The present collection deals with philosophical thinking at the medieval university from the threefold perspective of Institution and Career, Organizational Forms and Literary Genres, and School Formation and School Conflict.

Jakob Friedrich Fries (1773-1843): A Philosophy of the Exact Sciences -/- Shortened version of the article of the same name in: Tabula Rasa. Jenenser magazine for critical thinking. 6th of November 1994 edition -/- 1. Biography -/- Jakob Friedrich Fries was born on the 23rd of August, 1773 in Barby on the Elbe. Because Fries' father had little time, on account of his journeying, he gave up both his sons, of whom Jakob Friedrich was the elder, to (...) the Herrnhut Teaching Institution in Niesky in 1778. Fries attended the theological seminar in Niesky in autumn 1792, which lasted for three years. There he (secretly) began to study Kant. The reading of Kant's works led Fries, for the first time, to a deep philosophical satisfaction. His enthusiasm for Kant is to be understood against the background that a considerable measure of Kant's philosophy is based on a firm foundation of what happens in an analogous and similar manner in mathematics. -/- During this period he also read Heinrich Jacobi's novels, as well as works of the awakening classic German literature; in particular Friedrich Schiller's works. In 1795, Fries arrived at Leipzig University to study law. During his time in Leipzig he became acquainted with Fichte's philosophy. In autumn of the same year he moved to Jena to hear Fichte at first hand, but was soon disappointed. -/- During his first sojourn in Jenaer (1796), Fries got to know the chemist A. N. Scherer who was very influenced by the work of the chemist A. L. Lavoisier. Fries discovered, at Scherer's suggestion, the law of stoichiometric composition. Because he felt that his work still need some time before completion, he withdrew as a private tutor to Zofingen (in Switzerland). There Fries worked on his main critical work, and studied Newton's "Philosophiae naturalis principia mathematica". He remained a lifelong admirer of Newton, whom he praised as a perfectionist of astronomy. Fries saw the final aim of his mathematical natural philosophy in the union of Newton's Principia with Kant's philosophy. -/- With the aim of qualifying as a lecturer, he returned to Jena in 1800. Now Fries was known from his independent writings, such as "Reinhold, Fichte and Schelling" (1st edition in 1803), and "Systems of Philosophy as an Evident Science" (1804). The relationship between G. W. F. Hegel and Fries did not develop favourably. Hegel speaks of "the leader of the superficial army", and at other places he expresses: "he is an extremely narrow-minded bragger". On the other hand, Fries also has an unfavourable take on Hegel. He writes of the "Redundancy of the Hegelistic dialectic" (1828). In his History of Philosophy (1837/40) he writes of Hegel, amongst other things: "Your way of philosophising seems just to give expression to nonsense in the shortest possible way". In this work, Fries appears to argue with Hegel in an objective manner, and expresses a positive attitude to his work. -/- In 1805, Fries was appointed professor for philosophy in Heidelberg. In his time spent in Heidelberg, he married Caroline Erdmann. He also sealed his friendships with W. M. L. de Wette and F. H. Jacobi. Jacobi was amongst the contemporaries who most impressed Fries during this period. In Heidelberg, Fries wrote, amongst other things, his three-volume main work New Critique of Reason (1807). -/- In 1816 Fries returned to Jena. When in 1817 the Wartburg festival took place, Fries was among the guests, and made a small speech. 1819 was the so-called "Great Year" for Fries: His wife Caroline died, and Karl Sand, a member of a student fraternity, and one of Fries' former students stabbed the author August von Kotzebue to death. Fries was punished with a philosophy teaching ban but still received a professorship for physics and mathematics. Only after a period of years, and under restrictions, he was again allowed to read philosophy. From now on, Fries was excluded from political influence. The rest of his life he devoted himself once again to philosophical and natural studies. During this period, he wrote "Mathematical Natural Philosophy" (1822) and the "History of Philosophy" (1837/40). -/- Fries suffered from a stroke on New Year's Day 1843, and a second stroke, on the 10th of August 1843 ended his life. -/- 2. Fries' Work Fries left an extensive body of work. A look at the subject areas he worked on makes us aware of the universality of his thinking. Amongst these subjects are: Psychic anthropology, psychology, pure philosophy, logic, metaphysics, ethics, politics, religious philosophy, aesthetics, natural philosophy, mathematics, physics and medical subjects, to which, e.g., the text "Regarding the optical centre in the eye together with general remarks about the theory of seeing" (1839) bear witness. With popular philosophical writings like the novel "Julius and Evagoras" (1822), or the arabesque "Longing, and a Trip to the Middle of Nowhere" (1820), he tried to make his philosophy accessible to a broader public. Anthropological considerations are shown in the methodical basis of his philosophy, and to this end, he provides the following didactic instruction for the study of his work: "If somebody wishes to study philosophy on the basis of this guide, I would recommend that after studying natural philosophy, a strict study of logic should follow in order to peruse metaphysics and its applied teachings more rapidly, followed by a strict study of criticism, followed once again by a return to an even closer study of metaphysics and its applied teachings." -/- 3. Continuation of Fries' work through the Friesian School -/- Fries' ideas found general acceptance amongst scientists and mathematicians. A large part of the followers of the "Fries School of Thought" had a scientific or mathematical background. Amongst them were biologist Matthias Jakob Schleiden, mathematics and science specialist philosopher Ernst Friedrich Apelt, the zoologist Oscar Schmidt, and the mathematician Oscar Xavier Schlömilch. Between the years 1847 and 1849, the treatises of the "Fries School of Thought", with which the publishers aimed to pursue philosophy according to the model of the natural sciences appeared. In the Kant-Fries philosophy, they saw the realisation of this ideal. The history of the "New Fries School of Thought" began in 1903. It was in this year that the philosopher Leonard Nelson gathered together a small discussion circle in Goettingen. Amongst the founding members of this circle were: A. Rüstow, C. Brinkmann and H. Goesch. In 1904 L. Nelson, A. Rüstow, H. Goesch and the student W. Mecklenburg travelled to Thuringia to find the missing Fries writings. In the same year, G. Hessenberg, K. Kaiser and Nelson published the first pamphlet from their first volume of the "Treatises of the Fries School of Thought, New Edition". -/- The school set out with the aim of searching for the missing Fries' texts, and re-publishing them with a view to re-opening discussion of Fries' brand of philosophy. The members of the circle met regularly for discussions. Additionally, larger conferences took place, mostly during the holidays. Featuring as speakers were: Otto Apelt, Otto Berg, Paul Bernays, G. Fraenkel, K. Grelling, G. Hessenberg, A. Kronfeld, O. Meyerhof, L. Nelson and R. Otto. On the 1st of March 1913, the Jakob-Friedrich-Fries society was founded. Whilst the Fries' school of thought dealt in continuum with the advancement of the Kant-Fries philosophy, the members of the Jakob-Friedrich-Fries society's main task was the dissemination of the Fries' school publications. In May/June, 1914, the organisations took part in their last common conference before the gulf created by the outbreak of the First World War. Several members died during the war. Others returned disabled. The next conference took place in 1919. A second conference followed in 1921. Nevertheless, such intensive work as had been undertaken between 1903 and 1914 was no longer possible. -/- Leonard Nelson died in October 1927. In the 1930's, the 6th and final volume of "Treatises of the Fries School of Thought, New Edition" was published. Franz Oppenheimer, Otto Meyerhof, Minna Specht and Grete Hermann were involved in their publication. -/- 4. About Mathematical Natural Philosophy -/- In 1822, Fries' "Mathematical Natural Philosophy" appeared. Fries rejects the speculative natural philosophy of his time - above all Schelling's natural philosophy. A natural study, founded on speculative philosophy, ceases with its collection, arrangement and order of well-known facts. Only a mathematical natural philosophy can deliver the necessary explanatory reasoning. The basic dictum of his mathematical natural philosophy is: "All natural theories must be definable using purely mathematically determinable reasons of explanation." Fries is of the opinion that science can attain completeness only by the subordination of the empirical facts to the metaphysical categories and mathematical laws. -/- The crux of Fries' natural philosophy is the thought that mathematics must be made fertile for use by the natural sciences. However, pure mathematics displays solely empty abstraction. To be able to apply them to the sensory world, an intermediatory connection is required. Mathematics must be connected to metaphysics. The pure mechanics, consisting of three parts are these: a) A study of geometrical movement, which considers solely the direction of the movement, b) A study of kinematics, which considers velocity in Addition, c) A study of dynamic movement, which also incorporates mass and power, as well as direction and velocity. -/- Of great interest is Fries' natural philosophy in view of its methodology, particularly with regard to the doctrine "leading maxims". Fries calls these "leading maxims" "heuristic", "because they are principal rules for scientific invention". -/- Fries' philosophy found great recognition with Carl Friedrich Gauss, amongst others. Fries asked for Gauss's opinion on his work "An Attempt at a Criticism based on the Principles of the Probability Calculus" (1842). Gauss also provided his opinions on "Mathematical Natural Philosophy" (1822) and on Fries' "History of Philosophy". Gauss acknowledged Fries' philosophy and wrote in a letter to Fries: "I have always had a great predilection for philosophical speculation, and now I am all the more happy to have a reliable teacher in you in the study of the destinies of science, from the most ancient up to the latest times, as I have not always found the desired satisfaction in my own reading of the writings of some of the philosophers. In particular, the writings of several famous (maybe better, so-called famous) philosophers who have appeared since Kant have reminded me of the sieve of a goat-milker, or to use a modern image instead of an old-fashioned one, of Münchhausen's plait, with which he pulled himself from out of the water. These amateurs would not dare make such a confession before their Masters; it would not happen were they were to consider the case upon its merits. I have often regretted not living in your locality, so as to be able to glean much pleasurable entertainment from philosophical verbal discourse." -/- The starting point of the new adoption of Fries was Nelson's article "The critical method and the relation of psychology to philosophy" (1904). Nelson dedicates special attention to Fries' re-interpretation of Kant's deduction concept. Fries awards Kant's criticism the rationale of anthropological idiom, in that he is guided by the idea that one can examine in a psychological way which knowledge we have "a priori", and how this is created, so that we can therefore recognise our own knowledge "a priori" in an empirical way. Fries understands deduction to mean an "awareness residing darkly in us is, and only open to basic metaphysical principles through conscious reflection.". -/- Nelson has pointed to an analogy between Fries' deduction and modern metamathematics. In the same manner, as with the anthropological deduction of the content of the critical investigation into the metaphysical object show, the content of mathematics become, in David Hilbert's view, the object of metamathematics. -/-. (shrink)

