Wittgenstein, possibly the most influential philosopher of the twentieth century, is often labelled a Neopositivist, a New-Kantian, even a Sceptic. _Questions on Wittgenstein_, first published in 1988, presents a selection of nine essays investigating a matter of vital philosophical importance: Wittgenstein’s relationship to his Austrian predecessors and peers. The intention throughout is to determine the precise contours of Wittgenstein’s own thought by situating it within its formative context. Although it remains of particular interest to Anglo-Saxon philosophers, special familiarity with Austrian (...) philosophy is required to appreciate the subtle and profound influence which this cultural and philosophical setting had on Wittgenstein’s intellectual development. Professor Haller has spent his career exploring these themes, and is one of the foremost authorities on both Wittgenstein and contemporary Austrian philosophy. Questions on Wittgenstein thus offers a unique insight into the twentieth-century tradition of Austrian philosophy, and its importance for Wittgenstein’s thought. (shrink)
Wittgenstein, possibly the most influential philosopher of the twentieth century, is often labelled a Neopositivist, a New-Kantian, even a Sceptic. Questions on Wittgenstein , first published in 1988, presents a selection of nine essays investigating a matter of vital philosophical importance: Wittgenstein’s relationship to his Austrian predecessors and peers. The intention throughout is to determine the precise contours of Wittgenstein’s own thought by situating it within its formative context. Although it remains of particular interest to Anglo-Saxon philosophers, special familiarity with (...) Austrian philosophy is required to appreciate the subtle and profound influence which this cultural and philosophical setting had on Wittgenstein’s intellectual development. Professor Haller has spent his career exploring these themes, and is one of the foremost authorities on both Wittgenstein and contemporary Austrian philosophy. Questions on Wittgenstein thus offers a unique insight into the twentieth-century tradition of Austrian philosophy, and its importance for Wittgenstein’s thought. (shrink)
In the judgment of many historians of contemporary philosophy as well as of analytic philosophers of different lines, there is no doubt about the truth of the statement that the philosophy of the Vienna Circle is dead. And since it is dead, some think that the only remaining task could be to find out the cause that led to the downfall of this proud philosophical movement.
Wittgenstein, possibly the most influential philosopher of the twentieth century, is often labelled a Neopositivist, a New-Kantian, even a Sceptic. _Questions on Wittgenstein_, first published in 1988, presents a selection of nine essays investigating a matter of vital philosophical importance: Wittgenstein’s relationship to his Austrian predecessors and peers. The intention throughout is to determine the precise contours of Wittgenstein’s own thought by situating it within its formative context. Although it remains of particular interest to Anglo-Saxon philosophers, special familiarity with Austrian (...) philosophy is required to appreciate the subtle and profound influence which this cultural and philosophical setting had on Wittgenstein’s intellectual development. Professor Haller has spent his career exploring these themes, and is one of the foremost authorities on both Wittgenstein and contemporary Austrian philosophy. Questions on Wittgenstein thus offers a unique insight into the twentieth-century tradition of Austrian philosophy, and its importance for Wittgenstein’s thought. (shrink)
Wittgenstein's attitude toward philosophy and philosophical problems is examined with the result that - in spite of his own strong criticism of his earlier work - the aim of philosophy remains the same throughout his life: clarity for its own sake. Wittgenstein's concept of philosophy is sketched as non-naturalistic and anti-systematic with the recommendation of being unbiased as the only remedy for falling again into the old traps. The criticism of the Russell-Frege view of existential quantification and generalization included in (...) the "Big Typescript" is outlined as well as the position toward verification Wittgenstein maintained in between his beginning to work in philosophy anew and his first attempt of systematizing the results in the "Big Typescript". (shrink)
The purpose of this article is to try to get a clearer picture of a criterion which may be used to distinguish between genuine names of objects and pseudo-names, between names of existent and non-existent objects, between facts and fictitious states of affairs. Meinong's idea of incomplete objects serves as the theoretical notion for the description of fictitious objects. The distinction between imported (immigrant) and native objects in fiction is denied and a necessary connection between fictious and real objects maintained.
Inhaltsverzeichnis/Table of Contents: Rudolf HALLER: Investigating Hintikka. David PEARS: Hintikka's Interpretation of Wittgenstein's Treatment of Sensation-Language. Allan JANIK: How Did Hertz Influence Wittgenstein's Philosophical Development? Ilkka NIINILUOTO: Hintikka and Whewell on Aristotelian Induction. Jan von PLATO: Illustrations of Method in Ptolemaic Astronomy. Peter SIMONS: New Categories for Formal Ontology. Henri LAUENER: How to Use Proper Names. Matti SINTONEN: Knowing and Making: Kantian Themes in Hintikka's Philosophy. Paul WEINGARTNER: A Note on Jaakko Hintikka's "Knowledge and Belief". Nenad MIŠ_EVI_: Naturalism and Modal (...) Reasoning. Ulrike LEOPOLD-WILDBURGER: Induction as a Connection between Philosophy, Psychology and Economics. A Plea for Experimental Research. John PASSMORE: Editing Russell's Papers: A Fragment of Institutional History. Rudolf HALLER: From Archives to Editions. (shrink)
Grundlagenfragen wissenschaftlicher Theorien zählen zu den "nicht leicht" beantwortbaren Problemen, bietet doch bereits ihre Formulierung ein Feld des Disputes, und gelangen erst recht die Lösungsvorschläge nur selten in den Rang generell akzeptierter Annahmen. Natürlich gibt es verschiedene Gründe und Gründe verschiedenen Gewichtes, warum Philosophen und Physiker gemeinsam versuchen, bestimmte Fragen zu behandeln. Und es ist nur zu bekannt, daß einige solcher Fragen eher von Physikern und einige eher von Philosophen gestellt werden, ohne daß man sich auf diesem Gebiet über klare (...) Grenzen des wissenschaftlichen Kosmos einig wäre. Aber sicherlich werden einige Probleme von beiden "Seiten" aufgeworfen und dies nicht zuletzt und bisweilen in der Hoffnung, sie auch vereint am ehesten einer Lösung näher bringen zu können. Ob solche Hoffnung rational berechtigt ist, mag hier nicht untersucht werden. Obiichermaßen wird die Meinung akzeptiert, daß theoretische Probleme selbst auf metatheoretischer Ebene analysiert werden. Aber seit gewisse Elemente der kanoni schen Auffassung empirisch-wissenschaftlicher Theorien in zunehmendem Maße be zweifelt werden und entsprechend dem Prinzip 'ab esse ad posse valet iIIatio' auch be zweifelt werden 'können', fragt es sich, ob eine Charakterisierung des Verhältnisses von Theorie und Metatheorie angemessen ist, die den Objektbereich durch das Zweisprachen modell empirisch-theoretischer Begriffe abbildbar annimmt. Durch dieses Modell - ganz unabhängig von seinen verschiedenen Ausformungen und Deutungen - sollte ja der seman tische Bezug des Geltungsanspruches erfahrungswissenschaftlicher Theorien gesichert und transparent gemacht werden, der für die erklärten Hauptziele der Theorienbildun- nämlich Voraussage und Erklärung von Ereignissen - bedeutsam ist. (shrink)
