Der Autor stellt die Geschichte des "Klassik-Seminars", einer philosophiehistorisch angelegten Veranstaltung der Philosophie-Sektion an der Universität Jena in den Jahren 1975-1990 zur Erforschung der Philosophie der deutschen Klassik vor. Er analysiert die Konzeption und präsentiert eine Bibliografie der veröffentlichten Beiträge. Die Präsentation auf der WEB-Seite des Autors geht dadurch über die gedruckte Fassung hinaus. -/- The author presents the history of the "Classic Seminar", a philosophical-historical event organized by the Philosophy Section at the University of Jena in (...) the years 1975-1990 to research the philosophy of German Classicism. He analyzes the conception and presents a bibliography of the published contributions. The presentation on the author's website goes beyond the printed version. (shrink)

The edition presents the recently discovered diaries of Jena Church Historian Karl von Hase's research seminar. Between 1850 and 1883, the reading lists and research agenda of this institution as well as the participants' discussions of current issues in dogmatics and church policy were accurately recorded. The papers enable us to trace in detail how Hase transmitted his liberal views on theology, culture, and politics to students preparing for subsequent academic or ecclesiastical careers. As a result, the historian of (...) higher education can see that in the case of academic theology, the modern seminar went beyond the tasks of methodical historicist research to shape the minds of future academic elites through a close personal relationship with a teacher. (shrink)

Hohe Überlieferungsdisziplin einer akademischen Institution und ein wenig Glück auf seiten des Historikers sind die Voraussetzung dafür, daß sich im Aktenmaterial eines Lehrstuhls bedeutende Quellen aus dem 19. Jahrhundert finden bzw. identifizieren lassen, die generationenlang den Weg ins reguläre Universitätsarchiv gescheut haben. Im Besitz des Jenaer Lehrstuhls für Kirchengeschichte haben zwei handschriftliche Protokollbücher überdauert, die einen lückenlosen Überblick über dreiunddreißig Jahre Arbeit der dogmatisch-historischen Klasse des Jenaer theologischen Seminars unter der Leitung des Kirchenhistorikers Karl von Hase geben. Sie (...) werden hier erstmals ediert. (shrink)

Der Artikel analysiert die Aussagen Fichtes zur ästhetischen Diskussion seiner Zeit und die von ihm entwickelte Kulturauffassung als Mittler zwischen empirischen und transzendentalen Ich bis hin zur Aufnahme seiner Theoreme in der Jenaer Frühromantik. The article analyzes Fichte's statements on the aesthetic discussion of his time and the conception of culture he developed as a mediator between the empirical and transcendental ego up to the inclusion of his theorems in the Jena early romantic period.

Karl Hahn, Jahrgang 1937, war bis zu seiner Emeritierung im Jahr 2003 Professor für Politische Theorie und Ideengeschichte an der Westfälischen Wilhelms-Universität Münster. Hierbei hat er die Klassiker der abendländischen Geistesgeschichte nicht in einem kanonisch-schematischen Profil gelehrt, sondern die jeweiligen Themen und Theoreme mit lebensfüllender Leidenschaft vermittelt. Seine Vorlesungen und Seminare an der Universität zeugen, wie auch seine Vorträge und Tagungsbeiträge, von einem streitbaren Geist, der stets auch um die aktualisierende Bezugnahme bemüht war. Stets hat er pointiert Stellung bezogen, auch (...) gegen den Mainstream des Faches, das er kritisch hinterfragt hat. Ob Platon, Fichte oder auch Simone Weil: Bei Karl Hahn stehen philosophische Überlegungen für eine Suche nach der Vollendung des Daseins in seinen unendlich vielen und offenen Aussagemöglichkeiten. Hahns großes Lebensthema war und ist hierbei das tragische Element des menschlichen Wesens, dessen Kleinheit und Begrenztheit angesichts der großen Fragen der menschlichen Existenz. Das hat er seinen Studierenden mit auf den Weg gegeben. Und auch den Kolleginnen und Kollegen, die bereit waren, zuzuhören. Mit dem vorliegenden Band wird der Wissenschaftler zum Anlass seines 80. Geburtstages geehrt, der seine Verdienste nicht in der flüchtigen Wertschätzung des Feuilletons, sondern grundsätzlich im Diskurs der Seminarräume und Kongressveranstaltungen erworben hat. (shrink)

