v. 1. Dualism in the Archaic and Early Classical periods of Greek history -- v. 2. Dualism in the political and social history of Greece in the fifth and fourth century B.C. -- v. 3. Dualism in Greek literature and philosophy in the fifth and fourth centuries B.C. -- v. 4. Dualism in the ancient Middle East -- v. 5. A cultural history of Dualism -- v. 6. Dualism in the Hellenistic world -- v. 7. Dualism in the Palestinian-Syrian region (...) during the first century A.D. until. ca. 140 -- v. 8. Gnostic dualism in Asia Minor during the first centuries A.D. (2 v.) -- v. 10. Dualism in Roman history: 1. Imperialistic dualism -- v. 11. Dualism in Roman history: 2. Dualism in interior politics and social life -- v. 12. Dualism in Roman history: 3. The Christian church in conflict with the Roman Empire and with Judaism -- v. 13. Dualism in Roman history: 4. The struggle between orthodoxy and heterodoxy in the early Christian church -- v. 14. Dualism in Roman history: 5. Enemies of the Roman Order -- v. 15. Imperialism in medieval history I : dualism in Byzantine history, 476-638 and dualism in Islam, 572-732 -- v. 16. Imperialism in medieval history II : dualism in German history I -- v. 17. Imperialism in medieval history III : dualism in German history II -- v. 18. The dualism of the Christian and Muslim worlds during the middle ages -- v. 20. Gnostic-dualistic tendencies in the history of medieval Europe -- v. 21. Dualism and non-dualism in medieval theology and philosophy. (shrink)

The well-known Ratio Studiorum of 1599 states that logical instruction should follow F. Toletus or P. Fonseca. The latter authored the famous Institutionum Dialecticarum Libri Octo, the former a similar manual, Introductio in Dialecticam Aristotelis. As is often observed, the contrast between the Aristotelian and present symbolic logics is perhaps most striking in their analysis of relational statements. Both authors recognize the relational logical form as independent from the traditional subject-predicate form and see the need to recognize relational inferential rules. (...) They differ in their specific rules, however, so neither of the authors has captured the system of relational syllogism in its entirety. (shrink)

SUMMARYThis article explores how writers from the Dutch Golden Age thought about human contact with that which is elevated far above everyday life. The Dutch Republic offers an interesting context because of the strikingly early use there by seventeenth-century humanists of the Greek concept ὕψος, from Longinus, to discuss how writers, artists and their audiences were able to surpass human limitations thanks to an intense imagination which transported them to supreme heights. Dutch poets also used the Latin sublimis to discuss (...) how mankind constantly aims at that which is far above it, but, despite this, can never entirely be a part of it. Thirdly, protestant writers discuss the concept of the Fear of God by explaining that elevated contact with God should be accompanied by the contrasting emotions of attraction and fear. With reference to the humanist Franciscus Junius, poet Joost van den Vondel and preacher Petrus Wittewrongel, I will discuss how these artistic, literary and religious discourses concerning contact with the sublime are related to one another. (shrink)

