This paper argues that Derrida’s aporetic conclusions regarding moral and political concepts, from hospitality to democracy, can only be understood and accepted if the notion of différance and similar infrastructures are taken into account. This is because it is the infrastructures that expose and commit moral and political practices to a double and conflictual (thus aporetic) future: the conditional future that projects horizonal limits and conditions upon the relation to others, and the unconditional future without horizons of anticipation. The argument (...) thus turns against two kinds of interpretation: The first accepts normative unconditionality in ethics but misses its support by the infrastructures. The second rejects unconditionality as a normative commitment precisely because the infrastructural support for unconditionality seems to rule out that it is normatively required. In conclusion, the article thus reconsiders the relation between a quasi-transcendental argument and its normative implications, suggesting that Derrida avoids the naturalistic fallacy. (shrink)

American philosophical realism developed in two forms: “new” and “critical” realism. While the new realists sought to ‘emancipate’ ontology from epistemology and defended a direct theory of perception, the critical realists promoted a representationalist account of perception and thus argued for an epistemological dualism. Bertrand Russell’s early philosophical writings figured prominently in both of these American realist camps. However, while the new realists quite enthusiastically embraced the Russellian analytic style of reasoning (and Russell himself appreciated the American new realists as (...) anti-idealist allies), the critical realists were significantly more reserved toward Russell’s point of view. In the present paper, I identify the reasons for this difference in reception. In particular, I will show that the critical realists’ reservations pertained primarily to a more traditionalist—‘continental’—account of philosophy, whereas the neo-realists proved instrumental in setting the stage for later full-blown analytic philosophy in the United States. (shrink)

Philosophy & Social Criticism, Volume 48, Issue 7, Page 1014-1034, September 2022. The plural, impure or discordant nature of time has become an important theme in recent critical social and political theory. Against Althusser’s dismissal of Sartre’s presumedly Hegelian understanding of time and history, this article establishes Jean-Paul Sartre as a key figure in this debate on the plurality of temporalities. Especially in the Critique of Dialectical Reason, Sartre understands history and the social in terms of a multiplicity of uneven (...) and non-synchronous temporalisations, rejecting an notion of time as a universal container within which events take place. The originality of Sartre’s approach is that it establishes a link between the notion of the plurality of temporalities and the problem of freedom and domination. His mature social and political theory allows us to understand temporalisation as a strategy for domination, and objective social temporality as key to a form of anonymous or structural domination. A reconstruction of this highly complex and sophisticated approach to thinking domination through time can also shed an original light on the temporal dimension of democracy and totalitarianism. (shrink)

Does particle physics really describe the basic constituents of the material world or is it just a useful tool for deriving empirical predictions? This book proposes a novel answer to that question, emphasizing the importance of causal reasoning for the justification of scientific claims. It thereby responds to general worries about scientific realism as well as to more specific challenges stemming from the interpretation of quantum physics.

This paper critically assesses the proposal that scientific realists do not need to search for a solution of the measurement problem in quantum mechanics, but should instead dismiss the problem as ill-posed. James Ladyman and Don Ross have sought to support this proposal with arguments drawn from their naturalized metaphysics and from a Bohr-inspired approach to quantum mechanics. I show that the first class of arguments is unsuccessful, because formulating the measurement problem does not depend on the metaphysical commitments which (...) are undermined by ontic structural realism, rainforest realism, or naturalism in general. The second class of arguments is problematic due to its refusal to provide an analysis of the term "measurement". It turns out that the proposed dissolution of the measurement problem is in conflict not only with traditional forms of scientific realism but even with the rather minimal realism that Ladyman and Ross themselves defend. (shrink)

This paper defends the normativity of meaning thesis by clearing up a misunderstanding about what the thesis amounts to. The misunderstanding is that according to it, failing to use an expression in accordance with the norms which constitute its meaning amounts to changing the expression’s meaning. If this was what the thesis claimed, then it would indeed be easy to show that meaning norms do not yield prescriptions and cannot be followed. However, there is another reading: what is constitutive of (...) meaning is not the norm’s being followed, but the norm’s being applicable. On this reading, some standard arguments against the thesis lose their force. After discussing the alternative reading and its consequences, the paper goes on to sketch a model of how norms of meaning become applicable in the first place. This model supports the view that talk of meaning has its pragmatic home in contexts of linguistic calibration. (shrink)

