This dichotomy is discussed. First, by means of a short historical review, two theses are pointed out: (a) Originally scientific knowledge was regarded as a hermeneutical issue. (b) The separation into two methodological and scientific cultures is rather a ‘modern’ phenomenon. It was accomplished not before the 19th century as a product of the rise and final succes of the empirist-positivist paradigm for the so-called exact (natural) sciences and the analytic methodology. Further it is argued, that this separation turned out (...) to be an unproductive one: The traditional logical positivist philosophy of science failed in integrating the interpretive practice of the humanities. On the other hand hermeneutical methodology failed in explicating its principles in a way, that could satisfy modern analytic standards. So it remained deficient in founding the postulated methodological autonomy of the humanities. However, the more the positivist background of the traditional philosophy of science crumbles, the more interest the methodological intuitions of hermeneutists seem to obtain. Finally, a new possibility to explicate the concept of interpretation by means of analytical instrumentary is drawn out: The so-called structuralist view of scientific theories (J. D. Sneed, W. Stegmüller e.a.) seems to explicate properly just that feature of hermeneutical interpretation, which remained unintelligible for the traditional philosophy of science. So some realistic chance appears to mediate the alleged systematic antithesis and to eliminate that methodological dichotomy. Last but not least, a number of new philosophical theories, not coming from hermeneutical side, are mentioned, in which the concept of interpretation is already used in a presystematic, i.e. an implicit and vague, sense. So to explicate that concept seems to me to be a necessary philosophical task at the present time. (shrink)

Cet article s’intéresse aux ateliers régionaux de production céramique de Chypre à l’époque géométrique. À partir de l’analyse détaillée de la céramique, qui constitue la documentation primaire pour cette époque, et suivant une méthode rigoureuse, on tentera d’identifier et de définir le caractère régional de la production céramique. Cela nous permettra de cerner des modes de développement spécifiques et différenciés selon les régions de l’île. En l’absence de sources écrites pour l’époque chypro-géométrique, cette démarche est susceptible d’éclairer les processus de (...) constitution des royaumes chypriotes du Ier millénaire av. J.-C. (shrink)

Der metaphysische Geist-Koerper Dualismus sowie, im Anschluss daran, die Subjekt-Objekt-Trennung in der Erkenntnithe-orie der Neuzeit, einschliesslich der transzendentalen Position I. Kants, sind, so die These des deutschen Philosophen Wilhlem Dilthey, auf eine ueberspitzt intellektualistische Ausdeutung des neuzeitlichen Prinzips der Phaenomena-litaet zurueckzufuehren. Auf der Basis dieses Intellektualismus wurde in der Philosophie eine unueberbrueckbare Kluft zwischen dem Bewusstsein und der aeusseren materialen Welt geschaffen, die am Ende die gegebene Reali-taetsgewissheit selbst nicht zu begruenden vermag. Im Gegensatz dazu prae-sentiert Dilthey ein monistisches Prinzip (...) des „Lebens“, das aller logischen Bezugnahme auf eine objektive Welt vorausgehen soll. Auf dieser Ebene etab-lieren sich Selbstbewusstsein und Bewusstsein des „Andreren“ zeitgleich und in gegenseitiger Bedingtheit. Dilthey legt diese Korrelation mittels einer pha-enomenologischen Analyse der grundlegenden Erfahrung der willkuerlichen Bewegung dar. Anhand dieser Analyse laesst sich zeigen, dass die Erfahrung der willkuerlichen Bewegung, welche von der Vostellung eines zu erreichnden Ziels geleitet wird, notwendigerweise mit der Erfahrung eines opponierenden Widerstandes einhergeht. Die Signifikanz von Entitaeten, die aeusserlich ge-genueber dem Selbst sind, manifestiert sich somit primaer unter Kategorien wie die der Bedeutsamkeit und der Zweckmaessigkeit. (shrink)

