Ludwig von Mühlenfels as Advocatus Schleiermacheri. An addendum. The editorial copy of the “Allgemeine Zeitung” has survived in the Cotta-Archive with the names of the contributors. This has made it possible to identify belatedly the author of the apologia “Another word about Schleiermacher” in the “Außerordentliche Beilage der Allgemeinen Zeitung” (Augsburg) of April 2, 1834. It was Ludwig Friedrich von Mühlenfels (1793–1861). Mühlenfels, who led a rather varied life, was related to Schleiermacher’s wife Henriette, and thus belonged to Schleiermacher’s (...) extended family. (1) Member of Lützow’s Freicorps. On Schleiermacher’s suggestion, Mühlenfels participated in the war of liberation against Napoleon as a volunteer with the “Black Hunters”, in the end in the so-called Battle of the Nations at Leipzig. He finished the study of law in 1816 and, on probation, joined the prosecutor’s office in Cologne where the French legal code was still in force. (2) Incarcerated as a demagogue under the investigating judge E. T. A. Hoffmann. Mühlenfels became one of the formative figures in the early history of German fraternities and participated in the Wartburg Festival in October 1817. He was arrested in July 1819 by the authorities in Berlin, charged with activities as a demagogue and incarcerated in Berlin on September 17. Mühlenfels contested the jurisdiction of the authorities in Berlin and refused to testify. The investigative judge was the writer and composer E. T. A. Hoffmann who wanted to have Mühlenfels released, and who later used him as a literary figure in a satirical novel. (3) Flight from Berlin – Exile in Sweden. On May 5, 1821, Mühlenfels succeeded in fleeing to Sweden where he made a meagerly living as a private tutor. (4) Professor for German and Scandinavian Literature in London – Return to Prussia. In October 1827, Mühlenfels reached London. Supported by some German scholars, he obtained the Chair for German and Scandinavian at the newly founded University College. He taught there until 1831 and publishedseveral textbooks. When he was acquitted by a court ruling in 1830, he returned to the Prussian public service in August 1831 and gradually built a solid career. (5) The defender of Schleiermacher. His apologia of Schleiermacher written in opposition to the obituary by Gutzkow is a masterpiece of literary and legal writing. – First publication: Six letters between Mühlenfels, Henriette and Friedrich Schleiermacher, and Georg Andreas Reimer. (shrink)

The non-clerical („unpfäffisch“) Schleiermacher. Karl Glutzkow and the Schleiermacher image of Young Germany. Towards a construction of a countermyth. After Friedrich Schleiermacher’s death on February 12, 1834, his disciples and his family endeavoured to idealize him as an exemplary figure of the church by publishing a complete edition of his published and unpublished works as well as a selection from his letters. (1) Schleiermacher’s Christian death („christliche Euthanasie“). This endeveaour began with the sermons delivered at the funeral and (...) the notes of his wife, Henriette Schleiermacher, about his pious death. (2) Gutzkow’s obituary in the „Allgemeine Zeitung“. The journalist Gutzkow in particular protested against this portrayal in an obituary in which the old Schleiermacher was declared to have been senile and without substantial importance for the present time. On the other hand, an image of the young Schleiermacher, the friend of the Romantics, was to be preserved for the younger generation. (3) The replies of Schleiermacher’s disciples. A forthright reply to Gutzkow’s obituary appeared in the same journal. His view was contradicted by means of an extensive biographical sketch by Friedrich Lücke, one of Schleiermacher’s disciples. (4) Gutzkow’s publication of „Schleiermacher’s Vertraute Briefe über Friedrich Schlegels Lucinde“. Gutzkow supported his view with a new edition of Schleiermacher’s early work, to which he added a provocative preface. As a result, the edition was banned. (5) Abuse of Schleiermacher or a gallant service to him? The reception of the „Vertraute Briefe“. The reactions were divided between considering the work as an early youthful indiscretion of Schleiermacher, and the idea of an intellectual identity running through Schleiermacher’s whole life. The other authors of Young German aligned themselves with Gutzkow. (6) The end of the myth of Schleiermacher: Gutzkow’s „Wally. Die Zweiflerin“. This novel, which derives the protagonist’s suicide from his religious doubts, caused the literary movement Young Germany to be banned in all of Germany, and also led to the imprisonment of the author. In the novel itself, Schleiermacher’s role is rather minor. Later on, Gutzkow did not renew the image of an non-clerical Schleiermacher. – I shall also re-edit a conventional obituary, Gutzkow’s obituary as well as an anonymous reply in the Allgemeine Zeitung (Augsburg). (shrink)