This paper argues that ceteris paribus (cp) laws exist based on a Lewisian best system analysis of lawhood (BSA). Furthermore, it shows that a BSA faces a second trivialization problem besides the one identified by Lewis. The first point concerns an argument against cp laws by Earman and Roberts. The second point aims to help making some assumptions of the BSA explicit. To address the second trivialization problem, a restriction in terms of natural logical constants is proposed that allows one (...) to describe regularities, as specified by basic generics (e.g. ‘birds can fly’) and universals (e.g. ‘all birds can fly’). It is argued that cp laws rather than strict laws might be a part of the the best system of such a regularity-based BSA, since sets of cp laws can be both (a) simpler and (b) stronger when reconstructed as generic non-material conditionals. Yet, if sets of cp laws might be a part of the best system of a BSA and thus qualify as proper laws of nature, it seems reasonable to conclude that at least some cp laws qualify as proper laws of nature. (shrink)

(2013). Critical notice of Aaron James, Fairness in Practice: A Social Contract for a Global Economy. Canadian Journal of Philosophy: Vol. 43, No. 3, pp. 382-401.

Freges Kontextprinzip "Nur im Zusammenhange eines Satzes bedeuten die Wörter etwas" hat auch nach der von ihm vollzogenen Angleichung von Behauptungssätzen an Eigennamen Gültigkeit für die formale Sprache der "Grundgesetze". Der Bedeutungsvollständigkcitsbeweis, den er für sein Logiksystem anstrebt, schließt eine unmittelbare Anwendung dieses Prinzips nicht nur auf die unvollständigen Funktionsausdrücke, sondern auch auf die leerstellenfreien Wertverlaufsnamen ein. Wahrheitsnamen (Sätze) zeichnen sich vor anderen symbolsprachlichen Eigennamen in mehrfacher Hinsicht, insbesondere durch ihre semantische Selbständigkeit aus. Wertverlaufsnamen haben nur im Zusammenhang eines Wahrheitswertnamens (...) eine Bedeutung. Ihre Bedeutung besteht in ihrem Beitrag zur Bestimmung der Bedeutung von Wahrheitswertnamen, in denen sie vorkommen. (shrink)

In this paper, we trace the conceptual history of the term ?metamathematics? in the nineteenth century. It is well known that Hilbert introduced the term for his proof-theoretic enterprise in about 1922. But he was verifiably inspired by an earlier usage of the phrase in the 1870s. After outlining Hilbert's understanding of the term, we will explore the lines of inducement and elucidate the different meanings of ?metamathematics? in the final decades of the nineteenth century. Finally, we will investigate the (...) earlier occurrences and come to the conclusion that the conceptual prehistory of the Hilbertian notion of metamathematics dates back to 1870, whereas the history of the word starts in 1799 at the latest. What is this: metamathematics? It is something amazing everybody, [?] since it makes the mind dizzy and withdraws thinking its sole fulcrum.1 1 Brunner 1898, p. 832: ?Was ist das: Metamathematik? Es ist etwas, was einen Jeden in das äusserste Staunen versetzt, [?] was das Gehirn schwindlig macht und dem Denken seinen einzigen Stütz- und Angelpunkt zu entziehen droht? (shrink)

In response to the claim that democracies are inherently short-termist, this article argues for a new way to understand them as being committed to future generations. If taking turns among rulers and ruled is a normative idea inherent to the concept of democracy, then such turn-taking commits democrats to a fair turn with future generations.

This work considers Valkyries in the medieval Scandinavian mythology and literature and places them in the context of the early history of European religion. Drawing on textual and archaeological sources, a detailed review of Celtic, Etruscan and Graeco-Roman female demons of the battlefield and of death is presented, and their remarkable similarity with the Valkyries analysed against the background of Mediterranean-transalpine cultural contacts.