Resumo: Era Nietzsche um inimigo da ciência? A pergunta-problema deste artigo é justamente o título de uma conferência proferida pelo Dr. Helmut Heit (Kolleg Friedrich Nietzsche - Klassik Stiftung Weimar) no Seminário de Filosofia da Ciência do Instituto Federal do Espírito Santo, campus Linhares, em 9 de dezembro de 2014. Uma famosa versão do senso comum acadêmico apresenta Nietzsche como inimigo mortal das ciências. Sabe-se, contudo, que o filósofo manteve uma relação intensa, duradoura e necessária com o campo científico. (...) A partir de fontes primárias e de posicionamentos adotados por pesquisadores especializados, no presente estudo conclui-se que Nietzsche foi concomitantemente um entusiasta do método científico – em função da possibilidade de naturalização e de historicização da produção de conhecimento – e um crítico da fundamentação dogmática das ciências de seu tempo. A caracterização de Nietzsche como pensador crítico-perspectivista (não relativista) está desenvolvida em um artigo inédito de nossa autoria. Palavras-chave: Nietzsche; Ciência; Nietzsche e as ciências. On Nietzsche's necessary critical-perspectivist adherence to the sciences Abstract: Was Nietzsche an enemy of science? The problem question of this article is precisely the title of a lecture given by Dr. Helmut Heit (Kolleg Friedrich Nietzsche - Klassik Stiftung Weimar), presented at the Philosophy of Science Seminar of the Federal Institute of Espírito Santo, Linhares campus, on December 9, 2014. A famous version of academic common sense presents Nietzsche as the mortal enemy of science. It is known, however, that the philosopher maintained an intense, lasting and necessary relationship with the scientific field. From the use of primary sources and the positions adopted by specialized researchers, in the present study, it is concluded that Nietzsche was concomitantly an enthusiast of the scientific method - due to the possibility of naturalization and historicization of the production of knowledge – and a critic of the scientific method. dogmatic foundation of the sciences of his time. The characterization of Nietzsche as a critical-perspectivist (non-relativist) thinker is developed in an unpublished article of our authorship. Key-words: Nietzsche; Science; Nietzsche and the Sciences. Sobre la necesaria adhesión crítico-perspectivista de Nietzsche a las ciencias Resumen: ¿Nietzsche era enemigo de la ciencia? La pregunta problema de este artículo es precisamente el título de una conferencia del Prof. Dr. Helmut Heit (Universidad de Berlín), presentado en el Seminario de Filosofía de la Ciencia del Instituto Federal de Espírito Santo, campus Linhares, el 9 de diciembre de 2014. Si bien Nietzsche llegó a ser catalogado como positivista (MIGNONI, 2017), una famosa versión académica lo presenta como el enemigo mortal de las ciencias. Se sabe, sin embargo, que el filósofo mantuvo una relación intensa, duradera y necesaria con el campo científico. A partir del uso de fuentes primarias y de las posiciones adoptadas por investigadores especializados, en el presente estudio se concluye que Nietzsche fue concomitantemente un entusiasta del método científico – por la posibilidad de naturalización e historización de la producción del conocimiento – y un crítico del fundamento dogmatico de las ciencias de su tiempo. La caracterización de Nietzsche como pensador crítico-perspectivista (no relativista) se desarrolla en un artículo inédito de nuestra autoria. Palabras clave: Nietzsche. Ciencia. Nietzsche y las Ciencias. Nietzsche en la Investigación en Educación. (shrink)

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)

The importance of GS for understanding Nietzsche’s philosophy cannot be overestimated. While it can be disputed whether or not modern Nietzsche scholarship started with the revaluation of GS—as the editors claim with Giorgio Colli—the work forms an important link between the early and late writings of Nietzsche and especially Z. Klassiker Auslegen—Interpreting Classics—is a series dedicated to interpreting important works of philosophy as a whole through chapters successively discussing the individual chapters of the work. The book at hand consists of (...) two introductions—one for the volume, another one discussing the genesis of the edition of GS—and eight chapters covering each of the preface, the “Prelude in... (shrink)

Der erste Teilband des umfangreichen Seminarbandes 84 der Gesamtausgabe gehort in den grossen Kontext von Martin Heideggers Auseinandersetzung mit Immanuel Kant und Gottfried Wilhelm Leibniz. Leibniz ist fur Heidegger von herausragender Bedeutung fur die Geschichte der neuzeitlichen Metaphysik zwischen Descartes und Kant. Im Band 84.1 kommen drei Seminare zu Kant und ein Seminar zu Leibniz erstmals zur Veroffentlichung. Die drei Kant-Seminare befassen sich mit Kants Preisschrift uber die aFortschritte der Metaphysik (Sommer 1931), mit Kants aTranszendentaler Dialektik aus der Kritik (...) der reinen Vernunft im Hinblick und Vorgriff auf Kants praktische Philosophie (Winter 1931/32) und nochmals mit aHauptstucken aus der Kritik der reinen Vernunft (Sommer 1934). Das Leibniz-Seminar (Winter 1935/36) gibt erstmals eine grundlegende und wegweisende Gesamtinterpretation der aMonadologie. (shrink)

Seminar in Le Thor 1966 -- Seminar in Le Thor 1968 -- Seminar in Le Thor 1969 -- Seminar in Zähringen 1973.

