In lieu of an abstract, here is a brief excerpt of the content:Reviewed by:Spinoza: Une Lecture d'AristoteYitzhak MelamedFrédéric Manzini. Spinoza: Une Lecture d'Aristote. Paris: Presses Universitaires de France, 2009. Pp. 334. Paper, $39.95.The occasion that prompted the current study was the discovery of a tiny typo in the text of Spinoza's Cogitata Metaphysica—the appendix to his 1663 book, Descartes' Principle of Philosophy. As it turned out, this typo, a reference to Book XI instead of Book XII of Aristotle's Metaphysics, was (...) inadvertently reproduced by Spinoza from a contemporary edition of Aristotle's works, allowing Manzini to identify precisely the edition used by Spinoza as the 1548 edition of Aristotle's works printed in Basel by Johannes Oporinus. It also led him to conclude that, contrary to the belief of many, Spinoza read Aristotle's text very closely, and convinced him of the importance of studying the dialogue between the two great philosophers.The book is comprised of three parts, reversing the order of Spinoza's presentation of his philosophy in the Ethics. The first part discusses Spinoza's ethical and political theories—where, the author claims, the influence of Aristotle is most manifest—against the background of the Nicomachean Ethics and the Politics. Here, much attention is given to the notions of the summum bonum and beatitude. The second part discusses Aristotelian and Spinozistic theories of knowledge. In the third and final part, dedicated to metaphysics and first philosophy, the author compares the philosophers' absolutely impersonal conceptions of God, examines their conceptions of substance, and develops a reading of what he calls Spinoza's "ousio-theology" (305).According to Manzini, Aristotle was one of Spinoza's first major philosophical interlocutors, and there is no doubt he is right about this. This conclusion, however, is unsurprising, [End Page 126] since seventeenth-century philosophers, whether devoted Aristotelians or determined anti-Aristotelians, conversed in an Aristotelian philosophical language. Manzini shows that Spinoza engaged directly with Aristotle's text, but also tries to substantiate an even stronger claim by stressing the agreements between the two philosophers.There are two reasons that make it difficult to see Spinoza as being consciously and positively influenced by Aristotle, however. First, Spinoza's dialogue with his philosophical predecessors is, without exception, highly critical and polemical. He does not usually mention philosophers with whom he agrees (e.g. Crescas and Machiavelli). Secondly, several of Spinoza's explicit references to Aristotle are highly critical. Consider, for example, Spinoza's claim, in a letter to Hugo Boxel, that "the authority of Plato, Aristotle, and Socrates carries little weight with me" (Letter 56), or his mockery of the "delusions of the Aristotelians and Platonists" (Theological Political Treatise [TTP], Pref.; cf. ch. 13). Manzini suggests that in these passages Spinoza is not so much addressing Aristotle, but rather using him as a foil to target medieval Aristotelianism (13). Looking closely at the context, my impression is that he is right about the passages in the TTP, but not about the quote from Letter 56. More importantly, the claim that Spinoza uses Aristotle's name as a foil is a double-edged sword that may also serve to undermine Manzini's argument. Throughout the book, Manzini points out interesting and significant similarities between Spinoza's and Aristotle's texts, but to establish direct positive influence one must consider and rule out mediating agents. In the present case there is plenty of evidence that Spinoza read medieval Hebrew Aristotelians closely. Unfortunately, most of the Hebrew authors mentioned by Spinoza were never translated into modern European languages, and there are very few, if any, good studies of Spinoza's dialogue with these texts; in the absence of such translations and studies, some of Manzini's conclusions must remain tentative.Manzini's erudition and analysis of the text are impressive. For example, near the end of his celebrated Letter on the Infinite, Spinoza criticizes "recent Peripatetics" for misunderstanding the ancient method of proving God's existence, citing Crescas's correct formulation of the ancient proof. Manzini rightly points out that the proof Spinoza ascribes to the "recent Peripatetics" was in fact Aristotle's, while the alleged "ancient" proof (which allows for actual infinity and relies on Avicennian... (shrink)