The article considers the relationships among three arguments that purport to establish the intrinsically contradictory or paradoxical nature of the modern project aiming at the equal consideration of all. The claim that the inevitable historical insertion of universal-egalitarian norms leads to always particular and untransparent interpretations of grammatically universal norms may be combined with the claim that the logic of determination of political communities tends to generate exclusions. The combination of these two claims lends specific force to the third argument (...) according to which equal consideration perpetually requires the non-egalitarian project of understanding individuals on their own terms. Hence, taking off from a recent debate between Christoph Menke and Jürgen Habermas, I argue that the former is right to diagnose an aporetic self-reflection in egalitarian universalism, while agreeing with the latter about the indispensability of deliberative democratic frameworks for the defence of both egalitarian and non-egalitarian norms. Key Words: Theodor Adorno • deliberative democracy • Jacques Derrida • egalitarianism • equality • Jürgen Habermas • Christoph Menke • singularity • universalism. (shrink)

Unter »globaler Armut« wird das Phänomen verstanden, dass Teile der Weltbevölkerung über so wenig Ressourcen verfügen, dass sie ihre Grundbedürfnisse nicht befriedigen können. In der Debatte um globale Armut wird gefragt, wer in globaler Perspektive arm ist; welche Ursachen und welche Folgen diese Armut hat; warum und wie sie bekämpft werden sollte. Die globale Perspektive gibt dabei in drei Hinsichten vor, wie der Armutsbegriff in diesem Kontext zu verstehen ist, und diese drei begrifflichen Festlegungen prägen die gesamte Debatte um das (...) Phänomen globaler Armut. (shrink)

Das Kernanliegen der philosophischen Arbeiten Ludwig Sieps ist die Formulierung einer praktischen Philosophie für die Gegenwart. In seinen jüngeren Arbeiten sind insbesondere der Begriff der Natur und der Begriff der Erfahrung in den Fokus gerückt. Eine plausible Ethik muss nach Siep einerseits eine evaluative Naturbetrachtung und insbesondere eine Reflexion der Natur des Menschen umfassen. Andererseits muss sie aber auch, weil sie sich nicht auf apriorische Prinzipien stützen kann, ein Konzept der historischen Erfahrung heranziehen, wenn sie Antworten auf die heute relevanten (...) Fragen geben möchte. Der Band behandelt anlässlich des 75. Geburtstages Ludwig Sieps zentrale Aspekte seiner jüngeren Arbeiten, teils kritisch und teils mit Vorschlägen für mögliche Weiterentwicklungen. Ziel dieser Auseinandersetzung mit dem philosophischen Denken Ludwig Sieps ist es, entlang der systematischen Linien »Natur« und »Erfahrung« Bausteine zu einer praktischen Philosophie der Gegenwart zu diskutieren. (shrink)

In the face of the ever-growing effect the actions of the present may have upon future people, most conspicuously around climate change, democracy has been accused, with good justification, of a presentist bias: of systemically favouring the presently living. By contrast, this paper will argue that the intimate relation, both quasi-ontological and normative, that Derrida's work establishes between temporality and justice insists upon another, more future-regarding aspect of democracy. We can get at this aspect by arguing for two consequences of (...) the deconstructive affirmation of sur-vivre, of the alterity of death in life. Firstly, justice is not first of all justice for the living, but intergenerational from the start. This is so because no generation coincides with itself; rather, it dies and is reborn at every moment, and so – and this is the second consequence – consists in taking turns. Affirming life as living-on means affirming that it involves exchanging life's stations, as the young become the old, and the unborn become the dead. In this sense, the justice of living-on, I will argue, shares an essential feature with democracy, whose principle of exchanging the rulers with the ruled led Derrida to characterize it in terms of the wheel. Democracy consists in the principled assent to power changing hands, a switchover life demands of every generation at every turn. This assent further requires an acceptance of the gift of inheritance without which no life can survive. But as the gift can also never be fully acknowledged or appropriated, it must be passed on to the indefinite, unknown future, in a turning that is the time of life. (shrink)