On the methodological dichotomy between natural sciences and the humanities. This dichotomy is discussed. First, by means of a short historical review, two theses are pointed out: (a) Originally scientific knowledge was regarded as a hermeneutical issue. (b) The separation into two methodological and scientific cultures is rather a 'modern' phenomenon. It was accomplished not before the 19th century as a product of the rise and final succes of the empirist-positivist paradigm for the so-called exact (natural) sciences and the analytic (...) methodology. Further it is argued, that this separation turned out to be an unproductive one: The traditional logical positivist philosophy of science failed in integrating the interpretive practice of the humanities. On the other hand hermeneutical methodology failed in explicating its principles in a way, that could satisfy modern analytic standards. So it remained deficient in founding the postulated methodological autonomy of the humanities. However, the more the positivist background of the traditional philosophy of science crumbles, the more interest the methodological intutions of hermeneutists seem to obtain. Finally, a new possibility to explicate the concept of interpretation by means of analytical instrumentary is drawn out: The so-called structuralist view of scientific theories (J. D. Sneed, W. Stegmüller e.a.) seems to explicate properly just that feature of hermeneutical interpretation, which remained unintelligible for the traditional philosophy of science. So some realistic chance appears to mediate the alleged systematic antithesis and to eliminate that methodological dichotomy. Last but not least, a number of new philosophical theories, can coming from hermeneutical side, are mentioned, in which the concept of interpretation is already used in a presystematic, i.e. an implicit and vague, sense. So to explicate that concept seems to me to be a necessary philosophical task at the present time. (shrink)

Artificial Intelligence (AI) is increasingly being used in disaster risk management applications to predict the effect of upcoming disasters, plan for mitigation strategies, and determine who needs how much aid after a disaster strikes. The media is filled with unintended ethical concerns of AI algorithms, such as image recognition algorithms not recognizing persons of color or racist algorithmic predictions of whether offenders will recidivate. We know such unintended ethical consequences must play a role in DRM as well, yet there is (...) surprisingly little research on exactly what the unintended consequences are and what we can do to mitigate them. The aim of this perspective is to call researchers working on fairness, accountability, and transparency to work with DRM and local experts—so we can ensure that disaster mitigation and relief is accountable, considers local values, and is not unintentionally biased. (shrink)

Issledovanii︠a︡ Ekateriny Ilʹinichny Li︠a︡pushkinoĭ (1963-2018), literaturoveda, istorika russkoĭ literatury, dot︠s︡enta Sankt-Peterburgskogo gosudarstvennogo universiteta, obnaruzhivai︠u︡t nei︠a︡vnye smysly klassicheskikh tekstov. Prochtenie proizvedeniĭ Goncharova, Turgeneva, Dostoevskogo, Nabokova osnovyvaetsi︠a︡ na teorii literaturnoĭ germenevtiki. Teoreticheskie shtudii i praktika interpretat︠s︡ii realizui︠u︡t dialektiku ponimanii︠a︡ v obʺi︠a︡snenii︠a︡, to estʹ nalichie germenevticheskogo kruga, opredeli︠a︡i︠u︡shchee kompozit︠s︡ii︠u︡ predlagaemogo izdanii︠a︡.

The title of this volume A Man of Many Interests: Plutarch on Religion, Myth, and Magic. Essays in honour of Aurelio Pérez Jiménez is first and foremost a coalescing homage to Plutarch and to Aurelio, and to the way they have been inspiring (as master and indirect disciple) a multitude of readers in their path to knowledge, here metonymically represented by the scholars who offer their tribute to them. The analysis developed throughout the several contributions favors a philological approach of (...) wide spectrum, i.e., stemming from literary and linguistic aspects, it projects them into their cultural, religious, philosophical, and historical framework. The works were organized into two broad sections, respectively devoted to the Lives and to the Moralia. Contributors are: Frances Titchener, Carlos Alcalde Martín, José Luis Calvo, Delfim Leão, Judith Mossman, Anastasios G. Nikolaidis, Christopher Pelling, Philip Stadter, Paola Volpe, Francesco Becchi, Israel Muñoz Gallarte, Lautaro Roig Lanzillotta, Geert Roskam, Vicente M. Ramón Palerm, Frederick Brenk, John Dillon, Franco Ferrari, Aristoula Georgiadou, Luc van der Stockt, Luisa Lesage Gárriga. (shrink)