Dutch science flourished in the late sixteenth and in the seventeenth century thanks to the immigration of cartographers, botanists, mathematicians, astronomers and the like from the Southern Netherlands after the Spanish army had captured the city of Antwerp in 1585, and thanks to the religious and the socio‐economic situation of the country. A strong impulse for practical scientific activities started from the Reformation, mainly thanks to its anti‐traditional attitude, which had an anti‐rationalistic tendency. Therefore, in the Northern Netherlands there (...) was no ‘warfare’ between science and religion and the biblical arguments leading to Galileo's condemnation were not used.Although the growth of the exact sciences and of technology in the late sixteenth and the seventeenth centuries in Protestant cirles may be partly attributed to the expansion of trade, industry, navigation and so on, this does not explain why there was also at the same time a great interest in subjects as botany and zoology, which had no immediate economic utility. There were discussions about Copernicanism and Cartesianism. So a number of astronomers and theologians rejected the earth's movement on scientific and religious grounds, but there were also those who did not reject the Copernican system on biblical grounds. In the seventeenth century there was much discussion between science and religion in the Northern Netherlands, but that discussion was not followed by censure by the Church of the State. In the Republic there was a large amount of intellectual freedom in the study of the natural sciences, thanks to practical and ideological considerations. In the eighteenth century the seventheenth century tension between science and religion changed into a physicotheological natural science. It was believed that investigations into the workings of nature should lead to a better understanding of its Creator. So Bernard Nieuwentijt in his well‐known book: The right use of‐world views for the conviction of atheists and unbelievers (1715) intended to prove the existence of God on the basis of teleological arguments. (shrink)

Spätestens mit dem Aufkommen der modernen Naturwissenschaften im 19. Jahrhundert wird die Rolle der Metaphysik für die naturwissenschaftliche Begriffsbildung in Frage gestellt. Bereits Kant identifiziert die Schwächen einer Metaphysik, die in ihren wesentlichen Begriffen allein dem aristotelischen Vorbild treu geblieben ist. Das heißt aber nicht, dass bewährte traditionelle metaphysische Begriffe völlig aufgegeben werden müssen. Gerade in den modernen Naturwissenschaften gibt es Fragen, die aus der einzelnen Wissenschaft heraus nicht beantwortet werden können, ohne begriffliche Anleihen bei traditionellen metaphysischen Konzepten zu nehmen. (...) Anhand der metaphysischen und naturphilosophischen Konzeptionen Kants und Whiteheads untersucht Gordon Seitz den von Whitehead behaupteten Gegensatz zwischen Prozess- und Transzendentalphilosophie im Hinblick auf die Idee einer Einheit der Natur und unter Berücksichtigung moderner naturwissenschaftlicher Theorien. (shrink)

Eine weit verbreitete Auffassung über die wissenschaftlichen Naturverständnisse besagt, dass ihre historische Entwicklung von einer zunehmenden Abgrenzung gegenüber der Magie begleitet gewesen sei. Ursprünglich eng mit der Magie verbunden, hätten sich die wissenschaftlichen Naturverständnisse in einem langwierigen Prozess immer weiter von der Magie entfernt, bis sie ihre heutige amagische Gestalt erhalten hätten. Mein Beitrag diskutiert einige Argumente zur Stützung dieser, wie ich meine, plausiblen Auffassung. / A whitespread view of the natural sciences holds that their historical development was accompanied by (...) a constantly widening gap between them and magic. Originally closely bound up with magic, the sciences are supposed to have distanced itself from it in a long-drawn-out process, until they attained their present magic-free form. This essay discusses some arguments in support of this plausible view. (shrink)

Kants Metaphysische Anfangsgründe der Naturwissenschaft von 1786 stehen ihrem Anspruch nach zwischen einer transzendentalen Kritik der Vernunft - Kant bereitete zur selben Zeit die in wesentlichen Stücken umgearbeitete zweite Auflage der KrV vor - und der Physik als empirischer Wissenschaft. Die Notwendigkeit einer Reflexion über die Naturwissenschaft verhilft dieser Schrift heute wieder zu systematischer Relevanz, nachdem sie lange Zeit nur aus dem Blickwinkel ihrer Bedeutsamkeit für die empirische Naturwissenschaft betrachtet und infolgedessen allenfalls aus wissenschaftshistorischem Interesse rezipiert wurde.

Popular science in Nuremberg at the end of the 18th century exemplifies a little known German scientific culture: as in English und French towns, public lectures in natural philosophy and experimental demonstrations were offered to an interested bourgeois audience; the production of scientific toys flourished. The career of Johann Konrad Gütle, private teacher, itinerant lecturer and instrument maker, illustrates the popular scientific scene in Enlightenment Nuremberg.