This article provides an original reappraisal of the notion of Minnemystik in the work of the 13th-century Flemish beguine Hadewijch of Antwerp, with specific reference to its Trinitarian and Christological orientations. After an introduction to the nature and origins of Hadewijch’s work, relating to the discovery of four extant manuscripts in Belgium in 1838, followed by an elucidation of the experience-driven epistemology of the Victorians Richard of St Victor and Hugo of St Victor as her key early scholastic influences, Hadewijch’s (...) Minnemystik is distinguished from Wesenmystik, as encountered in the mystical work of her French contemporary and beguine counterpart, Marguerite Porete. From this discursive basis, Hadewijch’s Minnemystik is reassessed and represented as pertinently Trinitarian and Christological in orientation, and therefore as a theological presentation from the 13th century. (shrink)

Bd. 1. 1791-1794.--Bd. 2. 1793-1795.--Bd. 3.--1794-1796.--Bd. 4. 1797-1798.--Bd. 5. 1798-1799.--Bd. 6. 1799-1800.--Bd. 7. 1800-1801.--Bd. 8. 1801-1806.--Bd. 9. 1806-1807.--Bd. 10. 1808-1812.

In the history of philosophy, Fichte's thought marks a crucial transitional stage between Kant and post-Kantian philosophy. Fichte radicalized Kant's thought by arguing that human freedom, not external reality, must be the starting point of all systematic philosophy, and in Foundations of Natural Right, thought by many to be his most important work of political philosophy, he applies his ideas to fundamental issues in political and legal philosophy, covering such topics as civic freedom, rights, private property, contracts, family relations, and (...) the foundations of modern political organization. This volume offers the first complete translation of the work into English, by Michael Baur, together with an introduction by Frederick Neuhouser that sets it in its philosophical and historical context. (shrink)

L’objet de la présente contribution vise moins à analyser tel aspect de la Philosophie de la volonté élaboré par Ricœur que de repérer, dans son œuvre ultérieure, les structures de transition (et le sens de leur articulation) entre une phénoménologie d’abord centrée sur l’ eidos d’une volonté bien solitaire à une philosophie du co-agir qui débouche sur le souci de l’autre et des institutions. On peut ainsi, dans une perspective très panoramique, pointer trois structures de transition complémentaires venant initialement de (...) traditions philosophiques hétérogènes, d’une part, la socio-phénoménologie couplée avec la philosophie hégélienne de la Sittlichkeit, d’autre part, la tradition chrétienne du socius et du prochain couplée avec une philosophie politique néo-aristotélicienne, enfin une sémantique de l’action issue des courants analytiques. (shrink)

This article presents the interpretation of Herman Jean de Vleeschauwer (1899-1986) of Medieval philosophy during his career as a lecturer and professor of philosophy at the University of South Africa (UNISA) from 1951 to 1964. The study is done regarding De Vleeschauwer's publications and unpublished manuscripts relating to Medieval philosophy, as filed in Archive MSS Acc 32 at the UNISA Institutional Repository. Essentially, De Vleeschauwer was one of only two South African university lecturers in the 20th century who consistently included (...) the Middle Ages in the philosophy curriculum (the other was Martin Versfeld at the University of Cape Town, from 1937 to 1972). When précising his work in Medieval philosophy at UNISA for the designated period, it becomes clear that De Vleeschauwer's nuanced defence of Thomism was the matrix of his interpretation. This cornerstone, and his numerous other published and unpublished texts relating to the Middle Ages, show that De Vleeschauwer was an erudite commentator, competent lecturer and skilled specialist researcher in Medieval philosophy, as he was in early modern and modern philosophy (especially on Kant and Geulincx). As a scholar of Medieval philosophy, in particular, De Vleeschauwer had no equal in the 20th century South African context. CONTRIBUTION: This article contributes to the ongoing assessment of the characteristic and curious inattention to Medieval philosophy at South African (especially the historical Afrikaans) universities during the course of the 20th century. (shrink)