Aworkshop was held August 26–28, 2015, by the Earth- Life Science Institute (ELSI) Origins Network (EON, see Appendix I) at the Tokyo Institute of Technology. This meeting gathered a diverse group of around 40 scholars researching the origins of life (OoL) from various perspectives with the intent to find common ground, identify key questions and investigations for progress, and guide EON by suggesting a roadmap of activities. Specific challenges that the attendees were encouraged to address included the following: What key (...) questions, ideas, and investigations should the OoL research community address in the near and long term? How can this community better organize itself and prioritize its efforts? What roles can particular subfields play, and what can ELSI and EON do to facilitate research progress? (See also Appendix II.) The present document is a product of that workshop; a white paper that serves as a record of the discussion that took place and a guide and stimulus to the solution of the most urgent and important issues in the study of the OoL. This paper is not intended to be comprehensive or a balanced representation of the opinions of the entire OoL research community. It is intended to present a number of important position statements that contain many aspirational goals and suggestions as to how progress can be made in understanding the OoL. The key role played in the field by current societies and recurring meetings over the past many decades is fully acknowledged, including the International Society for the Study of the Origin of Life (ISSOL) and its official journal Origins of Life and Evolution of Biospheres, as well as the International Society for Artificial Life (ISAL). (shrink)

Jakob Friedrich Fries (1773–1843) zählt sicherlich zu den bedeutendsten Denkern der auf Kant folgenden Phase der deutschen Philosophie. Das wird in eindrucksvoller Weise durch die Beiträge dieses Bandes belegt, die aus Vorträgen auf dem Fries-Symposion hervorgingen, das im Oktober 1997 an der Friedrich-Schiller-Universität Jena stattfand. Die Autoren beleuchten die Lebensumstände von Fries, ordnen sein Werk philosophiegeschichtlich ein und setzen sich systematisch mit erkenntnistheoretischen, naturphilosophischen, wissenschaftstheoretischen und politischen Aspekten seiner Philosophie auseinander. Auch die Rezeption des Fries’schen Werkes bei Naturwissenschaftlern wie (...) M. J. Schleiden und Philosophen wie E. F. Fries und L. Nelson kommt zur Sprache. (shrink)

Name der Zeitschrift: Kant-Studien Jahrgang: 108 Heft: 2 Seiten: 311-312.

