Johann Gottlieb Fichte hielt im Sommer 1805 in Erlangen öffentliche Vorlesungen zum Thema 'Über das Wesen des Gelehrten und seine Erscheinungen im Gebiete der Freiheit'. In diesen Vorlesungen erläuterte Fichte sein Verständnis des Wesens und der Aufgabe des Gelehrten und führte in seine Philosophie ein. Dieser Text ist ein wichtiges Zeugnis nicht nur für die Entwicklung von Fichtes Philosophie, sondern auch für die Geschichte des Deutschen Idealismus und das Verständnis von Bildung und Wissenschaft im frühen 19. Jahrhundert. Dieser Band (...) enthält den Text von J. G. Fichtes 'Über das Wesen des Gelehrten' (1805) zusammen mit Interpretationen, die Fichtes Vorlesungen im Rahmen seines eigenen Werkes und im Kontext der Philosophie- und Geistesgeschichte verorten. Mit Beiträgen von Paul Cobben, Alfred Denker, Elisabeth Kessler, C. Jeffery Kinlaw, Wilhelm Metz, Angelica Nuzzo, Ernst-Otto Onnasch, Tom Rockmore, Annette Sell, Michael Vater, Richard Velkley, Franziskus von Heereman, Holger Zaborowski u.a. (shrink)

Über das Wesen des Gelehrten, und seine Erscheinungen im Gebiete der Freiheit (1805) von Johann Gottlieb Fichte -- Vorrede -- Erste Vorlesgun: Plan des Ganzen -- Zweite Vorlesung: Nähere Bestimmung des Begriffs der göttlichen Idee -- Dritte Vorlesung: Vom angehenden Gelehrten überhaupt; insbesondere vom Talente und Fleisse -- Vierte Vorlesung: Von der Rechtschaffenheit im Studiren -- Fünfte Vorlesung: Wie die Rechtschaffenheit des Studirenden sich äussere -- Sechste Vorlesung: Ueber die akademische Freiheit -- Siebente Vorlesung: Vom vollendeten Gelehrten im Allgemeinen (...) -- Achte Vorlesung: Vom Regenten -- Neunte Vorlesung: Vom mündlichen Gelehrte=Lehrer -- Zehnte Vorlesung: Vom Schriftsteller -- Menschliche Bildung und göttliche Idee. Über Struktur und Gedankengang von Fichtes Erlanger Vorlesungen Über das Wesen des Gelehrten / Annette Sell -- Über das Wesen des Gelehrten im Kontext der Wissenschaftslehre / C. Jeffery Kinlaw -- Fichte on Bestimmung and Wesen des Gelehrten / Angelica Nuzzo -- Fichte's Über das Wesen des Gelehrten, or the educated man as the salt of the Earth / Tom Rockmore -- Werkzeuge? Zur Herrschaft der Gelehrten im Kontext des Fichteschen Spätwerks / Franziskus von Heereman -- J.G. Fichtes Über das Wesen des Gelehrten und die Bestimmung des magister bei Thomas von Aquin / Wilhelm Metz -- Wie sich der Philosoph bei Descartes und Fichte zu sich selbst verhält / Elisabeth Kessler -- The ghosts of Kantian philosophy in Fichte's Über das Wesen des Gelehrten / Richard Velkley -- Reinhold über die Bildung eines neuen Menschen / Ernst-Otto Onnasch -- Die innerliche Verknüpfung von "objektiver Wissenschaft" und "subjektiver Bildung". Wilhelm von Humboldts Universitätsidee - mit einem Ausblick auf sein Kritik an Fichtes Überlegungen zum Gelehrten und zur Universität / Holger Zaborowski -- Die Todesangst als die Vermittlung zur absoluten Idee / Paul Cobben -- Fichte and Schelling / Michael Vater -- Fichtes Über das Wesen des Gelehrten und Heidegger / Alfred Denker. (shrink)

La philosophie de Hegel a reussi ; trop bien, peut-etre, car Hegel a trop critique l'entetement individuel afin d'exprimer ce que chacun porte en lui ; mais nul autre n'aurait su l'exprimer avec autant de raison. Avant lui Fichte, avec lui Schelling ont fait epoque. Pris en eux-memes, ces deux philosophes sont importants. De plus, ils font l'objet de la premiere oeuvre publiee par Hegel. A propos des critiques de Reinhold, Hegel oppose Schelling a Fichte dans la difference. L'essai sur (...) la philosophie de la nature reprend cette opposition, mais une controverse s'est elevee: qui l'a ecrit, Schelling ou Hegel? (shrink)

