Unter dem Titel "Lebenswelt und Wissenschaft" hat der XXI.

Ausgehend von einer Analyse des "Begründungsstreits", der in den letzten Jahren im Anschluß an H. Alberts Kritik des methodischen Prinzips der Begründung v.a. in der deutschen Philosophie geführt worden ist, werden zunächst die Positionen von K. O. Apel und J. Habermas einer immanenten methodischen Kritik unterzogen. Beide Programme erweisen sich als undurchführbar. Ausgehend von einer Präzisierung des Begriffes "Begründung" wird durch systematische Einführung begründungstheoretischer Termini ein begriffsiches Instrumentarium vorgeschlagen, das eine Rekonstruktion von Begründungssituationen erlauben soll. Mit seiner Hilfe werden die (...) im "Münchhausen-Trilemma" unterstellten Begründungssituationen genauer analysiert. Das "Münchhausen-Trilemma" wird als Argumentation für eine konstruktivistische und gegen eine reduktivistische Begründungskonzeption gewertet. (shrink)

This work has been selected by scholars as being culturally important, and is part of the knowledge base of civilization as we know it. This work was reproduced from the original artifact, and remains as true to the original work as possible. Therefore, you will see the original copyright references, library stamps (as most of these works have been housed in our most important libraries around the world), and other notations in the work. This work is in the public domain (...) in the United States of America, and possibly other nations. Within the United States, you may freely copy and distribute this work, as no entity (individual or corporate) has a copyright on the body of the work. As a reproduction of a historical artifact, this work may contain missing or blurred pages, poor pictures, errant marks, etc. Scholars believe, and we concur, that this work is important enough to be preserved, reproduced, and made generally available to the public. We appreciate your support of the preservation process, and thank you for being an important part of keeping this knowledge alive and relevant. (shrink)

Throughout this book, Gooch tells and retells the stories of Socrates and Jesus as he examines perennial human issues: why would anyone willingly die? To what do these two martyrlike deaths bear witness? What are the limits of words in explanation and defense? Why was Jesus silent during his trial? Why did Socrates' most powerful apologia fail? What words, if any, work in prayer? Do words work against the fear of death? Out of this philosophical and religious questioning, Reflections on (...) Jesus and Socrates throws new light on these two compelling figures and on the continuing meanings of their stories for us today. (shrink)

Transcendental conceptions of subjectivity, beginning with Descartes and including Kant, Fichte, and Husserl as well as neo-transcendental accounts of the 20th century, try to explicate a subject’s subjectivity as a necessary condition for all theoretical and practical validity claims. According to this conception, only this subject-theoretical presupposition allows for an adequate foundation of terms of authorship of action and self-determination. However, the conceptual self-explication of this position faces some inherent difficulties, which has repeatedly been pointed out even by representatives of (...) this school of thought themselves. Moreover, it seems as if the constitutional achievements of transcendental philosophy are increasingly being detached from philosophy: due to the development of the modern sciences of man, they are step by step conceived as objects of empirical research. This paper looks critically into this thesis of detachment. (shrink)

The article analyses the components of the presumption of innocence and tries to clarify some of the conceptual and logical difficulties surrounding the notion of ‘innocence’ and the structure of legal presumptions. It is argued that all conceivable literal interpretations of the maxim make little or no sense, and that the presumptions form is, as such, devoid of original content: presumptions do not explain nor justify anything but are auxiliary norms which refer to the legal consequences spelled out in other (...) norms. Therefore, the presumption of innocence can be used to express any kind of requirement and standard for the criminal process and the treatment of suspect citizens only in a tautological, albeit rhetorically forceful, way. This instrumental use of the presumption of innocence is theoretically without merit but can be practically beneficial as long as there is no developed system of fundamental rights and protections of individual freedoms in a given legal order. Finally, a functional understanding of the presumption of innocence is proposed which gives it an original, though limited field of application as a guarantee of the procedure itself, in particular of the openness of the outcome. (shrink)