This article investigates the meaning and the historical implications of the term praetor maximus quoted by Livy from an early republican law. In modern scholarship it has mostly been interpreted as a technical term for the supreme magistrate. Instead of taking praetor maximus as an official title, though, I suggest to follow Mommsen who understands the term as a generic expression. Going further from this general idea and given the meticulous observance of rituals in Roman religion, the law seems to (...) have used a generic term denoting any person who happened to be in charge of the community, which extended to matters touching on relations to the gods. Other than in Mommsen's interpretation, the term is here argued to belong to the immediate aftermath of the monarchic stage of the Roman community. In a period of great insecurity, when the republic had probably just barely been established, praetor maximus referred to the possibility of a rex as much as to any republican office. Thus, this term does not allow for any conclusions about the emergence of the supreme magistracy in Rome, but rather gives testimony to royal support still active in Rome after the expulsion oft he Tarquins. (shrink)

Name der Zeitschrift: Klio Jahrgang: 99 Heft: 1 Seiten: 358-363.

This is Werner S. Pluhar's translation of Immanuel Kant's Critique of Judgment (Kritik der Urtheilskraft) for Hackett Publications (Indianapolis, Indiana). ISBN 9780872200258 (paperback).

This article explores Adorno’s negative dialectics as a critical social theory of economic objectivity. It rejects the conventional view that Adorno does not offer a critique of the economic forms of capitalist society. The article holds that negative dialectics is a dialectics of the social world in the form of the economic object, one that is governed by the movement of economic quantities, that is, real economic abstractions. Negative dialectics refuses to accept the constituted economic categories as categories of economic (...) nature. Instead, the article argues, it amounts to a conceptualized social praxis [ begriffene Praxis] of the capitalistically constituted social relations, which manifest themselves in the form of seemingly independent economic categories. Economic nature is a socially constituted nature, which entails the class antagonism in its concept. The article concludes that for negative dialectics the explanation of real economic abstractions lies in the understanding of the class-divided nature of human practice. (shrink)

This lecture by Professor Werner Marx, of Freiburg University, was presented at the Moscow Hegel Convention on November 2, 1974. It is here translated for the first time by Professor James C. Risser, of Seattle University.

Against the background of the contemporary debate about financialisation, the paper conceptualises the capitalist labour economy as fundamentally a monetary system. It argues that money is not a capitalist means of organising its labour economy but that it is rather a capitalist end. The argument examines and finds wanting conceptions of money in political economy, including Keynesianism and neoliberalism, and argues that the debate about financialisation is fundamentally based on the propositions of political economy. It holds that Marx’s critique of (...) political economy conceives of money as the form of value and expounds money-making as the purpose of the capital labour economy. Thus, the labour theory of value is fundamentally a monetary theory of value, labour is the means of valorisation, and that is, of money in process, and as such capital. Making money out of money is capital as its most rational. In the form of credit, money posits wealth as a claim on future surplus value. (shrink)

This article has two purposes. First, it aims to present a detailed analysis of the argument of “recognition” or even of the “fight for recognition”, which Hegel uses in his fragments from Jena treating of the system of philosophy, especially of the philosophy of spirit. It will be necessary to determine precedently by means of an exact interpretation the content of that expressions, in order to criticize and to compare, his original significance in Hegel with the theoretical application made by (...) Honneth. The special aim hereby is to correct and to explain the function of the “fight for recognition”, even in its sharpening significance as a “fight for life and death”, with relation to the genesis of the state of right. Second, the figure of “recognition” is related to Hegel’s Philosophy of right in the version of 1820. In this work, recognition participates in the theory of “institutions” which is analyzed by Honneth as well. Apart from the merits gained through the endeavour to introduce a classic philosophical theory into a conception of justice in society, we feel obliged to state an error in Honneth‘s interpretation in so far as he understands an institution as a simple social community of communication. For that reason, a conclusion based on a critical commentary can only include a negative recommendation, that means, not to follow those traces of interpretation but rather to defend and to consult the texts originally composed by Hegel. (shrink)

The treatise is engaged in kant's too little noticed aesthetic doctrine of symbolic representation. It furthermore is occupied with the relevance which this doctrine has to enlighten the self-Estimation of literary criticism (theory of literature). The treatise results that kant's doctrine is to be considered as an offer to solve many problems in actually literary criticism (theory of literature).

Tant que l’art fera partie du luxe, c’est-à-dire tant qu’il organisera sa rareté par l’effet de sa spéculation intellectuelle, il vivra une croissance infinie. Pour cela, il ne faut pas qu’il y ait d’inflation, c’est-à-dire qu’il faut respecter un certain numerus clausus d’artistes et d’œuvres. Le Wall Street de nos désirs et nos désillusions, c’est justement l’organisation de cette inflation, c’est – dans la continuité de Beuys – affirmer que chacun d’entre nous est capable d’être un artiste. Nous allons bombarder (...) le réel qui nous est fait de tous les réels qui vivent logés en nous pour en faire Le Wall Street de nos désirs et de nos désillusions, une bourse de nos valeurs inscrites dans une symbolique, jouée à la hausse et à la baisse dans un jeu qui va faire monter votre désir et donc armer une révolution dans le sens des saisons. (shrink)