The humanitarian thought did not encounter such challenges that we face today. Biotechnologies outline the perspectives of “posthuman” personology, while digitalization and robotization of almost all spheres of social practice bring to the fore the idea of homodicy – justifying the need for human existence. The article analyzes four blocks of challenges to humanitarian knowledge: (1) achievements in medicine, prosthetics, transplantology and genetic engineering, which outlined the separation of a sentient subject from traditional anthropomorphism (“posthuman” personology); (2) studies of the (...) brain neurophysiology, which advanced new arguments against free will; (3) costs of ill-considered propaganda of human rights; (4) digitization of almost all socio-cultural practices – from economics and military affairs to the formation and functioning of authority. Digitalization permeates all these “problematization fields,” setting their common conceptual and technological platform. In this regard, the question arises of the humanitarian expertise of modern technologies and the projects of education, communication and management, which implemented with their help. That expertise deals with not only the consequences, progress or even the possibility of implementing such projects, but also with their necessity. The focus and criteria of such expertise are important. Obviously, it cannot be directed only at the preservation of the biological species of homo sapiens and the conditions of its survival. Paradoxical choice arises in a situation where freedom and free will are questioned: which is more important – homo or sapiens? It is time for a clear distinction between the concepts of humanism and humanitarianism, including in the latter the posthuman personology. If humanitarianism is a personology of free spirit, then humanism seems to have a place next to economism and nationalism as forms of confined humanitarianism. This wide range of problems requires comprehension not only of their content but also of the methodology of the humanities and of the prospects of the humanities in modern society. (shrink)

It is commonly supposed that in the eighth century B.c. there was a ‘population explosion’ in Greece which moved the Greeks to send out colonies. A. J. Graham in the Cambridge Ancient History iii, 3 is typical: ‘The basic active cause of the colonizing movement was overpopulation’; ‘at the very time when the Archaic colonising movement began, in the second half of the eighth century, there was a marked increase in population in Greece’ . The presumed connection between overpopulation and (...) colonisation is not immediately obvious. The evidence for the population explosion is found in the increased number of burials in Attica and the Argolid, but Athens sent out no colony before the very end of the seventh century and Argos probably none at all, certainly none in this period. So special explanations have to be formulated for Athens' and Argos' lack of colonies while their postulated ‘population explosion’ is presumed for Greece as a whole and called in to explain the burst of colonising in the eighth century. The hypothesis is not used for seventh-century colonisation when the number of burials declines. (shrink)

In this paper I want to discuss a certain way of understanding the concept of religion which I think is more satisfactory than other ways that have often been proposed in the literature, arguing, in brief, that the way to an adequate understanding does not lie through an analysis of the concept of ‘worship’ or ‘the worshipful’ or any notions derivative from these, as some writers have maintained, but instead through a comparative analysis of the various concepts of a ‘highest (...) good’, thought of as a final salvation or ‘liberation’ for its seekers, found in the major religions. I shall also discuss some of the advantages of this way of regarding religion, as well as what I take to be certain of its consequences for the philosophy of religion. The discussion will also lay the groundwork for a pragmatic justification of religious belief , and will, I hope, help to shed light on the question of what would constitute a religiously satisfactory notion of the highest good. (shrink)

Using data from nonwestern, and chiefly nonliterate, groups but relating his material to utopian, revivalistic, and sectarian movements in western societies, the anthropologist author has analyzed over a dozen cases, having in common a group of people under cultural stress who, finding their lives unsatisfactory, form a new ideal of human integrity and combine to create a new man in a new social order. After identifying the key elements of these millenarian situations, the author defines and relates his terms. He (...) discusses various problematic aspects, such as the role of the prophet and the significance of money. Several kinds of explanation are sketched. In one he lays out a typical millenarian pattern, or sequence of events, and finds himself, having glimpsed a kind of millennium, embarked on the first phase of a millenarian movement. In another scheme, four general types of explanation are examined: the psycho-physiological, the ethnographic, the Marxist, and the Hegelian. Finally, four "primary situations" and twelve "oppositions" are suggested as possible components in a millenarian model, no particular case, of course, requiring the full set. At every point the book invites discussion, clarification, amplification. It is coherent and illuminating but always open-ended, admirably fulfilling its stated purpose of posing problems and stimulating thought, rather than providing answers. The current complex of rebellions is never mentioned, but no one could read it without thinking of those who proclaim new values and who feel that, if only they could smash our present social order, a new and perfect one would arise from the ashes. The book would provide an apt conceptual frame for a study of our troubled times.--L. G. (shrink)