Ludwig von Mühlenfels as Advocatus Schleiermacheri. An addendum. The editorial copy of the “Allgemeine Zeitung” has survived in the Cotta-Archive with the names of the contributors. This has made it possible to identify belatedly the author of the apologia “Another word about Schleiermacher” in the “Außerordentliche Beilage der Allgemeinen Zeitung” (Augsburg) of April 2, 1834. It was Ludwig Friedrich von Mühlenfels (1793–1861). Mühlenfels, who led a rather varied life, was related to Schleiermacher’s wife Henriette, and thus belonged to Schleiermacher’s (...) extended family. (1) Member of Lützow’s Freicorps. On Schleiermacher’s suggestion, Mühlenfels participated in the war of liberation against Napoleon as a volunteer with the “Black Hunters”, in the end in the so-called Battle of the Nations at Leipzig. He finished the study of law in 1816 and, on probation, joined the prosecutor’s office in Cologne where the French legal code was still in force. (2) Incarcerated as a demagogue under the investigating judge E. T. A. Hoffmann. Mühlenfels became one of the formative figures in the early history of German fraternities and participated in the Wartburg Festival in October 1817. He was arrested in July 1819 by the authorities in Berlin, charged with activities as a demagogue and incarcerated in Berlin on September 17. Mühlenfels contested the jurisdiction of the authorities in Berlin and refused to testify. The investigative judge was the writer and composer E. T. A. Hoffmann who wanted to have Mühlenfels released, and who later used him as a literary figure in a satirical novel. (3) Flight from Berlin – Exile in Sweden. On May 5, 1821, Mühlenfels succeeded in fleeing to Sweden where he made a meagerly living as a private tutor. (4) Professor for German and Scandinavian Literature in London – Return to Prussia. In October 1827, Mühlenfels reached London. Supported by some German scholars, he obtained the Chair for German and Scandinavian at the newly founded University College. He taught there until 1831 and publishedseveral textbooks. When he was acquitted by a court ruling in 1830, he returned to the Prussian public service in August 1831 and gradually built a solid career. (5) The defender of Schleiermacher. His apologia of Schleiermacher written in opposition to the obituary by Gutzkow is a masterpiece of literary and legal writing. – First publication: Six letters between Mühlenfels, Henriette and Friedrich Schleiermacher, and Georg Andreas Reimer. (shrink)

The areas of interest of the scholar of religious studies, Karl E. Grozinger, are diverse. His research is concentrated on the religious and cultural history of Judaism throughout the ages: Israel in antiquity, the era of rabbinical traditional literature, philosophy of religion during the Middle Ages, the kabbalistic tradition, as well as Jewish thinkers and devout movements in contemporary times. On the occasion of Professor Grozinger's seventieth birthday, numerous scholars present the first fruits of their current research as a (...) first look into the tendencies of future research in Jewish studies. In accordance with this scholar's broad interests, the volume Jewish Lifeworlds and Jewish Thought, edited by Nathanael Riemer, is comprised of contributions to a wide variety of topics of Jewish cultural history.With contributions by Hermann Lichtenberger, Hanna Liss, Ronit Meroz, Yoav Elstein, Susanne Talabardon, Nathanael Riemer, Giuseppe Veltri, Dirk Westerkamp, Thomas Meyer, Daniel Jutte, Frederek Musall, Robert Jutte, J. Friedrich Battenberg, Admiel Kosman, Rella Kushelevsky, Elvira Grozinger, Simon Bronner, Avidov Lipsker, Jascha Nemtsov, Rebekka Denz, Micha Brumlik, Micha? Galas, Manja Herrmann, Hans-Michael Haussig, Anat Feinberg, Adam Lipszyc, Vivian Liska, Julius H. Schoeps, Edward D'browa, Ewa Geller, Manfred Voigts, Mordechai Lewy and Stanislaw Krajewski. (shrink)

Die neue Edition der Vorlesungen über die 'Philosophie der Weltgeschichte' stellt den Versuch dar, eine einzige der gehaltenen Vorlesungen aus drei Manuskripten unterschiedlicher Qualität möglichst authentisch zu rekonstruieren und bietet somit erst die Möglichkeit, sich wissenschaftlich mit der systematischen Konzeption der Hegelschen Geschichtsphilosophie zu beschäftigen. Der Band enthält zusätzlich einen umfangreichen Anmerkungsteil über die orientalische Welt, in dem ausführlich die zum großen Teil schwer zugänglichen Quellen nachgewiesen worden sind, die Hegel als Material für seine Vorlesung benutzt hat.

In my essay I try to explore a parallel between Herder and Humboldt and some modern investigations into the origin of language. Herder favors a pan-psychistic account of nature, and he proposes a theory maintaining that only language can do the business to mediate between the abstract reasoning of man and the content delivered to him by his senses. Humboldt, in his turn, prefers a Kantian transcendental analysis of the form of language, the form being dependent on man’s mental activity (...) and therefore dynamical in character. We may summarize this result in the thesis that Herder is speculating on the origin of language whereas Humboldt attempts to give a theory of the origination of language by synthetic acts. Problems connected with a narrative style of theorizing can also be demonstrated by contrasting two modern authors, namely R. G. Millikan and M. Tomasello. (shrink)