La présente contribution met en confrontation une double figure contradictoire de la démesure. Celle de la figure nietzschéenne de l'excès de vie contre tout ce qui risque de soustraire sa puissance. Celle de la figure lévinassienne de la démesure du visage comme injonction éthique. Il y a bien chez Nietzsche et chez Levinas une "grammaire commune" et une réhabilitation iconoclaste de l'excès (à l'encontre de sa longue condamnation et damnation dans l'histoire de la philosophie occidentale). Mais à travers cette réhabilitation, (...) l'ontologie nietzschéenne de la vie et l'éthique lévinassienne demeurent incompossibles et se regardent comme des soeurs ennemies. (shrink)

This article responds to a critical research challenge in Medieval philosophy scholarship regarding the internal periodisation of the register. By arguing the case for ‘post-scholasticism’ as an internal period indicator (1349–1464, the era between the deaths of William of Ockham and Nicholas of Cusa), defined as ‘the transformation of high scholasticism on the basis of a selective departure thereof’, the article specifies a predisposition in the majority of introductions to and commentaries in Medieval philosophy to proceed straight from 1349 to (...) 1464, understating 115 years of pertinent Medieval philosophical discourse. It is argued that in the modern account of Medieval philosophy, this understatement is manifested in either a predating of Renaissance philosophy to close the gap between 1349 and 1464 as far as possible or in proceeding straight from 1349 to Renaissance philosophy. The article presents five unique philosophical themes from this delicate period, indicating that ‘post-scholasticism’ was indeed a productive period in late Medieval philosophy, which should not be bypassed as an inconsequential entrance to Renaissance philosophy. The period 1349–1464 should accordingly be appreciated for its idiosyncratic contributions to the history of ideas in the late-14th and early-15th centuries, with reference to the political intensification of the via moderna, the pivotal separation of philosophy and theology and the resulting independence of the natural sciences, in res critique of institutions, transforming pragmatics and the rise of philosophical materialism. Contribution: This article contributes to methodological development in Medieval philosophy by responding to a critical research challenge regarding the internal periodisation of the later Middle Ages. Arguing the case for ‘post-scholasticism’ as an internal period indicator (1349 to 1464 in Medieval philosophy, the article presents unique philosophical themes from the period, indicating that it was a productive stage in late Medieval philosophy which should not be bypassed as an inconsequential entrance to Renaissance philosophy. (shrink)

This article investigates the palimpsest reception of Pseudo-Dionysius (ca. 500) in the metaphysics of Nicholas of Cusa (1401–1464). The article covers Cusa’s political theory and metaphysics, which are intertwined. Reading Cusa against the backdrop of an analysis of Pseudo-Dionysius’ metaphysics in a preceding article, the author, in a synthetic conclusion, isolates seven Dionysic ‘trails’ (S1 to S7) in Cusa’s metaphysics: the interpretation of transcendence as bound to immanence; the affirmation of God’s transcendence in the world (or a metaphysics of ‘creation (...) as teophany’); the radical transcendence and simultaneous radical immanence of God (that is, God as ‘Beingness’); fundamental restrictions of language and the analogical ‘Naming’ of God; creation as a system of dialectical symbols about God; the analogical participation of the subject in creation; and unification (reditus, the ‘flowing of things back to God’). The Dionysic trails in Cusa’s metaphysics are described as a noteworthy, if not important, palimpsest in the corpus of late Medieval philosophy and is indicative of what the author puts forward as ‘discursive memory’, which is presented as a modern-critical concept. (shrink)

Bd. 1-2. 1. Abth. Zur theoretischen Philosophie.--Bd. 3-4. 2. Abth., A. Zur Rechts- und Sitteniehre.--Bd. 5. 2. Abth., B. Zur Religionsphilosophie.--Bd. 6-8. 3. Abth. Populärphilosophische Schriften.