The papers in this volume are offered in celebration of the 200th anni versary of the pub 1 i cat i on of Inmanue 1 Kant's The MetaphysicaL Foundations of NatupaL Science. All of the es says (including the Introduction) save two were written espe ci ally for thi s volume. Gernot Bohme' s paper is an amended and enlarged version of one originally read in the series of lectures and colloquia in philosophy of science offered by Boston (...) University. My own paper is a revised and enlarged version (with an appendix containing completely new material) of one read at the biennial meeting of the Philosophy of Sci ence Association held in Chicago in 1984. Why is it important to devote this attention to Kant's last published work in the philosophy of physics? The excellent essays in the volume will answer the question. I will provide some schematic com ments designed to provide an image leading from the general question to its very specific answers. Kant is best known for hi s monumental Croitique of Pure Reason and for his writings in ethical theory. His "critical" philosophy requires an initial sharp division of knowledge into its theoretical and practical parts. Moral perfection of attempts to act out of duty is the aim of practical reason. The aim of theoretical reason is to know the truth about ma terial and spiritual nature. (shrink)

Über das Verhältnis der Naturwissenschaften zur Gesamtheit der Wissenschaft.--Über das Ziel und die Fortschritte der Naturwissenschaft.--Das Denken in der Medicin.--Induction und Deduction.

Friedrich Nietzsche has emerged as one of the most important and influential modern philosophers. For several decades, the book series Monographien und Texte zur Nietzsche-Forschung (MTNF) has set the agenda in a rapidly growing and changing field of Nietzsche scholarship. The scope of the series is interdisciplinary and international in orientation reflects the entire spectrum of research on Nietzsche, from philosophy to literary studies and political theory. The series publishes monographs and edited volumes that undergo a strict peer-review process. The (...) book series is led by an international team of editors, whose work represents the full range of current Nietzsche scholarship. (shrink)

In den Kant-Forschungen werden sowohl historisch als auch systematisch orientierte Arbeiten zur Philosophie Immanuel Kants veröffentlicht. Die Bände stellen Funde unbekannter oder verschollen geglaubter Kantischer Autographen und Vorlesungsskripte vor und erörtern Editionsprobleme der Kantischen Vorlesungen und Werke. Sie enthalten darüber hinaus Studien zu Kants Umfeld und zur Kant-Rezeption im 18. Jahrhundert sowie systematisch angelegte Arbeiten zu Architektonik und System der Philosophie Kants.

Analytic philosophy is sometimes said to have particularly close connections to logic and to science, and no particularly interesting or close relation to its own history. It is argued here that although the connections to logic and science have been important in the development of analytic philosophy, these connections do not come close to characterizing the nature of analytic philosophy, either as a body of doctrines or as a philosophical method. We will do better to understand analytic philosophy (...) – and its relationship to continental philosophy – if we see it as a historically constructed collection of texts, which define its key problems and concerns. It is true, however, that analytic philosophy has paid little attention to the history of the subject. This is both its strength – since it allows for a distinctive kind of creativity – and its weakness – since ignoring history can encourage a philosophical variety of “normal science.”. (shrink)

In lieu of an abstract, here is a brief excerpt of the content:Journal of the History of Philosophy 41.3 (2003) 421-422 [Access article in PDF] Konstantin Pollok. Kants Metaphysische Anfangsgründe der Naturwissenschaft. Ein kritischer Kommentar. Hamburg: Felix Meiner Verlag, 2001. Pp. x + 546. Cloth, € 98.00.Kant's Metaphysical Foundations of Natural Science (MFNS) was published in 1786, one year after his Groundwork of the Metaphysics of Morals, and thus also falling in the period between the two editions of (...) the Critique of Pure Reason. Long assigned a tertiary status within the corpus, the MFNShas for several reasons been the subject of renewed scholarly attention in the past two decades. Attempts to trace the origins of analytic philosophy beyond the work of the logicists and the Vienna Circle have focussed attention on neo-Kantian "scientific epistemologists" such as Helmholtz, Hertz, and their contemporaries, for whom Kant's philosophy of science formed a common point of departure. This more general concern is complemented by Kant scholars' increasing interest in his philosophies of mathematics and the sciences. Finally, there is greater appreciation of the importance of the Metaphysical Foundations for our understanding of Kant's revisions to the first Critique, for instance his emphasis in the B-edition on the necessity of external intuition to the "objective reality" of the categories.Earlier neglect of the MFNS was not merely the product of indifference to these issues, for it is an obscure book, even for Kant. In extending the transcendental metaphysics of the Critique into the domain of empirical science, Kant demands of his reader a thorough grasp of the critical philosophy. To complicate matters, the larger part of the text involves a detailed analysis of classical scientific concepts taken from the Leibnizian and Newtonian traditions. Kant often draws on his earlier writings on the natural sciences, such as the Physical Monadology, and either modifies or, in the case of pre-critical sources, inverts these to fit their new context. The book often seems to be little more than a rationalist deduction of the key concepts of Newtonian physics, at least as Kant understood them. In order to extract philosophically interesting arguments from this mixture of physical science and transcendental philosophy, one must have a firm grasp of the background in the history of science and of Kant's oeuvre as a whole. To date, there have been only two full-length studies (by Addickes and Plaass) devoted to this short work, and neither of them attempted to cover it as a whole. Konstantin Pollok's commentary of the MFNSwill therefore fill an important gap in the secondary literature. [End Page 421]Pollok's Critical Commentary, which is written in a clear anduncomplicated academic German, steers a middle course between textual analysis and criticism. The author accords each major division of the book (the Preface, Phoronomy, Dynamics, Mechanics, and Phenomenology) its own chapter, and then follows the argumentative lines of these closely. But Pollok's text does not mirror Kant's "mathematical" sub-division of the MFNSinto axioms, theses, and scholia. These are often grouped together and commented on as a single argumentative whole, which is keyed with the title of the main sub-division. The body text of the commentary consists of textual exegesis, quotations, and references to historical sources, as well as to the larger context of Kant's philosophy. The lengthy footnotes address discussions and controversies in recent secondary literature, as well as Pollok's evaluation of these. He quotes both primary and secondary sources at length, thereby freeing the reader from the bother of tracking down quotations in order to grasp what is at issue. This aid is, however, counterbalanced by his legitimate decision to quote all sources in the original language, with the exception of those available to Kant only in translation.Critical discussion is strictly confined to the conceptual context of Kant's time, in that the significance of Kant's arguments for later developments in the philosophy of science, and their status from the standpoint of such later developments are not addressed. But this decision still leaves open significant interpretative play: one can approach the... (shrink)

