to identify tractable fragments), we focus on arguments given over formulæ in which the allowed connectives are taken from certain sets of Boolean functions. We provide a complexity classification for four different decision problems (existence of a support, checking the validity of an argument, relevance and dispensability) with respect to all possible sets of Boolean functions. Moreover, we make use of a general schema to enumerate all arguments to show that certain restricted fragments permit polynomial delay. Finally, we give a classification also in terms of counting complexity. (shrink)

We investigate the application of Courcelle’s theorem and the logspace version of Elberfeld et al. in the context of non-monotonic reasoning. Here we formalize the implication problem for propositional sets of formulas, the extension existence problem for default logic, the expansion existence problem for autoepistemic logic, the circumscriptive inference problem, as well as the abduction problem in monadic second order logic and thereby obtain fixed-parameter time and space efficient algorithms for these problems. On the other hand, we exhibit, for each (...) of the above problems, families of instances of a very simple structure that, for a wide range of different parameterizations, do not have efficient fixed-parameter algorithms (even in the sense of the large class XPnu, resp., XLnu) under standard complexity assumptions. (shrink)

_Schelling’s masterpiece investigating evil and freedom._.

John Rawls' Verwendung der Maximin-Regel zur Herleitung seiner Gerechtigkeitsprinzipien hat eine Fülle kritischer Beiträge nach sich gezogen. Auf der Grundlage dieser Arbeiten wird im vorliegenden Papier der Versuch unternommen, Rawls' Maximin-Argumentation einer möglichst umfassenden und geschlossenen Kritik zu unterziehen. Zur Kennzeichnung des spezifischen Entscheidungsproblems, mit dem sich die Individuen in der "original position" konfrontiert sehen, wird auf das allgemeine Modell der Theorie rationaler Entscheidung bei Ungewißheit zurückgegriffen. In diesem Zusammenhang wird insbesondere die Frage geklärt, was man sich unter einer abstrakten (...) (bzw. in Rawls' Diktion: "analogen") Anwendung des Maximin-Kriteriums vorzustellen hat. Vor diesem Hintergrund werden dann drei verschiedene Versionen des Rawls'schen Maximin-Arguments vorgestellt bzw. rekonstruiert und einer systematischen Kritik unterzogen. (shrink)

John Rawls' Verwendung der Maximin-Regel zur Herleitung seiner Gerechtigkeitsprinzipien hat eine Fülle kritischer Beiträge nach sich gezogen. Auf der Grundlage dieser Arbeiten wird im vorliegenden Papier der Versuch unternommen, Rawls' Maximin-Argumentation einer möglichst umfassenden und geschlossenen Kritik zu unterziehen. Zur Kennzeichnung des spezifischen Entscheidungsproblems, mit dem sich die Individuen in der "original position" konfrontiert sehen, wird auf das allgemeine Modell der Theorie rationaler Entscheidung bei Ungewißheit zurückgegriffen. In diesem Zusammenhang wird insbesondere die Frage geklärt, was man sich unter einer abstrakten (...) (bzw. in Rawls' Diktion: "analogen") Anwendung des Maximin-Kriteriums vorzustellen hat. Vor diesem Hintergrund werden dann drei verschiedene Versionen des Rawls'schen Maximin-Arguments vorgestellt bzw. rekonstruiert und einer systematischen Kritik unterzogen. (shrink)

The paper draws on a conceptual analysis of justice in discussing the power of rational choice justifications of conceptions of justice. It is argued that the concept of justice can be reduced to two independent moral dimensions. From this conceptual thesis a simple conceptional criterion is derived which any powerful theory of justice must satisfy. An attempt is made to use this fundamental criterion in evaluating a wide variety of rational choice theories of justice. It is shown that there is (...) but one variant of the rational choice approach which in substantiating principles of justice does not violate this criterion. (shrink)

Schelling’s masterpiece investigating evil and freedom.

In diesem Beitrag sollen zentrale Spielarten und Familienverwandte des Liberalismus vorgestellt sowie auf zentrale Herausforderungen eingegangen werden, die sich dem Liberalismus als politischer Theorie gegenwärtig stellen. In diesem Beitrag sollen zum einen zentrale Spielarten und Familienverwandte von Rawls’ Liberalismus vorgestellt werden. Dabei handelt es sich um den Links- und Rechtslibertarismus, den Neoliberalismus sowie den Nationalliberalismus. Zum anderen sollen mit dem gesellschaftlichen Pluralismus, dem Verhältnis zur Demokratie und der Umweltzerstörung wichtige Herausforderungen thematisiert werden, mit denen sich der politische Liberalismus heutzutage konfrontiert (...) sieht. (shrink)

John Rawls ist im 20. Jahrhundert sicherlich einer der bedeutendsten praktischen Philosophen. Seine Werke und die damit verbundene Begriffs- und Theoriebildung haben viele Traditionslinien philosophischer Klassiker der Moderne aufgegriffen, synthetisiert und neu ausgelegt. Mit seinem Nachdenken über Gerechtigkeit prägt er bis heute viele philosophische Debatten, sei es in positiver Bezugnahme oder negativer Abgrenzung.

