This is a comprehensive introduction to the history of Western Philosophy from the Pre-Socratics to Twentieth Century thought. In addition to all the key figures, the book covers figures whose contributions have so far been overlooked, such as Vico, Montesquieu, Durkheim and Weber. Along with in-depth discussion of the philosophical movements, Skirbekk and Gilje also discuss the natural sciences, the establishment of the Humanities, Socialism and Fascism, Psychoanalysis, and the rise of the social sciences. _History of Western Thought_ is an (...) ideal introduction to philosophy and the sociological and scientific structures that have shaped modern day philosophy. (shrink)

This is a comprehensive introduction to the history of Western Philosophy from the Pre-Socratics to Twentieth Century thought. In addition to all the key figures, the book covers figures whose contributions have so far been overlooked, such as Vico, Montesquieu, Durkheim and Weber. Along with in-depth discussion of the philosophical movements, Skirbekk and Gilje also discuss the natural sciences, the establishment of the Humanities, Socialism and Fascism, Psychoanalysis, and the rise of the social sciences. _History of Western Thought_ is an (...) ideal introduction to philosophy and the sociological and scientific structures that have shaped modern day philosophy. (shrink)

This paper, on argumentative reason in a modernization-theoretical perspective, is a revised version of a public lecture held at Oslo University College, in memory of Professor Harald Grimen. There are three main points: argumentative reason conceived as self-critical reflection, to be extended to arguments from absurdity – from Apel to Ryle, as it were; argumentative reason conceived as a search for better arguments, ideally with mutual recognition and personal improvement – a meliorist approach; argumentative reason conceived as situated learning-processes, socially (...) and institutionally. In short, a special blend of late-Wittgensteinian praxeology, transcendental-pragmatics and discourse theory, as it is discussed in my writings. (shrink)

My question is the following: to what extent is ethical anthropocentrism tenable? In a “discourse ethical” perspective I will consider some case-oriented arguments in favor of a paradigmatically unique ethical standing for humans and some arguments in favor of an ethical gradualism between humans and other mammals and between humans and nature, ending with a conclusion in favor of a fair treatment of all moral subjects, human and non-human.

Obszar etyki jest najczęściej ograniczany do człowieka i świata ludzkiego: tylko ludzie mogą działać moralnie lub niemoralnie, tylko ludzie mogą być z moralnego punktu widzenia godni pochwały lub nagany; tylko ludziom przypisuje się status podmiotów moralnego działania i podmiotów moralnych praw. W jakim stopniu ten antropocentryzm etyczny daje się utrzymać? Czy współczesna wiedza biologiczna, uwydatniająca ciągłość i stopniowalność cech właściwych dla istot żywych, nie podważa takiego mocnego rozgraniczenia i założenia o uprzywilejowanej pozycji człowieka? Czy nie powinniśmy wyjść poza gatunkowy egoizm, (...) a przynajmniej go ograniczyć? W niniejszym artykule rozważę argumenty na rzecz stanowiącej osobny paradygmat, wyjątkowej pozycji etycznej człowieka oraz zbadam argumenty na rzecz etycznego gradualizmu [czyli stopniowalnych różnic] między istotami ludzkimi a pozostałymi ssakami oraz między człowiekiem a przyrodą. (shrink)

This article1 I 2014 hadde nærmere én av tre høyere utdanning. Blant folk mellom 25 og 39 år har mer enn halvparten av kvinnene høyere utdanning, noe som gjør denne aldersgruppen til den høyest utdannede i Norge.2 presents reflections on women's presence in Norwegian philosophy, partly as a result of input from key persons in the Norwegian philosophy environment. We discuss the low proportion of women among students and staff in the field, then we investigate whether gender perspectives are present (...) in the study of philosophy and why women's low participation in the study of philosophy is regarded as a vital challenge. We argue that awareness of the impact history of categorization of gender is important and it is necessary to examine current direct and indirect stereotypes of gender, rationality and natural properties and their role in Norwegian philosophy today. We identify characteristics of the Norwegian post-war philosophy, such as diversity and openness, power struggles and gender blindness, and argue that women throughout the postwar period and until today been a minority in philosophy. Our material shows that measures to improve gender balance in philosophy, and attempts to integrate gender perspectives, has met fierce resistance. The article also shows how the study of feminist philosophy and its influence and position in Norway, is well suited to give us a richer and more complex picture of the Norwegian philosophy. It may tell us something about how open-minded or closed the philosophical communities are, but it can also throw light on how philosophy itself plays the role as critical and self-reflective. (shrink)