English description: We live in a time where the old mechanisms of order have lost their grip on society, leading to numerous infractions and confrontations. In this religious-philosophical study, Kurt Wuchterl develops an epistemic perception of contingency that re-interprets the tense relationship between natural sciences and religion. Contingency always includes the "option of being different," which exacerbates pivotal problems such as chance, chaos, and unavailability. If we as individuals are not able to cope with these contingencies, we encounter the edge (...) of reason; acknowledging this edge, however, poses the question of the otherness of reason. German text. German description: Wir leben in einer Zeit, in der die alten Ordnungsgaranten ihre Orientierungskraft verloren und die Ordnungsbrueche zu vielfaltigen Konfrontationen gefuehrt haben. Kurt Wuchterl entwickelt in seiner religionsphilosophischen Studie einen epistemischen Kontingenzbegriff, mit dem das gespannte Verhaltnis der Naturwissenschaft zur Religion eine neue Deutung erfahrt.Kontingenz beinhaltet immer die Moglichkeit des Anders-sein-konnens. Und damit stellen sich zentrale Probleme wie Zufall, Chaos und Unverfuegbarkeit in verscharfter Form. Wenn es uns als Individuen nicht gelingt, diese Kontingenzen zu bewaltigen, wird die Grenze der Vernunft erreicht. Mit deren Anerkennung aber stellt sich die Frage nach dem Anderen der Vernunft. Wird dies als Chiffre des Religiosen interpretiert, zeigt sich dahinter nicht das Nichts, sondern eben gerade: ein ganz Anderes. In der Kontingenzbegegnung, wie diese Moglichkeit bezeichnet wird, scheiden sich die Geister; ihre Unbestimmtheit ist der Tribut an unsere Endlichkeit. (shrink)

In der systematisch-theologischen Studie wird am Beispiel des Werkes von Johann Georg Hamann (1730-1788) die Frage der Verhältnisbestimmung von Theologie und Naturwissenschaft untersucht und systematisch entfaltet. Im Zuge einer Übersetzung von Grundstrukturen "objektiver" Weltbetrachtung in Kategorien eines sprachlich-hermeneutischen Wirklichkeitsverständnisses ermöglicht Hamann die Verbindung von Schöpfung als Kommunikationsgeschehen mit einer ihre "grammatischen" Strukturen erschließenden Naturerkenntnis.

This paper makes some additional points about matters discussed in my book „Aristoteles als Naturwissenschaftler“ (Aristotle as a Natural Scientist), Berlin 2014. Findings by the biologist A. M. Leroi, who published a book on Aristotle with a similar subject that same year („The Lagoon. How Aristotle invented science“), will be considered. It will be argued that the mayflies discovered by Aristotle in the Kuban River belong to the species Palingenia fuliginosa. Aristotle is more likely to have observed the life-history (...) of the catfish in the river Strymon in Northern Greece than in the Achelous river basin in Acarnania. He probably never set eyes on the catfish Silurus aristotelis, which is endemic to Acarnania and was discovered by Agassiz in 1857. (shrink)