Investigation of neural and cognitive processes underlying individual variation in moral preferences is underway, with notable similarities emerging between moral- and risk-based decision-making. Here we specifically assessed moral distributive justice preferences and non-moral financial gambling preferences in the same individuals, and report an association between these seemingly disparate forms of decision-making. Moreover, we find this association between distributive justice and risky decision-making exists primarily when the latter is assessed with the Iowa Gambling Task. These findings are consistent with neuroimaging studies (...) of brain function during moral and risky decision-making. This research also constitutes the first replication of a novel experimental measure of distributive justice decision-making, for which individual variation in performance was found. Further examination of decision-making processes across different contexts may lead to an improved understanding of the factors affecting moral behaviour. (shrink)

Capacities for abstract thinking and problem‐solving are central to human cognition. Processes of abstraction allow the transfer of experiences and knowledge between contexts helping us make informed decisions in new or changing contexts. While we are often inclined to relate such reasoning capacities to individual minds and brains, they may in fact be contingent on human‐specific modes of collaboration, dialogue, and shared attention. In an experimental study, we test the hypothesis that social interaction enhances cognitive processes of rule‐induction, which in (...) turn improves problem‐solving performance. Through three sessions of increasing complexity, individuals and groups were presented with a problem‐solving task requiring them to categorize a set of visual stimuli. To assess the character of participants’ problem representations, after each training session, they were presented with a transfer task involving stimuli that differed in appearance, but shared relations among features with the training set. Besides, we compared participants’ categorization behaviors to simulated agents relying on exemplar learning. We found that groups performed superior to individuals and agents in the training sessions and were more likely to correctly generalize their observations in the transfer phase, especially in the high complexity session, suggesting that groups more effectively induced underlying categorization rules from the stimuli than individuals and agents. Crucially, variation in performance among groups was predicted by semantic diversity in members’ dialogical contributions, suggesting a link between social interaction, cognitive diversity, and abstraction. (shrink)

Luca M. Possati, Jean Grondin, Paul Ricoeur ; Aurore Dumont, François Dosse et Catherine Goldenstein, Paul Ricoeur: penser la mémoire ; Paul-Gabriel Sandu, Gert-Jan van der Heiden, The Truth of Language. Heidegger, Ricoeur and Derrida on Disclosure and Displacement ; Paul Marinescu, Marc-Antoine Vallée, Gadamer et Ricoeur. La conception herméneutiquedu langage ; Witold Płotka, Saulius Geniusas, Th e Origins of the Horizon in Husserl’s Phenomenology ; Delia Popa, Annabelle Dufourcq, La dimension imaginaire du réel dans la philosophie de Husserl ; (...) Maria GyemantDenis Seron, Ce que voir veut dire. Essai sur la perception ; Christian Ferencz-Flatz, Hans Friesen, Christian Lotz, Jakob Meier, Markus Wolf, Ding und Verdinglichung. Technik- und Sozialphilosophie nach Heidegger und der Kritischen Th eorie ; Bogdan MincăLarisa Cercel, John Stanley, Unterwegs zu einer hermeneutischen Übersetzungswissenschaft. Radegundis Stolze zu ihrem 60. Geburtstag ; Denisa Butnaru Johann Michel, Sociologie du soi. Essai d’herméneutique appliquée ; Ovidiu Stanciu, Jan Patočka, Aristote, ses devanciers, ses successeurs. Trad. fr. Erika Abrams ; Mădălina Diaconu, Emmanuel Alloa, Das durchscheinende Bild. Konturen einer medialen, Phänomenologie. (shrink)

In his book Moral Dimensions. Permissibility, Meaning, Blame , T.M. Scanlon proposes a new account of permissibility, and argues, against the doctrine of double effect (DDE), that intentions do not matter for permissibility. I argue that Scanlon's account of permissibility as based on what the agent should have known at the time of action does not sufficiently take into account Scanlon's own emphasis on permissibility as a question for the deliberating agent. A proper account of permissibility, based on the agent's (...) actual beliefs, will allow us to revise the principle Scanlon proposes for regulating the use of violence in war, and to show that, while the DDE as such might be invalid, its focus on intentions does point toward an important element which Scanlon's proposal lacks, viz. the requirement that the agent believes that her actions will have certain consequences and can be justified for that reason. (shrink)

For \documentclass[12pt]{minimal} \usepackage{amsmath} \usepackage{wasysym} \usepackage{amsfonts} \usepackage{amssymb} \usepackage{amsbsy} \usepackage{mathrsfs} \usepackage{upgreek} \setlength{\oddsidemargin}{-69pt} \begin{document}$${f,g\in\omega^\omega}$$\end{document} let \documentclass[12pt]{minimal} \usepackage{amsmath} \usepackage{wasysym} \usepackage{amsfonts} \usepackage{amssymb} \usepackage{amsbsy} \usepackage{mathrsfs} \usepackage{upgreek} \setlength{\oddsidemargin}{-69pt} \begin{document}$${c^\forall_{f,g}}$$\end{document} be the minimal number of uniform g-splitting trees needed to cover the uniform f-splitting tree, i.e., for every branch ν of the f-tree, one of the g-trees contains ν. Let \documentclass[12pt]{minimal} \usepackage{amsmath} \usepackage{wasysym} \usepackage{amsfonts} \usepackage{amssymb} \usepackage{amsbsy} \usepackage{mathrsfs} \usepackage{upgreek} \setlength{\oddsidemargin}{-69pt} \begin{document}$${c^\exists_{f,g}}$$\end{document} be the dual notion: For every branch ν, one of the g-trees guesses ν(m) infinitely often. We show that (...) it is consistent that \documentclass[12pt]{minimal} \usepackage{amsmath} \usepackage{wasysym} \usepackage{amsfonts} \usepackage{amssymb} \usepackage{amsbsy} \usepackage{mathrsfs} \usepackage{upgreek} \setlength{\oddsidemargin}{-69pt} \begin{document}$${c^\exists_{f_\epsilon,g_\epsilon}{=}c^\forall_{f_\epsilon,g_\epsilon}{=}\kappa_\e psilon}$$\end{document} for continuum many pairwise different cardinals \documentclass[12pt]{minimal} \usepackage{amsmath} \usepackage{wasysym} \usepackage{amsfonts} \usepackage{amssymb} \usepackage{amsbsy} \usepackage{mathrsfs} \usepackage{upgreek} \setlength{\oddsidemargin}{-69pt} \begin{document}$${\kappa_\epsilon}$$\end{document} and suitable pairs \documentclass[12pt]{minimal} \usepackage{amsmath} \usepackage{wasysym} \usepackage{amsfonts} \usepackage{amssymb} \usepackage{amsbsy} \usepackage{mathrsfs} \usepackage{upgreek} \setlength{\oddsidemargin}{-69pt} \begin{document}$${(f_\epsilon,g_\epsilon)}$$\end{document}. For the proof we introduce a new mixed-limit creature forcing construction. (shrink)

