Zum I. Kapitel 1 Diesen hier nur skizzierten Strukturzusammenhang von Fragehinsichten und Sachbezügen, innerhalb dessen die Politische Philosophie ihren Ort gewinnt, hat der Verf des näheren darzulegen versucht in einem Aufsatz Die Staatsphilosophie im Verhältnis zur Politik als Wissenschaft, in: Dieter Oberndörfer (Hrsg.), Wissenschaftliche Politik. Eine Einführung in Grundfragen ihrer Tradition und Theorie. Freiburg i. Br. 1962, S. 153-195. Vgl. dazu insbesondere auch Arnold Bergslraesser, Politik in Wissenschaft und Bildung. Schriften und Reden. Freiburg i. Br. 1961, S. 17-29 (Die Stellung (...) der Politik unter den Wissen schaften); Dieter Oberndärfer, Politik als praktische Wissenschaft, in dem oben angeführten Band, S. 9-58, bes. S. 37ff. ; Olto Heinrich von der GablenlZ, Politische Wissenschaft und Philosophie, in: Politische Vierteljahresschrift 1, 1960/61, S. 4-11; H.R.G. Greaves, Grundlagen der Politischen Theorie. Neuwied-Berlin 1960 sowie die Arbeiten von Hans Barlh, Helmut Kuhn, Max Müller (vgl. Anm. 6, Nr. 7), Joachim Ritter (zu Aristoteles) und Leo Slrauss, die zu den wenigen gehören, die heute noch von der Philosophie selbst aus den Problembereich der Praktischen und Politischen Philosophie in einem unserem Ver ständnis verwandten Sinne zu erörtern und grundzulegen suchen (s. Lit.-Verz.). Es sei auch auf die unter diesem Betracht in Frage kommenden Publikationen Hannah Arendts hingewiesen. Siehe außerdem unsere Angaben unter Anm. 4 und 5.-In ein analoges Ver hältnis setzt Helmut Schelsky (Ortsbestimmung der deutschen Soziologie. Düsseldorf Köln 1959) Soziologie, philosophische Theorie der Gesellschaft und allgemeine Philosophie zueinander. (shrink)

There are three basic approaches to the question of how Augustine, in his anti-Pelagian writings, conceives of the union of the human and the divine in Christ. Some have argued for a dynamic notion of Christological union as the mutual presence of God and man in and by grace. Others emphasize the increasing technicality of Augustine’s description of Christ’s ontological union. Still others posit a middle ground, affirming both of the ways he speaks of the unity of Christ. However, the (...) relationship between these forms of union has been left unexamined. The purpose of this article is therefore to explore how the two ways in which Augustine envisions Christ’s unity complement one another and to establish the logical priority of the personal incorporation of homo and Verbum over the notion of union as full divine indwelling. (shrink)

In this article, I build upon Jean-Albert Vinel’s account of Augustine’s “liturgical argument” against the Pelagians by exploring how and why Augustine uses both the givenness of the practice of infant baptism and its ritual components as evidence for his theological conclusions in opposition to those of the Pelagians. First, I explore infant baptism in the Roman North African Church before and during Augustine’s ministry. Second, I interpret Augustine’s rhetorical adaptation of the custom in his attempt to delineate the defining (...) characteristics of Catholic Christianity in the early fifth century. I show how Augustine mobilizes his belief in the efficacy of the Church’s practice of infant baptism to make explicit a boundary marker of “Catholic” Christianity, which was long implicit in the practice itself. Perceiving the consequences of Pelagianism, Augustine organizes his anti-Pelagian soteriology around the central node of infant baptism, the most theologically and rhetorically strategic means by which he could refute the Pelagian heresy and underwrite what he understood to be the traditional vision of sin and salvation evident in the baptismal rite. (shrink)

Fractal versus fragment -- From proto-modernity to pseudo-modernity. Kant and his descendants -- The politics of re-presentation. a collection of fractals -- Epilogue or after the end -- From sophisticated meaninglessness to sophisticated primitivism -- The state of mindlessness. the rise of the pseudo-modern world -- Ideologies of the non-world. the post-colonial and the subaltern.

According to the traditional inferential theory of perception, percepts of object motion or stationarity stem from an evaluation of afferent retinal signals (which encode image motion) with the help of extraretinal signals (which encode eye movements). According to direct perception theory, on the other hand, the percepts derive from retinally conveyed information only. Neither view is compatible with a perceptual phenomenon that occurs during visually induced sensations of ego motion (vection). A modified version of inferential theory yields a model in (...) which the concept of extraretinal signals is replaced by that of reference signals, which do not encode how the eyes move in their orbits but how they move in space. Hence reference signals are produced not only during eye movements but also during ego motion (i.e., in response to vestibular stimulation and to retinal image flow, which may induce vection). The present theory describes the interface between self-motion and object-motion percepts. An experimental paradigm that allows quantitative measurement of the magnitude and gain of reference signals and the size of the just noticeable difference (JND) between retinal and reference signals reveals that the distinction between direct and inferential theories largely depends on: (1) a mistaken belief that perceptual veridicality is evidence that extraretinal information is not involved, and (2) a failure to distinguish between (the perception of) absolute object motion in space and relative motion of objects with respect to each other. The model corrects these errors, and provides a new, unified framework for interpreting many phenomena in the field of motion perception. (shrink)

Journal of Philosophy of Education, Volume 55, Issue 1, Page 5-24, February 2021.

The following statement is a report of the Committee on Philosophy in Education of the American Philosophical Association and was approved by the Association's Board of Officers in September, 1959. The Committee was composed of the following: C. W. Hendel, Chairman, H. G. Alexander, R. M. Chisholm, Max Fisch, Lucius Garvin, Douglas Morgan, A. E. Murphy, Charner Perry, and R. G. Turnbull. Primary responsibility for the preparation of this report belonged to a subcommittee composed of Roderick M. Chisholm, Chairman, (...) H. G. Alexander, Lewis Hahn, Paul C. Hayner, and Charles W. Hendel. (shrink)

This essay argues that schooling in Israel is tied too closely to ideology. This results in an indoctrinary orientation that contributes to divisiveness and imperils Israeli democracy. After reviewing and critiquing the roots of this orientation, I advance an alternative that understands education as an agent of the good rather than ideology. Israeli schooling requires a vision of goodness broad enough to encompass competing conceptions of Jewish life espoused by the majority as well as non-Jewish orientations affirmed by various minorities. (...) Such a vision can be grounded, I contend, in a democratic Jewish theology that emphasizes God as teacher rather than tyrant. (shrink)