In lieu of an abstract, here is a brief excerpt of the content:Journal of the History of Philosophy 42.1 (2004) 101-103 [Access article in PDF] Cees Leijenhorst. The Mechanization of Aristotelianism: The Late Aristotelian Setting of Thomas Hobbes' Natural Philosophy. Leiden: Brill, 2002. Pp. xv + 242. Cloth, $97.00. Cees Leijenhorst, the young Dutch scholar and student of the late Karl Schuhmann, has written the most important book on Thomas Hobbes's natural science since Frithiof Brandt's Thomas Hobbes's Mechanical Conception of (...) Nature of 1928. This is true despite the undoubted brilliance and success of Leviathan and the Air Pump, published in 1985 by Simon Schaffer and Steven Shapin. Why this is so, it will be the burden of this review to clarify.Writing in the modern historiographical tradition known as contextualism, long associated with John Pocock, Quentin Skinner and Richard Tuck, Leijenhorst seeks to locate Hobbes within the horizon of that current of natural thought that began with Aristotle, led through antiquity and then flourished and came to predominate with the West's recovery of the Stagirite in the late Middle Ages. The course of so long a filiation of ideas cannot be the subject of a book whose length is under 250 pages, though a companion collection of essays on Aristotle and his long progeny, edited by Leijenhorst and others, has also appeared [End Page 101] (to be reviewed in the Journal). Instead, Leijenhorst focuses on the last, self-avowed inheritors and developers of that tradition, known as late Aristotelianism, though precisely how to define that tradition is itself problematized.Classically trained, Hobbes was well equipped to study Aristotle directly in Greek, without intermediaries; he early on published a translation of Thucydides. Still, Leijenhorst's concern is less to draw Hobbes closer to Aristotle than to relate him both to his immediate intellectual predecessors and to his own contemporaries, though, in each case, for different reasons. In the former, Leijenhorst convincingly argues that, as Gilson showed for Descartes, Hobbes assumed, drew upon, adopted and modified prevailing Aristotelian doctrines, even as he famously condemned their ancient author. And, Hobbes's sources, as they themselves interpreted, rejected and modified the views of their forebear, were rather various, including such writers of manuals as Bartholomaeus Anglicus and John Case, as well as others whose interests and directions were more varied and less conservative, including Scaliger, Rudolph Goclenius and Otto Casmann.A common source for both these strains of late Aristotelianism was the great stream of commentaries produced largely by members of the Jesuit Order from the middle of the sixteenth century onward, including Franciscus Toletus, Antonio Rubio, Petrus Fonseca, as well as Franciscus Suarez and members of other orders.This stream of thought also fed into the confessional strife of post-Reformation Europe, so that both Lutherans and Calvinists developed their own Aristotelianisms. One of the most striking conclusions of Leijenhorst's work is that, in characterizing both Aristotle's and his own metaphysics (or philosophia prima) as a universal science rather than as a particular theological science, Hobbes is an heir of this "Protestant ontology."Finally, Hobbes looked to the great names of natural-scientific thinking in sixteenth-century Italy, Zabarella, Pomponazzi, Fracastoro, Telesio and Campanella. Like Hobbes, these latter authors, "though vehemently anti-Aristotelian," nonetheless "exploited kinematic, empiricist and materialist tendencies found within the Aristotelian tradition itself, particularly in the School of Padua" (11).Such investigations into sources and lines of argument illuminate relations with predecessors and contemporaries in ways that social-constructivist accounts, like those of Schaeffer and Shapin and of the Edinburgh sociologist of knowledge David Bloor, may not accomplish. The author gives one instance of direct conflict between the results of that school and his own contextualism which illustrates this larger point.In his fight with Boyle, Hobbes is at pains to deny the existence of the void. Though he came to reject it rather late in his scientific thinking, the void, Schaffer and Shapin suggest, served to give space to the "incorporeal substances," similar to the scholastics' "abstract essences," upon which the latter erected the "kingdom of darkness" that... (shrink)

Franciscus Sanchez ist profunder Kenner der erkenntnistheoretischen Auseinandersetzungen seiner Zeit. Sein konsistentes skeptisches Denken und der hohe Grad der Argumentativität seiner Ausführungen machen Sanchez zu einem herausragenden Vertreter des frühneuzeitlichen Skeptizismus.

An architect and architectural philosopher, Berlage created a series of buildings and a body of writings that probed the problems and possibilities of Modernism. His principal texts, given here in English for the first time, present a vital chapter in the history of European Modernism.

In this book, linguists and philosophers combine to offer a unique insight not only into Grice's contribution to philosophy of language, but on his theories of natural and non-natural meaning, implicatures and the semantic-pragmatic distinction.