What is transcendental-pragmatics? Why is transcendental-pragmatics important? In this paper, I focus on four main points: I delineate what I see as the strength and relevance of transcendental-pragmatics within the intellectual setting in the post-war period. I indicate how the discussions within transcendental-pragmatics have revealed inherent challenges, at the same time as the intellectual and institutional surroundings have changed unfavorably during the last decades. Finally, I indicate how these inherent challenges and new constellations could and should be met, to the (...) effect that transcendental-pragmatics could reveal its philosophical importance and practical relevance under changed conditions. In so doing, I defend a gradualist and meliorist version of transcendental-pragmatics. In short, I «situate» transcendental-pragmatics, in a meta-philosophical essay, and at the same time, I argue in favor of a revised version. (shrink)

There are in our time ongoing discussions on the question of global justice and inter-cultural dialogues. This question embraces not only questions of distribution and recognition, but also questions of peace and survival. In this paper, focusing on the latter, I shall discuss the question of the possibility of a philosophical justifi cation for universally binding principles for international law and thus for inter-state and intercultural behavior.

Focusing on the terms 'possibly affected persons' and 'those affected' in the Habermasian ' discourse principle', I argue that we need a notion of moral subjects in addition to that of a person and that this notion of moral subjects implies a 'normative gradualism' which weakens the participatory and consensual aspect of discourse theory and strengthens the aspect of enlightened 'advocatory' deliberation in terms of needs and the good life. I argue that this notion of moral subjects represents a challenge (...) for the discourse principle. Confronted with the huge number of moral subjects and of future persons, demanding various kinds of advocatory representation, the Habermasian discourse principle, as stated in Between Facts and Norms, becomes unsatisfactory. (shrink)

The debate between Habermas and Rawls that took place in 1990s concerned how philosophy can justify the principles of justice under the conditions of pluralism of different and irreconcilable moral, philosophical, and religious doctrines. The context of the debate was mainly Rawls’ Political Liberalism and Habermas’ Between Facts and Norms as well. This paper argues that a wider geo-cultural perspective is pertinent in order to better comprehend the different justification strategies in Habermas and Rawls, concerning the principle of justice. This (...) goes for their different geo-cultural experiences and presuppositions – in short, Rawls living in a self-confident North America in the post-war period versus Habermas’ German experience of civilization breakdown. However, it might also be relevant for the assessment of these two strategies in our time, faced with new kinds of geo-political differences and conflicts. (shrink)

"The notion of sustainability is interdisciplinary, requiring more than multidisciplinary research, and normative, requiring ongoing discussion about ethical priorities." "Hence, the authors of this anthology recommend improved interdisciplinary collaboration and intensified public discussion about sustainability. By such admittedly fallible procedures we should try, again and again, to avoid or rectify instances of unsustainability." "Further, the authors argue in favour of reduced material consumption, an ideal of 'good life', and gradualistic obligations toward non-human beings."--BOOK JACKET.Title Summary field provided by Blackwell North (...) America, Inc. All Rights Reserved. (shrink)

In an age of cultural pluralism, and in light of serious counterarguments, this work offers a justification of universal principles. The book focuses on a series of modern challenges and argues in favor of an awareness for varieties and nuances, as well as a discursive universality. Timely Thoughts represents a serious contribution to inter-cultural dialogues and is appropriate for academia and the public sphere.