For f, g $ \in \omega ^\omega $ let $c_{f,g}^\forall $ be the minimal number of uniform g-splitting trees (or: Slaloms) to cover the uniform f-splitting tree, i.e., for every branch v of the f-tree, one of the g-trees contains v. $c_{f,g}^\exists $ is the dual notion: For every branch v, one of the g-trees guesses v(m) infinitely often. It is consistent that $c_{f \in ,g \in }^\exists = c_{f \in ,g \in }^\forall = k_ \in $ for N₁ many (...) pairwise different cardinals $k_ \in $ and suitable pairs $(f_{ \in ,g \in } ).$ For the proof we use creatures with sufficient bigness and halving. We show that the lim-inf creature forcing satisfies fusion and pure decision. We introduce decisiveness and use it to construct a variant of the countable support iteration of such forcings, which still satisfies fusion and pure decision. (shrink)

Bd. 1. Mit Beiträgen von Ernst Bloch, Joseph M. Bochenski, Alois Dempf, Hermann Glockner, Hans-Eduard Hengstenberg, Pascual Jordan, Werner Marx, Josef Pieper, Helmut Plessner.

'This book is an excellent, theoretically sound and politically relevant reader', Professor Wolfschaefer, Universitat des Bundeswehr, Hamburg 'Up to date complete overview of European monetary and fiscal policy issues. Highly readable, good mix of theory and data' 'I think the book contains a wealth of useful, precise information, presented in a straightforward, readable way in a quintessentially comparative perspective', Dr M Mclean, Royal Holloway University 'Excellent treatment - quite comprehensive, full references, accessible for non-economists', Charlotte Bretherton, Liverpool John Moores Univesity (...) 'A useful addition to student literature', MJ Macmillan, Exeter University 'This is a top class book and does not limit itself to assessing the adequacy of the European political economy to the precepts of advanced monetary economics...This book is an excellent tool for teaching EMU economics, and raising the level of EMU economics in the reaserch-field of international political economy. Students and scholars will appreciate the explicit assessment the authors make of complex economic issues, and their unbiased stance in the study of EMU economic and political interplay.' Miriam L.Campamella, Jean Monnet Professor, Faculty of Political Science, University of Turin. ECSA Review, Winter 2001This textbook offers a fresh and comprehensive examination of European monetary and fiscal policy in the third stage of Economic and Monetary Union. Professors Eijffinger and de Haan give a brief history of European economic integration before the transition to EMU, and continue with a comprehensive analysis of institutions, legislation, and policies. Their analysis includes the functions and goals of the European Central Bank, the Treaty on European Union, the Stability and Growth Pact, and the harmonization of taxes. Other topics discussed include the targets and instruments of European monetary policy, the integration of European financial markets, and the competition between financial institutions in Europe. (shrink)