In lieu of an abstract, here is a brief excerpt of the content:Feminist Studies 47, no. 2. © 2021 by Feminist Studies, Inc. 341 Petrus Liu Thinking Gender in the Age of the Beijing Consensus Originally formulated to dispute biologically deterministic explanations of women’s subordination, the analytical distinction between sex and gender has developed in unexpected ways in transitions from one language to another. Drawing on a wide range of sources, from John Money’s sexological writings to Simone de Beauvoir’s (...) dictum, “One is not born a woman, but rather becomes one,” Anglophone feminists in the 1970s developed the distinction between sex (understood as anatomy) and gender (understood as social identity) to argue that a woman’s biological sex ought not dictate the kind of work she should do or the kind of life she should live.1 In her landmark 1975 essay, “The Traffic in Women,” Gayle Rubin coined the phrase “sex/gender system” to examine “the set of arrangements by which a society transforms biological sexuality into products of human activity, and in which these transformed sexual needs are satisfied.”2 In more recent years, however, the distinction 1. Simone de Beauvoir, The Second Sex (Paris: Gallimard, 1949; New York: Knopf, 1993), 281. Citations refer to the Knopf edition. For an account of feminist reformulations of John Money and Robert Stoller, see Jennifer Germon, Gender: A Genealogy of an Idea (New York: Palgrave Macmillan, 2009). 2. Gayle S. Rubin, Deviations: A Gayle Rubin Reader (Durham, NC: Duke University Press, 2011), 34. It is worth mentioning that sex in Rubin’s sex/gender system refers to sexual practice rather than the distinction between male and female. This understanding forms the basis of her theoretical disagreements with Judith Butler, who preserves the semantic ambiguity of sex (as 342 Petrus Liu between sex and gender has taken on an entirely different meaning as it comes to inform transgender movements and politics seeking to decouple a person’s sex assignment at birth from their future gender identity. At the same time, theories of intersectionality, women-of-color feminisms, and transnational feminisms have all developed their own theses of gender variability to contest the myth of the universal woman. The life of gender—in academic theory, politics, and social movements— has confounded the original intentions of its American theorists. It is clear that there is no singular or stable account of gender; rather, gender is always in a state of flux, incessantly rethought and reforged by the demands of an increasingly complex and asymmetric world.3 Gender is always a translation—from one discipline, context, or language to another—ineluctably intertwined with the geopolitical problems created by the violences of imperialism, colonialism, and transnational capitalism. The translation of gender into non-European languages, such as Chinese, raises questions about whether spaces previously resistant or exterior to world capitalism are now being assimilated and enfolded into the structure of neoliberal globalization defined by the Washington Consensus. Against this view, some critics maintain that China’s precipitous ascent presents an alternative model of development for the Global South called the Beijing Consensus. Considering how gender has entered different languages, including Chinese, to create new coinages that may at times appear as instruments of an imperial takeover, Judith Butler argues that the translation of gender actually offers a path of linguistic humility for English, a reminder that we cohabit a multilingual world in which no one ever owned the term.4 But how exactly do we describe that complex, multilingual world and how does gender both gender and sexuality) as the point of departure for a different kind of feminist inquiry. See Gayle Rubin with Judith Butler, “Interview: Sexual Traffic,” differences: A Journal of Feminist Cultural Studies 6, nos. 2–3 (1994): 67. 3. See Heather Love, ed. “Rethinking Sex.” Special issue, GLQ 17, no. 2 (2011): 1–221. This collection of essays conveys a sense of how Rubin’s methodological distinction between sex and gender has given rise to new ways of thinking across different disciplines about sex radicalism, crip sexuality, Black feminism, and sex trafficking. 4. Judith Butler, “Gender in Translation: Beyond Monolingualism,” philoSOPHIA 9, no. 1 (Winter 2019). Petrus Liu 343 transform it? How is the translation of gender inflected by the material conditions... (shrink)

In Queer Marxism in Two Chinas Petrus Liu demonstrates how queer Marxist critics in China use queer theory as a non-liberal alternative to Western models of queer emancipation, and in doing so, he revises current understandings of what queer theory is, does, and can be.