Between the 14 and 18 March 2016, the Institute for Ethics, History and Theory of Medicine, in cooperation with the Institute for Sociology at Ludwig-Maximilians-University, Munich, hosted an interdisciplinary workshop on migrant and refugee health in Germany and the UK. Fifteen participants from four countries met to discuss ethical issues surrounding the health of migrants and refugees in Europe, with particular emphasis on a comparison of the different approaches taken by Germany and the UK. This report provides an overview of (...) the structure and purpose of the workshop, an outline of the topics discussed, its outcomes, and its objectives moving forward. (shrink)

“Who are you? Tu quis es?” The interrogator was the German philosopher and pedagogue Eduard Spranger. The subject was Carl Schmitt. The place: Berlin. The time: summer of 1945. The question was “precipitous,” as Schmitt acknowledged in Ex Captivitate Salus, the book he completed following his release from Nuremberg in 1947. “Who are you?” Who, but one of the most highly acclaimed and esteemed jurists and political thinkers of the Weimar Republic, whose writings captured the attention of Georg Lukács, Karl (...) Korsch, Felix Gilbert, Leo Strauss, Ferdinand Toennies, and whose concepts significantly influenced Walter Benjamin, Herbert Marcuse, Otto Kirchheimer, Franz Neumann, Karl Mannheim and many other intellectuals and writers on the Left and the Right? (shrink)

This paper emphasizes the crucial role of variation, at several different levels, for a detailed historical understanding of the development of the biomedical sciences. Going beyond valuable recent studies that focus on model organisms, experimental systems and instruments, we argue that all of these categories can be accommodated within our approach, which pays special attention to organismal and cultural variation. Our empirical examples are drawn in particular from recent historical studies of nineteenth- and early twentieth-century genetics and physiology. Based on (...) the quasi-paradoxical conclusion that biological and cultural variation both constrains and enables innovation in the biomedical sciences, we argue that more attention should be paid to variation as an analytical category in the historiography of the life sciences. (shrink)

Una importante causa filosófica e ideológica de la inhumanidad de la sociedad rusa durante las décadas del marxismo-leninismo fue la obsesiva orientación de los marxistas-leninistas hacia el futuro histórico (futuro comunismo) en aras de lo cual, comunidades, culturas y personas podían ser reducidas a medios para alcanzar ese fin histórico. El autor de los debates apoyándose en los propios pensadores rusos de la "tradición clásica", como por ejemplo Herzen, Dostoievsky, Tolstoy, Leontiev y Berdiaev. No se opone a cualquier tipo de (...) orientación de futuro, pero recalca la importancia de las personas actuales. (shrink)

Epaminondas the soldier has been much admired. His two great battles rank as masterpieces of the military art. Epaminondas himself perhaps regarded them as his greatest achievements, to judge by his last words as reported by Diodorus . He had been carried from the battlefield of Mantinea with a spear stuck in his chest. The doctors declared that when the spear was removed he would die. After hearing that his own shield was safe and that the Boeotians had won, he (...) ordered that the spear be removed. One of his friends said to him ‘But you die without a son.’ He answered ‘I do, by God, but I leave two daughters, my victory of Leuctra and my victory of Mantinea’, and then he died. Nor were his ‘daughters’ unadmired. By remarkable chance the future Philip II of Macedon was hostage at Thebes at the very time of Epaminondas' pre-eminence and did not fail to learn, as Chaeronea was to show. (shrink)