Das Vorlesungsmanuskript zur "Naturphilosophie und Philosophie des Geistes" aus den Jahren 1805/06 stellt den spätesten der drei erhaltenen Systementwürfe aus der Jenaer Zeit Hegels dar. Hinsichtlich der Naturphilosophie zeichnet sich der Text dieser Vorlesung dadurch aus, daß er erstmals über eine systematische Gliederung verfügt, die der des Teils über die Philosophie der Natur in der Enzyklopädie von 1817 schon sehr nahekommt; hinsichtlich der Philosophie des Geistes dokumentiert der Text von 1805/06 die letzte Stufe der in den Jenaer Jahren (...) vollzogenen Umformulierung der Philosophie der Sittlichkeit zu einer Theorie des Bewußtseins. (shrink)

1. Bd. Von den Vorsokratikern bis David Hume.

Long awaited and eagerly anticipated, this remarkable volume allows English-speaking readers to experience a profound dialogue between the German philosopher Martin Heidegger and the Swiss psychiatrist Medard Boss. A product of their warm friendship, _Zollikon Seminars_ chronicles an extraordinary exchange of ideas. Heidegger strove to transcend the bounds of philosophy while Boss and his colleagues in the scientific community sought to understand their patients and their world. The result: the best and clearest introduction to Heidegger's philosophy available. Boss approached Heidegger (...) asking for help in reflective thinking on the nature of Heidegger's work. Soon they were holding annual two-week meetings in Boss's home in Zollikon, Switzerland. The protocols from these seminars, recorded by Boss and reviewed, corrected, and supplemented by Heidegger himself, make up one part of this volume. They are augmented by Boss's record of the conversations he had with Heidegger in the days between seminars and by excerpts from the hundreds of letters the philosopher wrote to Boss between 1947 and 1971. (shrink)

Der Artikel behandelt die Problemstellung inwieweit der Klassik-Begriff als Periodenbegriff sinnvoll ist. Dabei wird herausgearbeitet, dass ein historisch-kritischer Zugang den Begriff als einen Wertungsbegriff aus einer jeweils gegebenen historischen Perspektive zu dechiffrieren vermag.

Die in der Jenaer Zeit entstandenen Entwürfe des ganzen Systems der Hegelschen Philosophie sind nur fragmentarisch erhalten, gewähren aber wichtige Einblicke in die genetische Entwicklung der – mehrfach modifizierten – Architektonik der Grundlegung des dann ausgeführten Werks. Die in diesem Band enthaltenen Fragmente der handschriftlichen Entwürfe Hegels zu seinem ersten ausgeführten gesamten System der Philosophie beziehen sich auf bestimmte Teile bzw. Abschnitte des Systems und gehören in den Zusammenhang der Vorbereitung auf die Vorlesung "Das System der spekulativen Philosophie", die (...) Hegel im Wintersemester 1803/1804 in Jena gehalten hat. (shrink)

In Four Seminars, Heidegger reviews the entire trajectory of his thought and offers unique perspectives on fundamental aspects of his work.

Long awaited and eagerly anticipated, this remarkable volume allows English-speaking readers to experience a profound dialogue between the German philosopher Martin Heidegger and the Swiss psychiatrist Medard Boss.

Designing a successful graduate seminar should account for more than just the content to be conveyed and the completion of the standard seminar paper. This article dissects the seminar structure, revealing some of what is obscured by the “hidden curriculum” of graduate education, with an eye toward transforming the climate in philosophy. I begin with a brief review of literature on graduate teaching and inclusive teaching in philosophy. I then examine four components of a typical graduate (...) class='Hi'>seminar: the faculty instructor of graduate courses, the graduate students themselves, the material selection, and the course requirements. Reflecting on the graduate seminar compels revisiting learning goals, ensuring inclusivity and accessibility, and adopting a more intentional approach to graduate course design that ties course goals to specific activities and assessments for the life of the professional philosopher. (shrink)

Der Band versammelt grundlegende Studien zur Klassik- und Psychoanalyse-Rezeption Edith Steins. Texte, Kommentare und Dokumente erläutern die Denkarbeit der Karmelitin, aber auch ihren Literaturbrief von 1932. Ohne die hier aufgezeigten Fundamente ist weder der Karmel- noch der Wissenschaftsweg Edith Steins angemessen verständlich.