In The Specter of Materialism Petrus Liu examines what "materialism" means for progressive queer theory and Marxist approaches to China's postsocialist economy. Liu recasts the history of queer theory in light of the Beijing Consensus, arguing that North American queer theory's inability to sustain a materialist analysis is the result of its positioning of the United States, rather than China, as the focal point of contemporary global capitalism. Analyzing relations of gender and sexuality that have been reconfigured by China's (...) global capitalist accumulation-such as dagongmei (female migrant laborers in China's export-oriented sunbelt) and money boys (rural-to-urban sex workers)-Liu argues for a materialist queer theory that positions China at the center. (shrink)

Keine ausführliche Beschreibung für "Genese und Analyse" verfügbar.

This volume will be of special concern to those involved in experimental research as well as theoretical moorings.

Editio princeps of Peter Thomae's De ente. It is generally acknowledged by historians of philosophy that medieval philosophers made key contributions to the discussion of the problem of being and the fundamental issues of metaphysics. The Quaestiones de ente of Peter Thomae, composed at Barcelona ca. 1325, is the longest medieval work devoted to the problem of being as well as the most systematic. The work is divided into three parts: the concept of being, the attributes of being, and the (...) descent of being. Many of the philosophical tools that Peter pioneered in this work, such as the distinction between objective being and subjective being, and various modes of quiddities and abstraction, were adopted by later thinkers and discussed up to the eighteenth century. Apart from defending and further extending Scotistic doctrine, one of Peter's achievements in the De ente is to fully reconcile Scotistic univocity with the traditional doctrine of the analogy of being. In addition to the critical edition, the present volume also contains a detailed introduction and study of the philosophy and the manuscripts of the De ente, with an appendix containing the Question on univocity by Francis Marbres (John the Canon), who copied extensively from the De ente. (shrink)

Der Tierrechte-Ansatz stellt den Anspruch des Menschen auf Nutzung von Tieren prinzipiell in Frage. Der Grund besteht darin, dass durch den Gebrauch von Tieren zu menschlichen Zwecken typischerweise deren Rechte verletzt werden. Um welche Rechte es sich dabei handelt und welche Tiere sie allenfalls besitzen, ist Teil anhaltender Diskussionen sowohl in der Tierethik als auch innerhalb der Tierrechtsbewegung.

Die Tierrechtsbewegung gehört zu den neuen Sozialbewegungen und fordert unveräußerliche Grundrechte wie das Recht auf Leben, Freiheit und Unversehrtheit auch für nicht-menschliche Tiere. Anders als in der traditionellen Tierschutzbewegung wird damit der Anspruch des Menschen auf Nutzung dieser Lebewesen zum Zwecke der Ernährung, Bekleidung, Forschung oder Unterhaltung fundamental kritisiert. In der Regel schränkt der Tierschutz den menschlichen Nutzungsanspruch auf Tiere nämlich bloß mittels des Tierschutzrechts ein; es geht primär darum, wie wir mit Tieren, die wir nutzen, umgehen sollten. Demgegenüber stellt (...) die Tierrechtsbewegung grundlegend infrage, ob wir Tiere zu unserem Nutzen und Vorteil gebrauchen dürfen. (shrink)

Auch religiöses Sprechen wird seit geraumer Zeit sprachphilosophisch analysiert. Nicht selten beruft man sich dabei auf den Slogan „Sprechen ist Handeln" und hier vor allem auf John L. Austin. Zumindest für das Verständnis von Aspekten der religiösen Sprache - den sog. religiösen Performativa - scheint sein Ansatz besonders geeignet. Denn offenbar werden damit die Bedingungen des erfolgreichen Vollzugs religiöser Handlungen auf der einen, die Voraussetzungen ihrer Wirksamkeit auf der anderen Seite deutlicher; und offenbar wird damit auch deutlicher. wie Vollzug und (...) Wirksamkeit zusammenhängen und worin das Besondere religiösen Sprechens allenfalls besteht. (shrink)