Ziel dieser Untersuchung ist es, den Zusammenhang der kantischen Kritiken unter Wahrung einer transzendental-kritischen Perspektive nachzuweisen. Dazu wird zunächst eine Paraphrasierung der einzelnen Kritiken entwickelt und aus einem gemeinsamen erkenntnistheoretischen Horizont heraus interpretiert, der anschließend jeweils mit einschlägigen Positionen der Forschungsliteratur diskutiert wird. Der inhaltliche Schwerpunkt der Arbeit zielt auf eine besondere Einordnung der Leistung Kants: Eine Differenzierung der Bereiche "Metaphysik", "Transzendentalphilosophie" und "transzendentale Kritik" lässt Kants Standpunkt einheitlich bestimmen und zeigt unter der Berücksichtigung der Notwendigkeit für das menschliche Denken (...) die grundlegenden allgemeingültigen Strukturen des menschlichen Erkenntnisvermögens. Diese Akzentuierung der Betrachtung hat einige Verschiebungen des heute gelehrten Kant-Bildes zur Folge, die bes. den Kategorischen Imperativ und die sogenannte "Ästhetik" der Kritik der Urteilskraft betreffen. (shrink)

All of metaethical positions today can be replaced by a universal architecture of moral philosophy, all but one: moral realism. Here, I use the term “metaethics” to refer to any theory of ethics concerning the groundwork of ethics, on the one hand, and the inquiry of the use of philosophical words, concepts or methods on the other. In this article, I will present my hypothesis that in moral philosophy, we do not need any specialized metaethics at all. Metaethics as a (...) discipline of philosophy is only required by the work of moral realists, who try to show us a realm of values and norms that exist (per se) naturally, non-naturally or supernaturally. How can they know? The effort of metaethical realists cannot be proven either in ontology or in the philosophy of language or in cognitive science or in any meta-science that works en plus to ethics, because even in every additional discipline, we have to accept the presupposition of a validity of judgments. So, let us try it the other way around; we have to find a way to found ethics by following its structures, and that means, based on David Velleman’s concepts: a) We have to search for a ubiquitous point of ethical theory in its foundation – here, no kind of value or norm can be found that is not based on a universal formal structure of normativity. b) We have to start an empirical inquiry to collect norms and values in actual use. MFT, moral psychology and moral sociology are in charge here. The combination of such an abstract groundwork with mere empirical study has to be legitimized again. Hence, I am going to try to sum up the main ideas of such a project to show the relevance of a new architecture of moral philosophy today. There is a line of reasoning that addresses the possibility of a transcendental critique in practical philosophy; therefore, it has to look into the different notions of “intuition” in moral methods like it was used by Sidgwick (Rashdall, Green, Ross, Brentano, McTaggart) and Moore on the one hand and Brentano and Bergson on the other. In my view, there is a way to combine these perspectives using the two-level-model of Hare, Singer, Greene, where “intuition” is used to categorize habits and customs of the common sense morality in general while a critical reflection uses act-utilitarian calculus to provide a universal decision – in the sense of “concrete reason” – for any possible actor in a singular situation (Hegel, Peirce, Bloch etc.). The change between these levels may be explained by means of a pragmatistic kind of continuum of research with an ideal summum bonum in the long run and a concept of common sense morality as can be found in every group or society. (shrink)

In der jüngeren Philosophie entbrannte eine Debatte über den Geltungsanspruch ethischer Aussagen. Wie sich zeigen lässt, treten im Spektrum der metaethischen Positionen dialektische Begründungsmuster im Stile der vorkantischen Metaphysik auf. Die vorliegende Studie untersucht, ob sich die Metaethik auf ähnliche Weise „therapieren“ lässt wie die Metaphysik zu Kants Zeiten. Sie entwickelt dazu eine transzendentale Architektonik der Moralphilosophie und übergibt die Aufgabe der Moralforschung an empirische Wissenschaften, wobei eine pragmatistische Methodologie gewährleistet, dass diese unterschiedlichen Perspektiven nahtlos ineinander übergehenden.

Proceedings of an international conference held at the Herzog August Bibliothek Wolfenbèuttel in 2009.

Neste texto, refero-me principalmente à forma madura da Ciência da Lógica, isto é, ao seu primeiro livro da edição revista do ano 1832. O objetivo de meu trabalho reside em demonstrar que a ilustração do problema do início da filosofia por Hegel é indiretamente uma chave para o entendimento da ideia fundamental de sua concepção da lógica como método científico da filosofia. Para atingir esse objetivo exponho, em primeiro lugar, as principais ideias do programa de Hegel por uma revisão da (...) lógica, da metafísica e da filosofia completa, em contraste à lógica tradicional. Depois ofereço uma interpretação da declaração da dificuldade em encontrar um início lógico na filosofia, que reside em que resolver o problema de unir o método ao conteúdo, a forma ao princípio. Essa interpretação deve mostrar no qual sentido o início vale sem pressuposto. Esse entendimento nega a possibilidade de começar a filosofia com algo hipotética e problematicamente verdadeiro como é o procedimento comum na matemática. Por meio da análise daquele problema ilustrado especialmente pelo exemplo da crítica hegeliana à compreensão da natureza da relação entre o ser puro e a sua alteração necessária em Jacobi, tento encontrar um acesso para o entendimento do método lógico de Hegel, na medida em que o momento da negatividade enquanto princípio do modo de determinar e, com isso, do conteúdo, resultam necessariamente da indeterminidade do ser como a mais pensável abstração. Esse resultado surge pela necessidade, por qual o ser puro provoca a sua própria mudança para o devir um desenvolvimento que Jacobi desmente por princípio para ficar parado na abstração unilateral e falsa. Assim, a indeterminidade enquanto algo contrário é mesmo o determinado ou o negativo, isto é, o negativo puro, inteiramente abstrato, em outras palavras: O ser como resultado da perfeita abstração é negatividade abstrata, o nada. Mas essa negatividade é o princípio e o método da determinação e do conhecer na lógica e na filosofia como ciência. (shrink)

(2000). The Potentiality Argument in the Debate relating to the Beginning of Personhood. Human Reproduction & Genetic Ethics: Vol. 6, No. 2, pp. 19-26.