Lima gagasan yang dapat mengubah Indonesia itu tentu Pancasila. Sebagaimana ditulis Jakob Oetama dalam kata pengantar buku Profesor Sastrapratedja, sudah sangat mendesak untuk mengaktualisasikan kembali Pancasila. Pancasila sudah lama berada dalam bahaya, bukan karena masih ada kekuatan politik yang mempersoalkannya, melainkan karena dukungan terhadap Pancasila cenderung menguapkan maknanya. Di masa Demokrasi Terpimpin Pancasila semakin dikesampingkan oleh semboyan-semboyan lain di mana yang paling tragis adalah NASAKOM. Di masa Orde Baru Pancasila dinyatakan sakti dan sesudahnya jutaan saudara dan saudari sebangsa dibunuh, (...) dikucilkan, dan dihancurkan eksistensinya; Pancasila menjadi payung salah satu kejahatan terbesar dalam sejarah umat manusia. Dan kemudian, melalui manipulasi, seperti dalam Pedoman Penghayatan dan Pengamalan Pancasila, Pancasila di-jawa-kan—dalam pidatonya di Pekanbaru Suharto mengatakan bahwa untuk memahami Pancasila orang perlu tahu falsafah honocaroko—dan dibonsai menjadi anjuran untuk bersikap baik-baik, bebas bertanggungjawab di bawah naungan pemerintah. Pancasila bonsai itu diindoktrinasikan melalui kursus-kursus BP7 kepada masyarakat. Maka waktu Suharto meninggalkan tahta kekuasaannya, Pancasila seakan sudah masuk kotak, orang sepertinya malu berbicara mengenai Pancasila. Panggung ideologis yang kosong segera mulai diisi oleh ideologi-ideologi picik-agamis-eksklusivis yang betul-betul mau membersihkan Indonesia dari sisa Pancasila. Maka pada 2006 AIPI (Akademi Ilmu Pengetahuan Indonesia) menyerukan kepada Presiden Susilo Bambang Yudhoyono agar Pancasila kembali dijadikan acuan akhir eksplisit segala kebijakan kenegaraan. Karena itu, pemahaman kembali tentang arti Pancasila sangat mendesak. Itulah aktualitas buku Professor Sastrapratedja. Judulnya bukan sekedar kata keren. Sastrapratedja menunjukkan bahwa Pancasila bukan sebuah dokumen sejarah saja—seperti Declaration of Independence Amerika Serikat—atau sebuah pilar di atasnya bangsa Indonesia meneruskan perjalanannya. Sastrapratedja memperlihatkan bahwa Pancasila mempunyai gigi; artinya, Pancasila merupakan petunjuk tajam tentang kebijakan mana yang boleh dan tidak boleh diambil oleh negara yang mewujudkan bangsa Indonesia. Sastrapratedja menunjukkan dengan rinci bahwa kalau kita mengaku mendasarkan kehidupan bangsa pada lima sila Pancasila maka ada konsekuensinya. Ada kebijakan yang wajib diambil dan ada kebijakan yang wajib ditolak. Kalau negara kita mengikuti petunjuk Pancasila maka negara kita akan berubah. Buku ini terdiri dari dua puluh tiga makalah yang ditulis penulis dalam lima belas tahun terakhir. Bentuk itu menguntungkan karena pembaca tidak perlu membaca 393 halaman teks ini dari permulaan sampai akhir. Daftar isi yang cukup jelas, sebuah indeks nama dan sebuah indeks analitis rinci membantu pembaca untuk menemukan persis apa yang dicarinya. Sastrapratedja tentu tidak hanya membicarakan Pancasila. Di antara sekian masalah yang dibicarakan ada, misalnya, ”etika ilmu pengetahuan“—yang menurut Sastrapratedja memuat lima prinsip: harus menghormati martabat manusia sebagai pribadi, berpegang pada prinsip ”tidak merugikan,” terarah pada kesejahteraan bagi manusia dan masyarakat seluruhnya, pada pengurangan penderitaan, serta pada pemerataan hasil-hasilnya—, ”nasionalisme,“ ”jati diri manusia Indonesia,“ ”globalisasi“ dan tantangannya, pelbagai arti kata ”ideologi,“ ”etika politik,“ arti ”budaya politik,“ ”multikulturalisme,“ ”krisis modernitas“ sampai ”keamanan pangan“ sebagai tantangan etis........ Satu muatan Pancasila yang diangkat oleh Sastrapratedja adalah bahwa ”Pancasila menjadikan kehidupan masyarakat dan negara lebih manusiawi.” Mempancasilakan Indonesia berarti membuat bangsa Indonesia hidup bersama dengan lebih manusiawi. Hal itu eksplisit dituntut dalam sila kedua, tetapi memancar ke semua sila. Lebih manusiawi berarti penolakan terhadap kekerasan sebagai sarana untuk menyelesaikan masalah. Pancasila mendorong untuk mengusahakan “penghalusan perasaan” dan “transformasi keagresifan” manusia Indonesia. Ketuhanan Yang Maha Esa memanusiakan manusia dengan mengajak menghormati perbedaan, mengakui identitas semua warga dan komunitas masyarakat, dan dengan menjamin kebebasan beragama dan ”toleransi” terhadap kemajemukan. Menjunjung tinggi Pancasila membawa kewajiban untuk menjamin hak-hak asasi manusia. Demokrasi membawa ”komitmen pada kesamaan.” Usaha mewujudkan keadilan sosial berakar dalam solidaritas. Bahwa Pancasila merupakan suatu etika politik, menurut Sastrapratedja, tidak berarti bahwa Pancasila tidak menyangkut sikap etis manusia Indonesia masing-masing. Pancasila dapat menjadi etika politik apabila nilai-nilai Pancasila dihayati oleh masyarakat masing-masing. Sesuai dengan lima silanya karakter manusia Pancasilais ditandai oleh lima kemampuan: kemampuan untuk menghargai perbedaan, untuk membawa diri secara manusiawi dan santun, untuk mencintai tanah airnya, untuk bersikap demokratis, serta bersikap adil dan solider. Pendidikan Pancasila dengan demikian adalah pendidikan yang mendukung perkembangan sikap-sikap Pancasilais itu. Sesuatu yang masih dapat dimasukkan ke dalam edisi berikut buku ”Lima Gagasan…” adalah tanggapan terhadap pelbagai paham tentang Pancasila yang selama ini muncul di Indonesia. Ada sebuah koreksi kecil. Catatan Delanty, yang dikutip Sastrapratedja, yang mengatakan bahwa Ayatullah Khomeini dulu menyebarkan gagasannya lewat internet (hlm. 85) tentu keliru. Waktu Khomeini di Paris—dan sampai ia meninggal dunia—belum ada internet. (Franz Magnis-Suseno, Guru Besar Ilmu Filsafat Emeritus, Sekolah Tinggi Filsafat, Driyarakra, Jakarta ). (shrink)

Das wachsende wissenschaftliche Interesse an Tieren, ihren Fähigkeiten und Interaktionen mit den Menschen sowie verhaltensbiologische Erkenntnisse und tierphilosophische Einsichten führen zu einer Neubewertung der Mensch-Tier-Beziehung. Dies bleibt nicht ohne Konsequenzen für die Theologie. Sie muss nach den philosophischen und theologischen Ursachen für ihre weitgehende „Tiervergessenheit“ fragen sowie die Potenziale entfalten, die zum Beispiel die Heilige Schrift und die Schöpfungsspiritualität für die Gestaltung der Beziehung zu den Tieren bieten. Dabei balanciert sie auf dem schmalen Grat, den Mensch-Tier-Differentialismus zu überwinden, ohne das (...) je Eigene von Menschen und Tieren zu verwischen. Dieser Band leistet eine interdisziplinäre Annäherung an eine christliche Tierethik, die sich nicht als isolierte binnenphilosophische oder -theologische Bereichsethik versteht, sondern Antworten sucht auf gesamtgesellschaftliche Auseinandersetzungen mit Fragen der Mensch-Tier-Beziehung. Mit Beiträgen von Andreas Aigner, Heike Baranzke, Martina Besler, Julia Blanc, Katharina Ebner, Matthias Eggel, Julia Enxing, Matthias Gauly, Herwig Grimm, Anita Idel, Kurt Kotrschal, Peter Kunzmann, Martin M. Lintner, Susana Monsó, Ute Neumann-Gorsolke, Jakob Ohm, Christina Potschka, Kurt Remele, Michael Rosenberger, Markus Vogt und Markus Wild. (shrink)

In this article, I explore two neglected works by the twentieth-century Jewish German Marxist philosopher Ernst Bloch, Avicenna and the Aristotelian Left and Natural Law and Human Dignity. Drawing on previous analyses of leftist Aristotelians and natural law, I blend Bloch’s two texts’ concepts of pregnant matter and maternal law into “pregnant materialist natural law.” More precisely, Aristotelian Left articulates a concept of matter as a dynamic, impersonal agential force, ever pregnant with possible forms delivered by artist-midwives, building Bloch’s messianic (...) utopia. And Natural Law resurrects the Stoics’ concept of natural law as drawing on a prehistoric matriarchal utopia, later channeled by earth goddess cults misconstrued by the nineteenth-century German anthropologist Johann Jakob Bachofen as political matriarchy. I then conclude by linking this pregnant materialist natural law to Dionysus as son of the Great Mother Goddess. Though stigmatized throughout homophobic Western history for his queerness and maternal dependence, Dionysus is also the patron god of Bloch’s hero, the slave revolutionary Spartacus, paramour of a priestess of Dionysus who prophesied his divine mission of liberation. (shrink)