Ist Intelligenz erblich? Karl-Friedrich Fischbach und Martin Niggeschmidt zeigen, dass „Erblichkeit“ in der biologischen Fachsprache etwas anderes bedeutet als in der Alltagssprache – was fast zwangsläufig zu Fehlinterpretationen führt. Die 2. Auflage dieses essentials wurde um Kapitel zur Aussagekraft von Zwillingsstudien und genomweiten Assoziationsstudien über IQ-Unterschiede erweitert. Wer sich die Logik der Modelle und Methoden vergegenwärtigt, stellt fest: Intelligenz als „erblich“ zu bezeichnen, ist unpräzise und irreführend. Die Autoren: Prof. Dr. Karl-Friedrich Fischbach ist Entwicklungsbiologe und Neurogenetiker. (...) Er war von 1985 bis 2013 Professor für Biophysik und Molekularbiologie an der Universität Freiburg, davon zwei Jahre lang als geschäftsführender Direktor des Instituts für Biologie III. Martin Niggeschmidt ist Redakteur in Hamburg. Stimmen zur 1. Auflage: „... Das zugänglich geschriebene Werk erklärt faktenbasiert und anhand zahlreicher Abbildungen den komplexen Stoff, um so Missverständnisse, aber auch bewusste Falschaussagen aufzudecken.” „... wirklich lohnenswert, ja verdienstvoll...“. (shrink)

Este artigo discute tópicos fundamentais relativos à tensão interna entre os aspectos absolutista e liberal do pensamento de Hobbes.

Avec la première publication de sa philosophie de l' État De Cive, Hobbes réalise, d'une manière paradigmatique, la justification du contractualisme moderne en prenant la théorie de l' état de nature comme point de référence, à la fois déontologique et méthodique de la théorie de l' État et du droit. L'objet de cet article est de reconstruire le commencement de la philosophie politique et déterminer sa place à l'intérieur des Elementa philosophica. Hobbes' rechtsphilosophische Erstveröffentlichung De Cive löst in paradigmatischer Weise (...) das Begründungsprogramm des neuzeitlichen Kontraktualismus ein, indem es die Theorie des Naturzustandes zum normativen und methodischen Referenzpunkt der Theorie von Recht und Staat macht. Die vorliegende Studie versucht, den Begründungsgang dieses Anfangs der politischen Philosophie nachzuzeichnen und seinen Ort innerhalb der Elementa philosophica zu bestimmen. (shrink)

Elementary textbook introducing several topics from numerical mathematics, with many exercises and solutions. For students and practitioners from engineering and natural sciences.

F.A. Staudenmaier (1800-1856), eine der Zentralfiguren der Kath. Tübinger Schule und einer Theologie der lebendigen Auseinandersetzung mit dem dt. Idealismus und der Romantik, hat gerade in der Gotteslehre kirchliche Tradition und Gedankengut seiner Zeit zu vereinen gesucht. Seine Lehre von Gott ist getragen vom Lebensgedanken, der - verknüpft mit dem Gedanken vom absoluten Geist - die dreipersonale Lebenseinheit Gottes gegenüber pantheistischen Tendenzen sichert. Orientierung an und Distanzierung von Hegel kennzeichnen St.s. reifende und reife Theologie, deren Weitschweifigkeit durch diese Arbeit prägnant (...) zusammengefasst wird. (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)

In comparing different risk elicitation methods under the assumptions of expected utility theory, previous studies have found significant differences in the elicited risk attitudes. This paper extends this line of research to consider cumulative prospect theory by comparing risk attitudes and probability weightings determined using two elicitation methods: the method by Tanaka et al. :557–571, 2010; TCN method) and the method by Wakker and Deneffe :1131–1150, 1996; WD method). We demonstrate that the two methods reveal significantly different mean values for (...) the measured risk attitudes. Participants are classified on average as moderately risk-averse using the TCN method, whereas the same individuals are classified as nearly risk-neutral using the WD method. Moreover, we find that on average, participants overweight low probabilities and underweight high probabilities to a greater extent with the WD method than with the TCN method. Therefore, the different elicitation methods, that both consider probability weighting, can lead to different measured values of risk attitude and probability weighting. (shrink)

The standard microeconomic analysis of taxation suggests that excise taxes on goods with a price-inelastic demand are more efficient in that they lead to a lower deadweight loss than taxes on goods with price-elastic demand. This argument ignores secondary effects on the rest of the economy. By narrowly focusing on the primary effects on the market where the tax is raised, the overall deadweight loss is underestimated when demand is price-inelastic. Moreover, it is overestimated when demand is price-elastic. This puts (...) into question the validity of the standard textbook argument. In this paper we address this issue by considering how taxes affect consumer behavior in other markets. From this we can clearly see how the impact of an excise tax is not limited to one market in isolation, but is spread over all markets and affects the demand for cash balances. We suggest a simple way to incorporate this important insight into a standard textbook exposition. (shrink)

Der 1864 in Hirschberg/Schlesien geborene Karl JoëlJoël, Karl entstammte väterlicherseits einer bedeutenden Rabbiner- und Gelehrtenfamilie. Der 1881 verstorbene Vater Hermann JoëlJoël, Hermannwar ein Schüler SchellingsSchelling, Friedrich Wilhelm Joseph und wurde mit einer vergleichenden Studie zur Stellung der Patriarchen in Judentum, Christentum und Islam 1857 promoviert. Mit seinem Bruder DavidJoël, David schrieb er eine wichtige Monographie zum Sohar.