This book is intended not only for scholars and students in humanities, history (esp. the history of ideas), Jewish studies, philosophy (esp. the history of philosophy), and Christian theology, but also for those concerned with the roots of anti-Semitism and with the need for toleration and intercultural pluralism. Modernity and the Final Aim of History: * Combines the development of German philosophy from the Enlightenment to Idealism, and from Idealism to the revolutionary turning-point of the mid-nineteenth century with the Jewish (...) question; * Shows the close entwining of anti-Jewish prejudices with awareness of the importance of Judaism in the formation of modern thought; * Points out the hopes, obstacles, compromises, and disappointments of Jewish emancipation right up to the appearance of racial anti-Semitism; * Traces the changes in the debate over Judaism from the theological perspective to the philosophical and from the philosophical to that of the economic and naturalistic; * Underlines the dangers to toleration that arise from seeing human history as directed towards a single aim; *Can be used in university courses and seminars, as well as in research groups. (shrink)

Unter dem Titel Feuerbach und der Judaismus wird mit dieser Publikation ein neues Kapitel in der Feuerbachforschung aufgeschlagen, da erstmalig Feuerbachs Stellung zum Judaismus, aber auch sein Einfluß auf die deutsch-jüdische Philosophie ...

Metaphysics is a field where the positions of Kant and Mendelssohn differed significantly, from the essays for the Academy of Sciences right up to their last works. While Kant is increasingly doubtful of the objective validity of metaphysics and comes to admit only its subjective significance as a reflection of insuppressible human need, Mendelssohn continues to defend its objective validity with respect to sciences and natural theology. After reducing the valid proofs for the existence of God to the ontological argument, (...) Kant refuses this argument by means of his conception of existence as a position. Meanwhile, Mendelssohn upholds the legitimacy of such an argument and sees it as a bulwark against scepticism and Kant's paradox of the thing-in-itself. Notwithstanding these differences, they are allies in the defence of reason against visionary exaltation, as becomes apparent in the debate on spinozism between Hamann, Jacobi and Wizenmann on the one hand; and Mendelssohn on the other. The profound and pertinent dialogue between the two philosophers lasted more than 20 years and touched upon many subjects; such as the different methods in mathematics and philosophy, the philosophical meaning of intensive magnitude, the evidence, certainty and probability in metaphysics, natural theology and morals, reason, feeling and moral sense, pure religion and historical faiths, the meaning of human history. They agreed on attributing a fundamental role to freedom and on evaluating religions accordingly. Kant acknowledged the importance of M's Jerusalem for human emancipation. However; he criticised Judaism as a religion for slaves in Religion within the Boundaries of Mere Reason and so misunderstood M's affection for his own faith. They were also at variance over the progress of the human race; while Kant subscribed to the optimistic point of view and linked the efforts for human betterment to confidence in the progressive improvement of the human race even in the moral sphere, Mendelssohn rejected this evolutionary scheme and insisted upon the originality and diversity of human beings in different civilisations and times. Their differences were far from being resolved and the interest in Mendelssohn's thought during the Idealist period and later gives clear evidence of that. (shrink)

Na última fase da sua evolução, Feuerbach propõe um materialismo que não anule a originalidade do sujeito e lhe reconheça um âmbito de liberdade. Confrontando-se com Schopenhauer e com Kant, ele examina o sentimento de remorso e de arrependimento, bem como as condições de imputabilidade de um ato. Enquanto aqueles recorriam à distinção entre a esfera inteligível e a esfera sensível do homem, Feuerbach procura reconduzir tudo ao único principio da sensibilidade. Esta, mudando no tempo, torna possível reconhecer como erro (...) um ato realizado e operar em si uma mudança. Contra Schopenhauer, Feuerbach afirma que o caráter do homem não é inato, nem imodificável, por isso é equivocada a pena de morte. O fundamento da liberdade é o eu que age no jogo das paixões e é essencialmente em relação com os outros. As sugestões no campo moral e jurídico são interessantes, mas permanecem abertas algumas questões éticas, como aquela do fundamento absoluto da obrigação moral, já posta por Kant na explicação da consciência moral. (shrink)

Nel 2015 si è svolto a Milano l’Expo, una manifestazione fieristica dal titolo “Nutrire il pianeta. Energia per la vita” che in 184 giorni e con 145 nazioni partecipanti, fra cui ovviamente il Brasile, ha avuto 21 milioni di visitatori. Sull’onda di questo evento è tornato di attualità il celebre motto di Feuerbach: «L’uomo è ciò che mangia ». Nella lingua tedesca l’assonanza fra le terze persone del verbo essere e del verbo mangiare è evidente e suggerisce una stretta relazione (...) fra essere e mangiare. Non a caso i critici dell’epoca vi videro un’espressione di rozzo materialismo, che poteva essere avvicinata alla frase di Karl Vogt: «I pensieri stanno press’a poco nel medesimo rapporto col cervello, come la bile al fegato o l’urina alle reni». Vogt era ben consapevole di usare un’espressione «in un certo senso rozza», ma intendeva dire che «tutte le attività psichiche» erano «solo funzioni della sostanza cerebrale» [...]. (shrink)

Impossible Worlds focuses on an exciting new theory in philosophy, with applications in metaphysics, logic, and the theory of meaning. Its central topic is: how do we meaningfully talk and reason about situations which, unbeknownst to us, are impossible? This issue emerges as a central problem in contemporary philosophical accounts of meaning, information, knowledge, belief, fiction, conditionality, and counterfactual supposition. The book is written bytwo of the leading philosophers in the area and contains original research of relevance to professional philosophers (...) and logicians working in metaphysics, philosophy of language, formal logic, and adjacentareas. (shrink)