Variant Creutzfeldt–Jakob disease is a fatal, transmissible, neurodegenerative disorder for which there is currently no effective treatment. vCJD arose from the zoonotic spread of bovine spongiform encephalopathy. There is now compelling evidence for human to human transmission through blood transfusions from presymptomatic carriers and experts are warning that the real epidemic may be yet to come. Imperatives exist for the development of reliable, non-invasive presymptomatic diagnostic tests. Research into such tests is well advanced. In this article the ethical implications (...) of the availability of these tests are elaborated and comparisons drawn with predictive genetic testing for Huntington’s disease and screening for HIV. Paramount to considerations is the issue of whom to test, weighing up respect for personal autonomy against obligations to benefit and protect society. A paradigm is proposed similar to that used for HIV screening but with unique features: compulsory testing of all blood/organ donors and individuals undergoing surgery or invasive procedures who have a significant risk of disease transmission. (shrink)

Jakob Friedrich Fries (1773–1843) was the most prolific German philosopher of science in the nineteenth century who strived to synthesize Kant’s philosophical foundation of science and mathematics and the needs or practised science and mathematics in order to gain more comprehensive conceptual frameworks and greater methodological flexibility for those two disciplines. His original contributions anticipated later developments, to some extent, though they received comparatively little notice in the later course of the nineteenth century—a fate which partly can be explained (...) by the unfortunate development of the so-called ‘First Friesian School,’ founded by E. F. Apelt, M. J. Schleiden and O. X. Schlömilch. This situation changed temporarily when Leonard Nelson (1882–1927) arrived on the philosophical stage and founded a second, so-called, ‘New Friesian School’ in 1903. In the following two decades, Fries’ specific transformation of Kantian philosophy gained influence within the vigorous discussions about ‘new’ foundations of mathematics and, thus, also played a role within the Berlin Group surrounding Hans Reichenbach, though his work had no direct impact on the philosophy of physics being expounded therein. -/- This essay will first outline some characteristics of Fries’ development of the Kantian approach. Then it will point out the limited impact of the ‘New Friesian School’ on the Berlin Group, while highlighting some missed chances for fruitful exchange. As the originality of this school and its importance for the development of logic and philosophy of mathematics—by and large merits of its early members Walter Dubislav and Kurt Grelling —is dealt with in separate chapters of this volume, and elsewhere, this article will focus on what Fries called the ‘mathematical philosophy of nature’ (i. e. the philosophical foundations of physics). More specifically, it will show how the New Friesian School reacted to Einstein’s theories of relativity, in a way that contrasts with the approach of the Berlin Group. This discussion about relativity will also be used to reveal different understandings of the nature of ‘scientific philosophy’ in general, as well as different models of how philosophy and the empirical sciences should interact. (shrink)

Cognitive science is experiencing a pragmatic turn away from the traditional representation-centered framework toward a view that focuses on understanding cognition as "enactive." This enactive view holds that cognition does not produce models of the world but rather subserves action as it is grounded in sensorimotor skills. In this volume, experts from cognitive science, neuroscience, psychology, robotics, and philosophy of mind assess the foundations and implications of a novel action-oriented view of cognition. Their contributions and supporting experimental evidence show that (...) an enactive approach to cognitive science enables strong conceptual advances, and the chapters explore key concepts for this new model of cognition. The contributors discuss the implications of an enactive approach for cognitive development; action-oriented models of cognitive processing; action-oriented understandings of consciousness and experience; and the accompanying paradigm shifts in the fields of philosophy, brain science, robotics, and psychology. ContributorsMoshe Bar, Lawrence W. Barsalov, Olaf Blanke, Jeannette Bohg, Martin V. Butz, Peter F. Dominey, Andreas K. Engel, Judith M. Ford, Karl J. Friston, Chris D. Frith, Shaun Gallagher, Antonia Hamilton, Tobias Heed, Cecilia Heyes, Elisabeth Hill, Matej Hoffmann, Jakob Hohwy, Bernhard Hommel, Atsushi Iriki, Pierre Jacob, Henrik Jörntell, Jürgen Jost, James Kilner, Günther Knoblich, Peter König, Danica Kragic, Miriam Kyselo, Alexander Maye, Marek McGann, Richard Menary, Thomas Metzinger, Ezequiel Morsella, Saskia Nagel, Kevin J. O'Regan, Pierre-Yves Oudeyer, Giovanni Pezzulo, Tony J. Prescott, Wolfgang Prinz, Friedemann Pulvermüller, Robert Rupert, Marti Sanchez-Fibla, Andrew Schwartz, Anil K. Seth, Vicky Southgate, Antonella Tramacere, John K. Tsotsos, Paul F. M. J. Verschure, Gabriella Vigliocco, Gottfried Vosgerau. (shrink)

Major Philosophers of Jewish Prayer in the Twentieth Century addresses the troubling questions posed by the modern Jewish worshiper, including such obstacles to prayer as the inability to concentrate on the words and meanings of formal liturgy, the paucity of emotional involvement, the lack of theological conviction, the anthropomorphic and particularly the masculine emphasis of prayer nomenclature, and other matters. In assessing these difficultites, Cohen brings to the reader the writings on prayer of some seminal 20th century Jewish theologians. These (...) include Herman Cohen, Franz Rosenzweig, Avraham Yitzhak, Hoakohen Kook, Mordecai M. Kaplan, R. Arele, Aaron Rote, Elie Munk, Abraham J. Heschel, Jakob J. Petuchowski, Eugene B. Borowitz, and Lawrence A. Hoffman. (shrink)

