In the earlier sections of part one of the "critique of judgment," discussing natural beauty, Kant describes the aesthetical or beautiful in strongly formalistic terms. In the closing sections of this part, Discussing fine art, He characterizes the aesthetical or beautiful in predominantly expressionistic terms. The puzzle is not that these views are different but that our philosopher seems to think they are identical. Various hypotheses that claim to explain this puzzle are examined. The key suggested is kant's background or (...) approach. In analysing the aesthetical, Kant is looking for evidence of a harmony between natural fact and moral aspiration, Nature and freedom. For this purpose the aesthetical as form seems best in the field of natural beauty, And the aesthetical as expression in the field of fine art. (shrink)

It has frequently been argued that there is a clear and irreducible difference between statements of fact and statements of value. To say “X is cobalt” and “X is good” is to make statements differing not merely in detail but in kind. To attempt to reduce the second type of statement to the first is to commit the “naturalistic” fallacy. To attempt to reduce the first type of statement to the second is to commit the “idealistic” fallacy. In this paper, (...) I shall accept this position as correct but argue that, far from settling the question of value science, it is merely the elementary premise from which all discussion of this matter must begin. (shrink)

Philosophy was born in China in the 6th century, in the person of Confucius. But to properly understand this beginning and its development, we need to recall the beginning of the Zhou dynasty in the 11th century BC. Animated by a vision of the Mandate of Heaven for their rule, the Zhou rulers initiated and maintained a dynasty in north China aimed at achieving a civilized life for all human beings on earth. After a brief sketch of this background, Richard (...) Gotshalk attempts an exposition of the six major figures who gave shape to the early Chinese tradition of philosophy: Confucius, Mo-zi, Lao-zi, Mencius, Zhuang-zi, and Xun-zi. Presenting the thought of each separately, Gotshalk concludes the work by drawing together some of the basic themes and emphases which mark the early Chinese realization of philosophical thought and that distinguishes philosophy in its beginnings in China from philosophy in its beginnings in India and Greece. (shrink)

Philosophy was born in India in the late 8th century, at a crucial but troubled time in the emergence of a civilization which integrated peoples of northern India with contrasting Aryan and Indus Valley heritages. This book begins with a recalling of the extended historical dynamic that culminated in that time. Given the sketch of the historical background and matrix, the book then attempts an exposition of a number of the important Upanisads . Richard Gotshalk provides fresh interpretations and (...) translations of the Upanisads, and places his exposition of the philosophical material in the relevant historical context. The work concludes with a brief sketch of features and emphases which mark the Upanisadic realization of philosophical thought and distinguish it from philosophy as realized in its beginnings in China and Greece. In an appendix the work also offers a translation of the parts of the eleven Upanisads treated in the main text. (shrink)

Philosophy arose in Greece in a three-fold birth, first in 6th century Ionia, then in 6th century south Italy, and finally in 5th century Athens. This triple-birth, together with the character and differences of these three beginnings, becomes intelligible when the historical background and matrix involved are recalled. Richard Gotshalk begins this work with an extended sketch of that background, emphasizing the emergence of poetry as a truth-revealer beyond myth and the role of Homer and Hesiod in shaping by (...) their poetic achievements, the matrix within which philosophy arose. From that background, Gotshalk then offers an understanding of the origins and initial shapes of philosophy in Greece, taking Heraclitus as exemplifying the Ionian beginning, Parmenides the south Italian, and Plato and Aristotle the Athenian. The work concludes with a brief sketch of the features and emphases which mark the Greek realization of philosophical thought, and distinguish philosophy in its beginnings in Greece from philosophy in its beginnings in India and China. (shrink)

Loving and Dying is a reading of three dialogues which, using the figure of Socrates conversing in three different concrete situations, in complementary fashion address death, love, and reflection, as matters central to finding and understanding life's meaning and to sharing in the kind of immortality that is open to a human being. The intent of the work is simply to bring to attention how the dialogues register as drama and how they achieve this provocation of the reader to reflection (...) on these central matters in human life. (shrink)