In the winter of 1807, while Berlin was occupied by French troops, the philosopher Johann Gottlieb Fichte presented fourteen public lectures that have long been studied as a major statement of modern nationalism. Yet Fichte's _Addresses to the German Nation_ have also been interpreted by many as a vision of a cosmopolitan alternative to nationalism. This new edition of the _Addresses_ is designed to make Fichte's arguments more accessible to English-speaking readers. The clear, readable, and reliable translation is accompanied (...) by a chronology of the events surrounding Fichte's life, suggestions for further reading, and an index. The groundbreaking introductory essay situates Fichte's theory of the nation state in the history of modern political thought. It provides historians, political theorists, and other students of nationalism with a fresh perspective for considering the interface between cosmopolitanism and republicanism, patriotism and nationalism. (shrink)

Mit dem Entwurf eines merkantilistischen, autarken und sozialen Ständestaates liefert Fichte eine der geschlossensten Konkretisierungen seiner rechtspolitischen Ideen, nämlich das erste Modell einer sozialistischen Planwirtschaft. Zugleich berührt das Werk ein Kernproblem von Fichtes praktischer Philosophie: Wie läßt sich die freie Selbsttätigkeit der Einzelnen mit der alle auf ein Ideal verpflichtenden Hoheit des Vernunftsstaates vereinigen?

Transgender people have among the highest rates of suicide attempts of any group in society, driven strongly by the perception that they do not belong in the sex of their physical body. Gender reassignment surgery is a procedure that can change the transgender person’s physical body to accord with their gender identity. The procedure raises important ethical and distributive justice concerns, given the controversy of whether it is a cosmetic or medical procedure and the economic costs associated with performing the (...) procedure. This paper argues that there is a strong case for funding GRS as a matter of clinical necessity and justice. This paper will be divided in four key sections: First, the state of transgender health will be outlined, including the role of GRS and common objections to it. Second, a number of common objections to GRS will be analysed at the outset and shown to be unconvincing. Third, a constructive argument will be advanced, arguing that publicly funded GRS is clinically necessary, cost-effective, and demanded by principles of justice. Fourth, the paper will briefly discuss moralistic biases and why we demand a higher burden of justification for funding GRS compared with other analogous procedures. (shrink)

Mit seiner zweifellos wichtigsten religionsphilosophischen Abhandlung unternahm Fichte den Versuch, seine Wissenschaftslehre einem breiteren Publikum wenigstens in ihren zentralen Aussagen zugänglich zu machen und das Verhältnis von gelebtem Glauben und wissenschaftlicher Reflexion klar zu bestimmen.

Im "System der Sittenlehre" fand Fichtes praktische Philosophie im direkten Anschluß an die Wissenschaftslehre von 1794 ihre vollendete Gestalt. Fichtes theoretischer Ansatz bietet den bis heute einzigen methodisch konsistenten Versuch einer Letztbegründung des Sollens als Beweis der sittlichen Freiheit des Einzelnen.

Bescheidene Antwort auf Herrn Christian Wolffens Anmerckungen über das Buddeische Bedencken ; D. Io. Francisci Buddei Bedencken über die Wolffianische Philosophie -- Bescheidener Beweis, dass das Buddeische Bedencken noch fest stehe, wieder Hrn. Christian Wolffens Nöthige Zugabe aufgesetzet.

This essay argues that non-linguistic animals qualify not just for externalist notions of rationality (maximizing biological fitness or utility), but also for internal ones. They can act for reasons in several senses: their behaviour is subject to intentional explanations, they can act in the light of reasons - provided that the latter are conceived as objective facts rather than subjective mental states - and they can deliberate. Finally, even if they could not, it would still be misguided to maintain that (...) animals are capable only of (mechanical) behaviour, not of (intentional) action. (shrink)