Artykuł przedstawia Deborę Vogel jako jedną z najważniejszych krytyczek i teoretyczek sztuki lat trzydziestych XX wieku. Po polsku oraz w jidysz stworzyła ona system, w którym sztuka jawi się jako poetycko-programowa reakcja na rzeczywistość. Jest ona elitarna, ale też ściśle związana z codziennością. Jest niezbędna dla życia, ale też jest „samym życiem”, w sensie banalnej i wiecznej ballady. Za tą konstrukcją myślową kryje się malarstwo Marca Chagalla. To na przykładzie jego obrazów Vogel dowodzi głównej tezy awangardy o jedności formy i (...) treści. Na tożsamość życia i sztuki Vogel spogląda przez pryzmat aktualności rozumianej nie jako manifestowanie poglądów politycznych, lecz jako konstruowanie rzeczywistości w dziele sztuki. Punktem wyjścia jest dla lwowskiej intelektualistki estetyka Hegla, od której stopniowo przesuwa się ku dialektyce materialistycznej, rozwijając m. in. tezy Lu Märten, pionierki estetyki marksistowskiej. Poetyka życia oraz koncepcje sztuki były u Vogel szeroko zakorzenione w filozofii, m.in. w teorii subiektywnego postrzegania Jakoba von Uexkülla. W artykule omówiona zostaje jego koncepcja koła funkcjonalnego, jak i mająca duży wpływ na artystów awangardowych teza, iż rzeczywistość stanowi dla indywiduum wyłącznie konstrukcję własnych doznań zmysłowych. Na koniec stawiane są pytania dotyczące znaczenia myśli Bergsona i Simmla dla rozumienia sztuki w ujęciu proponowanym przez Deborę Vogel. (shrink)

A diferencia de todos los demás sistemas de imputación, Jakobs ubica el acento de la relevancia jurídico-penal del hecho en su significado normativo, como algo que trasciende la mera causalidad exterior y la finalidad del autor, de manera que lo decisivo para la imputación jurídico-penal no es ni lo psíquicoreal querido por el autor, ni la causalidad desplegada por su conducta, sino el significado normativo de esa conducta como la expresión de un sentido objetivo de desautorización de la vigencia de (...) la norma en un determinado contexto social. (shrink)

Einleitung.--Hessing, S. Salve Spinoza!--Brucar, J. Spinoza und die ewigkeit der seele.--Buber, M. Spinoza und die chassidische botschaft.--Droop, F. Fünf szenen aus dem leben Spinozas.--Dubnow, S. Die gestalt.--Gebhardt, C. Der gotische Jude.--Gherasim, V. Die bedeutung der affektenlehre Spinozas.--Grunwald, M. Der lebensphilosoph Spinoza.--Hessing, S. Die glückseligkeit des freien menschen.--Klatzkin, J. Der missverstandene.--Klausner, J. Der jüdische charakter der lehre Spinozas.--Marcianu, M. Einbekenntnis.--Myslicki, I. Spinoza und das Ideal des Menschen.--Niemirower, I. Spinozaverehrung eines nichtspinozisten.--Petrovici, I. Eine Spinozahuldigung.--Rolland, R. Der lichtstrahl Spinozas.--Sass, K. Spinozas Bibelkritik und (...) Gottesbegriff.--Siegel, C. Vom grunlegenden dualismus in Spinozas system.--Sokolow, N. Der Jude Spinoza.--Zweig, A. Der schriftsteller Spinoza.--Äusserungen von: Alfred Einstein, Sigmund Freud und Jakob Wassermann. (shrink)

Karl Eugen Müller's contribution to the development of the algebra of logic is perhaps the most important part of his scientific work. Müller, who became Gymnasialprofessor after his university studies, was a student of Ernst Schröder's friend, the mathematician Jakob Lüroth. As a result of publishing two papers on problems related to Schröder's monumental Vorlesungen iiber die Algebra der Logik, Müller was commissioned by the Deutsche Mathematiker- Vereinigung with the editing of the unpublished parts of the Vorlesungen from Schröder's (...) Nachla?. Müller worked on Schröder's papers until 1910, but did not bring this work to a conclusion. Müller's own Nachla?, including those parts of Schröder's papers still in his possession, was destroyed in Frankfurt a.M. in 1943, so there remains no hope of finding through Müller any part of the missing Nachla? of Schröder. (shrink)