Theological thinking is hard. It takes various forms depending on its object of reflection, and needs to be doctrinally informed, contextually appropriate and methodologically consistent. Theological thinking about evolutionary creation meets all said conditions and restrictions on some sort of a larger-than-usual scale. I, thus, introduce a thinking tool – intuition pump, as Daniel Dennett calls it – that can help us theologically contemplate evolutionary creation. This approach aims to put together and to combine evolution and creation within the context (...) of the structure and form of Dennett’s proposed methodology and thought experiments using at one instance Gödel’s incompleteness theorems. This intuition pump has its implications and effects in other theological domains (Trinity, Christology and Sacramentology) but its natural context lies within theology of creation. I will start by presenting Dennett’s heterophenomenological method for scientific research of consciousness, stretching our theological imagination by using it. This thinking tool enables us to see this world as God’s heterophenomenological world. At the same time, it enables us to recognize and confirm intrinsic properties or essences in nature and it warrant thinking about historicity of Adam and Eve. (shrink)

The issue of interpretation is one of the major themes in the study of law and legal practices. Nonetheless, while legal interpretation plays a crucial role in the study of law, scholars have yet to reach an agreement about its nature and status in the discipline. One of the most prolific legal philosophers who is deeply engaged in the discourse of this issue is Ronald Dworkin. This article will examine his views on law as an interpretation. The constructive interpretation model (...) that Dworkin develops has posed a serious challenge for analytical jurisprudence in general, and especially, for legal positivism. The challenge is substantive and methodological; substantive, in the sense that it seeks to radically criticize a sharp separation between law and morality as prevalent in legal positivism, and methodological in the sense that it seeks to put together the analysis of legal concepts with the interpretation of law as it is regarded from the perspective of particular legal cases. Through the concept of law as interpretation, Dworkin wishes to formulate his own understanding of law as a coherent system of legal principles. Keywords: Ronald Dworkin, constructive interpretation model, external and internal skepticism, theory of law, rights thesis, difficult cases. Abstrak: Persoalan interpretasi merupakan salah satu tema besar dalam studi hukum dan praktik hukum. Kendati demikian, sementara interpretasi hukum memainkan peran krusial dalam studi hukum, para pakar masih belum sepakat mengenai hakikat dan kedudukannya dalam disiplin ilmu tersebut. Salah seorang ahli filsafat hukum yang sangat produktif dan sangat serius menggeluti persoalan ini adalah Ronald Dworkin. Artikel ini akan mengkaji pandangan Dworkin tentang hukum sabagai sebuah interpretasi. Model interpretasi konstruktif yang dikembangkan oleh Dworkin merupakan tantangan yang sangat serius bagi yurisprudensi analitis pada umumnya, dan khususnya bagi positivisme hukum. Tantangan ini bersifat substantif dan metodologis. Bersifat substantif dalam arti bahwa Dworkin mengkritik secara radikal pemisahan yang begitu tajam antara hukum dan moralitas seperti lazim terjadi dalam positivisme hukum. Tantangan ini juga bersifat metodologis dalam arti bahwa tantangan tersebut berkehendak menyatukan analisis atas konsep hukum dengan interpretasi terhadapnya, dipandang dari perspektif kasus-kasus hukum partikular. Melalui konsep hukum sebagai interpretasi, Dworkin ingin memformulasikan pemahamannya tentang hukum sebagai sebuah sistem prinsip-prinsip hukum yang koheren. Kata-kata kunci: Ronald Dworkin, model interpretasi konstruktif, skeptisisme eksternal dan internal, teori hukum, tesis hak, kasus-kasus sulit. (shrink)