Mit seiner Theorie der Gerechtigkeit löste John Rawls (1921-2002) eine Renaissance der normativen politischen Theorie aus, da sie Fragen nach der gerechten Verteilung von Gütern und Chancen wieder als eine zentrale philosophische Aufgabe ernst nahm. Es gilt als eines der einflussreichsten Werke der politischen Philosophie des 20. Jahrhunderts und kann nach wie vor als konstruktiver Beitrag zu aktuellen Diskussionen um Verteilungsgerechtigkeit gesehen werden. Mit seinem zweiten Hauptwerk Politischer Liberalismus hat er die Debatte eröffnet, wie wir unter Bedingungen einer pluralistischen Gesellschaft (...) auf vernünftige Weise gemeinsam leben können. Das Werk von Rawls besitzt eine zentrale Bedeutung für die politische Philosophie der Gegenwart und für angrenzende Disziplinen wie Sozialwissenschaften, Rechtswissenschaften oder Theologie. Das Handbuch ist das erste deutschsprachige Nachschlagewerk, welches auf dem aktuellen internationalen Forschungsstand das Gesamtwerk von Rawls in seiner Entwicklung darstellt, zentrale Begriffe erläutert und zudem die wichtigsten Referenzen und Diskussionen vorstellt. (shrink)

This paper maintains that objectivism about practical reasons should be combined with pluralism both about the nature of practical reasons and about action explanations. We argue for an ‘expanding circle of practical reasons’, starting out from an open-minded monist objectivism. On this view, practical reasons are not limited to actual facts, but consist in states of affairs, possible facts that may or may not obtain. Going beyond such ‘that-ish’ reasons, we argue that goals are also bona fide practical reasons. This (...) makes for a genuine pluralism about practical reasons. Furthermore, the facts or states of affairs that function as practical reasons are not exclusively natural or descriptive, but include normative facts. That normative facts can be reasons justifies a pluralism about reason explanations, one which allows for what we call enkratic explanations in addition to teleological ones. (shrink)

This chapter explores whether a version of causalism about reasons for action can be saved by giving up Davidsonian psychologism and endorsing objectivism, so that the reasons for which we act are the normative reasons that cause our corresponding actions. We address two problems for ‘objecto-causalism’, actions for merely apparent normative reasons and actions performed in response to future normative reasons—in neither of these cases can the reason for which the agent acts cause her action. To resolve these problems, we (...) move from objecto-causalism to ‘objecto-capacitism’, which appeals to agential competences manifest-ed in acting for a reason. We briefly apply this view of reasons for action to historical action explanations. (shrink)

This volume is dedicated to the topic of the human evaluation and interpretation of animals in ancient and medieval cultures. From a transcultural perspective contributions from Assyriology, Byzantine Studies, Classical Archaeology, Egyptology, German Medieval Studies and Jewish History look into the processes and mechanisms behind the transfer by people of certain values to animals, and the functions these animal-signs have within written, pictorial and performative forms of expression.

By studying how different societies understand categories such as time and causality, the Durkheimians decentered Western epistemology. With contributions from philosophy, sociology, anthropology, media studies, and sinology, this volume illustrates the interdisciplinarity and intellectual rigor of the "category project" which did not only stir controversies among contemporary scholars but paved the way for other theories exploring how the thoughts of individuals are prefigured by society and vice versa.

Comparing knowledge with belief can go wrong in two dimensions: If the authors employ a wider notion of knowledge, then they do not compare like with like because they assume a narrow notion of belief. If they employ only a narrow notion of knowledge, then their claim is not supported by the evidence. Finally, we sketch a superior teleological view.