Among the reasons that Whitehead is such an interesting philosopher is that his work resonates across philosophical traditions. This collection develops connections between Whiteheadian concepts and recent European thinkers. The purpose is not simply to compare, however, but, as editor Jeremy Fackenthal suggests, to develop a Whiteheadian thinking “in tandem” with European philosophers in order to create disruptions or “dislocations” in thought that can engender creative approaches to contemporary problems.One general feature of the book deserves mention at the outset, though (...) I will return to it later in the review: although phenomenology and hermeneutics are each represented in the volume, roughly half of the essays focus on the work of Gilles Deleuze (if we group these together with essays focused on “new materialism,” which is connected with Deleuze, the proportion is more like two-thirds). This will be no surprise, since Deleuze is the European philosopher who was most appreciative of Whitehead. And yet, the result is that the conversation with “continental philosophy” is highly selective.The book is organized into three parts, each comprised of three essays. In part 1, “Technological and Systematic Dislocations,” William S. Hamrick brings Whitehead into conversation with Maurice Merleau-Ponty's concept of “the flesh” to suggest an ecological ontology capable of overcoming the instrumentalization of nature. Hamrick's strategy is to read Whitehead and Merleau-Ponty as contributing to an “ontological foundation” for a sustainable civilization (18). Bo Eberle writes about the “quantified self” suggested in new, wearable self-monitoring technologies. Drawing on Whitehead's notion of causal efficacy, Eberle argues that devices such as Fitbit give us access to bodily states that bypasses the standard ways we are aware of ourselves (i.e., through consciousness). He goes further to argue that, like all ways of knowing, wearable technologies are selective, and that the selection reflects the interests of the manufacturers and promotes a certain kind of subjectivity (in the case of Fitbit, a subjectivity that is oriented toward “getting your steps in”). Whitehead's epistemology thus enables the critic of wearable technologies to understand how contemporary experience and self-understanding is shaped not simply by recent technological mediations but by the material interests embedded in them. J.R. Hustwit and Carl Dyke take on what they call “activist” uses of Whitehead that naively (in their judgment) suggest that a non-relational substance metaphysics is to blame for most of our social ills. They employ the theory of complex adaptive systems in conversation with Whitehead and Antonio Gramsci to show that, in fact, achieving significant social change is far more difficult and even unpredictable than mere insertion of better ideas into public discourse. Dominant hegemonies have ways of adapting and absorbing attempts to undermine them. Here Hustwit and Dyke draw on the philosophy of Paul Ricoeur to suggest that resistance to the dominant hegemony is nevertheless always possible because of the vagueness of discourse, allowing a plurality of competing interpretations and thus fractures in the dominant hegemony. However, even this kind of resistance is impossible to control and its effects incapable of being entirely predicted. To the essay's titular question, “Can Whitehead save the world?” the authors answer, “No.”In part 2, “Animal/Human Dislocations,” Jeremy Fackenthal draws on the new materialism of Rosi Braidotti (and Deleuze) along with Whitehead to argue for a “process-relational” nomadism that culminates in a “becoming-imperceptible.” His reading together of Whitehead and Braidotti creates the opportunity to recast the former's concept of objective immortality in such a way that it does not refer to death so much as to being diffused into a relational network. The satisfaction of an actual occasion may be taken as its translation into its effects among its relations. Fackenthal argues that this becoming-imperceptible makes possible a sustainable presence within a fragile network of life. Deena M. Lin uses Whitehead, Braidotti, and Judith Butler to lay out a vision of human life as precarious and deserving attention, care, and solidarity. She presses this vision as a direct moral assault on US (Trump's) policy toward Syrian refugees. Going further, she draws on Braidotti's posthuman account of zoe to argue for universal connection and solidarity with all life that should foster, as the title of her essay puts it, “Welcoming of Syrian Life.” Tano Posteraro offers an intriguing essay drawing on Jakob von Uexküll's account of animal experience. Posteraro argues that Uexküll's notion of an animal's Umwelt, shaped by its distinctive perceptual apparatus, needs to be supplemented by Whitehead's notion of prehension to account for the active dimension of animal perception. Rather than a passive registering of animal environments, Posteraro argues that the latter are constructed, and that concepts (or conceptual prehensions) should be understood as tools with which such environments are constructed.In part 3, “Time, the World, and Abstraction,” three essays probe ways that Whiteheadian and Deleuzian themes may resonate critically and constructively. Kris Klotz brings the thought of Whitehead and Deleuze together to inquire about how alternatives to present social forms are envisioned. He argues that, for Whitehead, every actual occasion involves a selection of some features of the past, and, further, that every selection is also an abstraction from the concrete welter of influences impinging on it. For Whitehead, then, to envision alternatives involves a critique of abstractions, a reinstatement of the concrete plurality of possibilities. This, for Whitehead, is what rationality does: it works at restoring the concrete, and, with it, a series of alternatives that have been eclipsed. To this Whiteheadian analysis, Klotz adds Deleuze and Guattari's critique of “opinion.” For Deleuze and Guattari, opinion is not an idiosyncrasy but a consensus to which differences of experience are subjected. Philosophy, for Deleuze and Guattari, must always struggle against opinion in order to bring alternatives to light. These conceptions of reason/philosophy, Klotz argues, represent useful ways to critique inequalities and other social wrongs that are embedded in the social forms that are routinely taken for granted. Elijah Prewitt-Davis uses a scene from Buffy the Vampire Slayer, along with philosophical innovations of Foucault, Deleuze, and Whitehead, to offer a distinctive account of power. Prewitt-Davis calls attention to Deleuze's important book on Leibniz, The Fold, and to how Whitehead's concept of prehension lies at its center. The upshot is that power is not reduced to dominance but, instead, is at work wherever any occasion of experience persists amid the onslaught of the influence of other occasions. Power, as Deleuze wrote, is the capacity to be affected—and to decide how to constitute oneself anew. Keith Robinson offers a detailed account of Whitehead's epistemology along with a reading of Deleuze's analysis of temporality to suggest that there is a common trajectory that seeks to undermine what the title of the essay describes as the “Bifurcation of Nature” (i.e., the separation of natural phenomena and human experience) within the dominant Western philosophical tradition.There is much of value in the volume as a whole. Aside from staging what Spinoza might have called good encounters between Whitehead and a number of continental philosophers, enhancing the conceptual power of each, the contributors are able to make a case that these philosophical trajectories, when read together, have much to contribute to our understanding of and response to the pressing issues of the day. In addition, readers who are interested in the relationship between Whitehead and the new materialism will find this volume to be a helpful resource, stocked with fine examples of how to sharpen new materialist thinking with Whitehead and how to read contemporary contexts through these lenses. On the other hand, this book is not a handbook nor a comprehensive reference. The organizational logic behind its division into sections is murky and the amount of attention given to particular continental philosophers as opposed to others appears somewhat arbitrary: there are recent continental philosophers who get little to no attention at (Derrida, Malabou, Žižek, Agamben, Latour, Nancy, for example), several of whom might prove to be quite interesting to read “in tandem” with Whitehead. Perhaps that is just to say that there are many more essays to be written. (shrink)

Symbol formation is a term used to unify the view on the interdependencies in the research of the Hamburg University before 1933: the Philosophical Institute (William Stern, Ernst Cassirer), the Psychological Institute (Stern) with its laboratory (Heinz Werner) in cooperation with the later joining Umwelt Institut (Jakob von Uexküll). The term, definitely used by Cassirer and Werner, is associated with the personalistic approach: “Keine Gestalt ohne Gestalter” (Stern), but also covers related terms like “melody of motion” (Uexküll), and “relational (...) content” (Cassirer), discussing the term “empirical scheme” (Kant). All this scientific interest addressed personal forces to structure thresholds in equivalent stimuli. This view on intermodal formation allowed research in common aspects in the environments of animals, of children and adults to meet there the symbol formation of artists (Weimar Bauhaus) and poets like R. M. Rilke, a friend of Uexküll. (shrink)

A new theory is taking hold in neuroscience. It is the theory that the brain is essentially a hypothesis-testing mechanism, one that attempts to minimise the error of its predictions about the sensory input it receives from the world. It is an attractive theory because powerful theoretical arguments support it, and yet it is at heart stunningly simple. Jakob Hohwy explains and explores this theory from the perspective of cognitive science and philosophy. The key argument throughout The Predictive Mind (...) is that the mechanism explains the rich, deep, and multifaceted character of our conscious perception. It also gives a unified account of how perception is sculpted by attention, and how it depends on action. The mind is revealed as having a fragile and indirect relation to the world. Though we are deeply in tune with the world we are also strangely distanced from it. (shrink)

The influential work of speculative biology-and a key document in posthumanist studies-now available in a new, accurate English translation.