In CQ n.s. 26 . 62–84 I argued that the defeat of Sparta in 371 B.C. was not due to the pursuit of unwise policies towards the other Greek states. Unwise policies there had been. Sparta being by no means superior to Athens in the formulation of foreign policy, but these did not affect the position on the eve of Leuctra when, with Thebes politically isolated, and with some of the Boeotians disaffected, Cieombrotus at the head of a numerically superior (...) Spartan and allied army was poised for the, destruction of Theban power; a triumph of policy it must have seemed. Sparta failed for military reasons. Her army was unequal to the military genius of Epaminondas. (shrink)

In lieu of an abstract, here is a brief excerpt of the content:Philosophy and Rhetoric 36.3 (2003) 207-222 [Access article in PDF] Burke Contra Kierkegaard:Kenneth Burke's Dialectic via Reading Søren Kierkegaard G. L. Ercolini Isaac—to his children Lived to tell the tale— Moral—with a Mastiff Manners may prevail. —Emily Dickinson Kenneth Burke employs the term dialectic throughout his works and yet, despite its profuse recurrence, the term remains ambiguous. Much secondary scholarship has focused on Burke and dialectics, and still the (...) term in Burke remains—if not already complicated—cloudy. 1 Part of the difficulty regarding this term stems from Burke's own ambiguity; another part from critics' tendency to rely on Burke's own use and definitions for clarification of this concept. The arguments have been helpful and illuminating, yet Burke's dialectic can be further clarified by going beyond what Burke means by the term by focusing on how he deploys dialectical criticism in his own work. 2 This article focuses on Burke's appropriation of the existential thinker Søren Kierkegaard as a particularly clear and remarkable instance of the operation of Burke's dialectic in his criticism. I maintain that although Burke's reading of Kierkegaard is arguably a misreading, his strategic appropriation of Kierkegaard in A Rhetoric of Motives (1950) not only serves as a clear deployment of the dialectic, but also functions as a foil against which Burke defines his own critical method. Burke's reading of Kierkegaard emphasizes the function of resolution in Burke's critical project.The current literature, although quite informative, does not put Burke's dialectic in sharp focus. Rueckert argues that Burkean dialectics "is really a branch of what Burke was to later call logology, the study of words, of language, of symbol systems" (1994, 14). Heath claims that dialectic "is an analytical tool to help us diagnose perspectives so that we can [End Page 207] examine whether they make sense and consider their implications for social relations" (1986, 162). Crusius contends that, "dialectic for Burke is the study of verbal universes, the disinterested pursuit of a vocabulary's implications" (1986, 24). While Brummett and Crusius show similarity between Hegel's and Burke's dialectic, Heath and Wess distinguish Burke's dialectic from Hegelian idealism and teleological history respectively. 3 Most of the arguments concerning Burke and dialectic focus on "The Dialectic of Constitutions" in A Grammar of Motives (1969), while A Rhetoric of Motives (1962), where Burke identifies humankind as homo dialecticus, is hardly engaged with regard to this concept. 4 Burke's working through Kierkegaard in A Rhetoric of Motives demonstrates Burke's dialectical criticism—thus providing an operational account of Burke's dialectic—and allows for his revelation of the three motives in the realm of rhetoric: the Order, the Secret, and the Kill. 5 And yet, despite this centrality of Fear and Trembling, surprisingly little has been said about Burke's Kierkegaard beyond passing mention. 6Despite editorial advice to the opposite regarding an article that would later become a part of the book, Burke evidently regarded his reading of Kierkegaard as important. Joseph Bennett, editor of Hudson Review, responded as follows to Burke's 1948 submission of the article entitled "Imagery of Killing": "I would like to request that you eliminate Kierkegaard from the article in question, confining it simply to literary exegesis and excluding the philosopher theologian." 7 Although he complied for the article, Burke retained his reading of Kierkegaard in A Rhetoric of Motives. Despite the lack of attention given to it, Burke's engagement with Kierkegaard clearly demonstrates how Burke views ethical criticism as that which resolves opposition, negation, and paradox to a higher order. Burke contra Kierkegaard The section entitled "Order" in A Rhetoric of Motives contains a detailed, twenty-three-page discussion of Kierkegaard's Fear and Trembling. In this discussion, Burke primarily attacks Kierkegaard for encouraging what Burke enigmatically and elliptically identifies as the "cult of the Kill."Burke's portrayal of Kierkegaard is hardly flattering: at the crescendo of his analysis in A Rhetoric of Motives he claims that thinking such as Kierkegaard... (shrink)