In lieu of an abstract, here is a brief excerpt of the content:Reviewed by:The Roots of RomanticismJames SchmidtIsaiah Berlin. The Roots of Romanticism. The A. W. Mellon Lectures in the Fine Arts. The National Gallery of Art, Washington, D.C. Bollingen Series XXXV:45. Edited by Henry Hardy. Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1999. Pp. xvi + 171. Cloth. $19.95.Originally delivered in the spring of 1965 and subsequently broadcast several times over the BBC, Berlin's lectures on romanticism have long been esteemed by his (...) admirers. Berlin nevertheless resisted their publication, hoping one day to write a book on romanticism. His literary executor Henry Hardy reports, however, "not so much as a sentence of the intended work was ever written" (x). Thus Hardy's edition of these lectures constitutes Berlin's most extended reflection on a theme that loomed large in his understanding of the modern world: the romantic critique of the Enlightenment.Surprisingly few romantics actually appear in these pages. Those who do arrive late, linger briefly, and are usually German. Fichte enters on page 88, followed by Schelling (97) and the Schlegel brothers (104), with brief appearances by E. T. A. Hoffman and Johann Ludwig Tieck (114-6). Only in his closing ruminations on the impact of romanticism does Berlin cast a glance at Byron, Chateaubriand, and Sir Walter Scott. Most of the book explores what Berlin takes to be romanticism's "roots," which he locates in a few eighteenth-century German writers who, when romanticism finally burst upon the scene, were either disgusted by it (Jacobi, Schiller, and Goethe) or dead (Hamann). A few years later Berlin made these proto-romantics the charter members of the movement he dubbed "the Counter-Enlightenment"—a concept that would have a considerable career of its own. Berlin's concern is thus less with romanticism per se than "with the revolution of which romanticism, at any rate in some of its guises, is the strongest expression and symptom" (xiii).As Berlin saw it, this revolution involved a rejection of the idea that 1) "all [End Page 451] genuine questions can be answered," 2) "all these answers are knowable," and 3) "all these answers must be compatible with one another" (21-2). Upon these three principles, he insists, "the whole Western tradition rested" (21), and their rejection constitutes "the greatest single shift in the consciousness of the West" (1). Berlin holds that the Enlightenment left these principles unshaken. It was the romantics who questioned the "ruinous" belief that "there is one single solution to all human ills" (which carries the insidious corollary that "you must impose this solution no matter what cost") and thus laid the foundations for "liberalism, toleration, decency and the appreciation of the imperfections of life" (146-7), causes which are usually associated (wrongly, according to Berlin) with the Enlightenment.These arguments will not be unfamiliar to those who know Berlin's works. Reading him is a bit like listening to Vivaldi: taken individually, his essays are clever, vigorously argued, and elegantly crafted; but reading them in sequence soon leads to a nagging sense of having heard it all before. Berlin's work was animated by an awareness of the diversity of plausible answers that could be given to the question of how life should be lived and by an impassioned defense of this plurality of possibilities against the illusion of an ultimate solution. One can admire the defense of liberalism that Berlin drew from these convictions and yet have reservations about the historical accuracy of his account of the relationship between romanticism and the Enlightenment. It is hard to see Hamann as a supporter of pluralism and harder still to see the philosophes—who rejected the dogmatic esprit de systèm in favor of an experimentalist esprit systématique—as oblivious to the multiplicity of ways in which good lives could be lived. Lessing's views on religious questions were a good deal more skeptical and open-ended than Jacobi's. Fichte and Schelling sought to bring a greater systematic coherence to Kant's philosophy, not to dismantle it. Once one moves from general claims about "romanticism" and "the Enlightenment" to assess specific thinkers, the picture becomes a good deal messier than Berlin lets on. Early romantics... (shrink)

This volume celebrates the work of Hans-Johann Glock, a philosopher renowned for both his exegesis of Wittgenstein and his many contributions to debates in contemporary philosophy. It brings together 16 new essays by up-and-coming and distinguished philosophers engaging with Glock’s work, and it concludes with a "Reflections and Replies" chapter in which Glock responds to his interlocutors. -/- Glock’s distinctive philosophical voice features a rare combination of a Wittgenstein-inspired approach with a willingness to break away from Wittgenstein to tackle problems (...) in an open-minded way. The broad selection of essays included in this volume reflects Glock’s wide-ranging philosophical interests and demonstrates the potential of applying Wittgensteinian insights to advance current systematic debates in philosophy. The chapters discuss Wittgenstein’s philosophy, metaphilosophy, truth and language, animal minds and agency, and reasons and normativity. (shrink)

This collection contains the first English translations of a group of important eighteenth-century German essays that address the question, "What is Enlightenment?" The book also includes newly translated and newly written interpretive essays by leading historians and philosophers, which examine the origins of eighteenth-century debate on Enlightenment and explore its significance for the present. In recent years, critics from across the political and philosophical spectrum have condemned the Enlightenment for its complicity with any number of present-day social and cultural maladies. (...) It has rarely been noticed, however, that at the end of the Enlightenment, German thinkers had already begun a scrutiny of their age so wide-ranging that there are few subsequent criticisms that had not been considered by the close of the eighteenth century. Among the concerns these essays address are the importance of freedom of expression, the relationship between faith and reason, and the responsibility of the Enlightenment for revolutions. Included are translations of works by such well-known figures as Immanuel Kant, Moses Mendelssohn, Johann Gottlieb Fichte, and Johann Georg Hamann, as well as essays by thinkers whose work is virtually unknown to American readers. These eighteenth-century texts are set against interpretive essays by such major twentieth-century figures as Max Horkheimer, Jürgen Habermas, and Michel Foucault. (shrink)

The introduction charts Hans-Johann Glock’s academic career, introduces some of his core philosophical views, and provides an overview of the chapters included in the festschrift.