Was verbindet Hammer, Pinsel und Geige? Werkzeuge und Instrumente vermitteln zwischen menschlichem Körper und Materie. So genießen diese Objekte eine genuine Gemeinsamkeit, und doch gründet gerade in der Differenz beider Begriffe die abendländische Unterscheidung zwischen handwerklichen und künstlerischen bzw. musikalischen oder wissenschaftlichen Tätigkeiten. Die Beiträge des achten Bandes der Hamburger Forschungen zur Kunstgeschichte nehmen Werkzeuge und Instrumente aus einer kunsthistorischen Perspektive und im interdisziplinären Dialog in den Blick. Das Augenmerk liegt gleichermaßen auf den Techniken ihrer Handhabung, ihrer Diskursivierung in Kritik (...) und Theorie sowie ihrer Darstellung im Bild. Mit Beiträgen von: Gotlind Birkle, Martine Clouzot, Philippe Cordez, Gottfried Korff, Matthias Krüger, François Lamy, Katja Müller-Helle, Ulrich Pfisterer, Albrecht Pohlmann, François Poplin, Julia Ann Saviello, Monika Wagner. (shrink)

El artículo estudia ciertos aspectos de la noción agustiniana de belleza. Se limita al estudio del nombre latino pulchritudo y sus derivados, dejando de lado otros términos como speciosus, formosus o decorus.

John Duns Scotus deals with a question which is still of importance for modern ethical debate, namely what is the difference between a good deed which is intended but may be hindered by the circumstances and a good deed which is both intended and consummated? Scotus discusses this issue in connection with the question of whether moral goodness or badness can be assigned to the external act, which depends on physical capability. In his investigation, he determines that the imputability of (...) acts, i.e. the fact that the actor had free power of disposition over them, is a criterion for being able to morally qualify them as good or bad. His conclusion that one can clearly attribute the external act with its own moral good or evil is primarily based on his definition of the moral good as the totality of circumstances necessary according to right reason for a good act. William of Ockham expressly rejects Doctor Subtilis' conclusion and relativizes his criterion of moral goodness to the point of meaninglessness. Ockham attributes the moral good or evil of an act almost exclusively to the actor's intention. He explains the moral significance attributable to the actual consummation of an intentional action in terms of the acts of will occurring during and after consummation, which can be morally judged in their own right. He does admit, however, that a judgment made by mortals is based on criteria different from those relevant in the eyes of God. Today, the particularly interesting aspect of this debate seems to be that a moral conception similar to Kant's is confronted with a position that can still be called Aristotelian, albeit with some Augustinian influence. Yet the perceivable theoretical proximity between these two authors could indicate a possible connection between two of the most important ethical concepts in the history of occidental philosophy. Die auch für moderne Ethikkonzepte nicht unwichtige Frage, worin der moralische Unterschied zwischen einer nur gewollten, aber durch die Umstände verhinderten und einer ausgeführten guten Tat liegt, wird von Johannes Duns Scotus im Zusammenhang mit der Frage bearbeitet, ob dem äußeren, auf körperliche Vermögen angewiesenen Akt eine eigene moralische Güte oder Schlechtigkeit zukommt. Bei seiner Untersuchung ermittelt er als Kriterium für die moralische Qualifizierbarkeit in die eine oder andere Richtung die Zurechenbarkeit von Handlungen, d.h. den Umstand, daß sie in der freien Verfügungsgewalt des Handelnden stehen. Das Resultat seiner Überlegungen, daß nämlich der äußeren Handlung sehr wohl eine eigene moralische Güte oder Schlechtigkeit zugesprochen werden kann, basiert wesentlich auf seiner Definition der moralischen Güte als Gesamtheit der gemäß der rechten Vernunft für eine gute Handlung erforderlichen Umstände. Wilhelm von Ockham weist das Resultat des Doctor Subtilis ausdrücklich zurück und relativiert dessen Kriterium moralischer Güte bis zur weitgehenden Bedeutungslosigkeit. Er führt die moralische Güte oder Schlechtigkeit eines Aktes ausschließlich auf die Intentionen des Handelnden zurück und erklärt die eigene moralische Bedeutung, die der Ausführung einer willentlichen Handlung zukommt, durch die während und nach der Ausführung stattfindenden Willensakte, die ihrerseits moralischer Beurteilung unterliegen. Allerdings gesteht er zu, daß die Beurteilung durch die irdische Gerichtsbarkeit z.T. anderen Gesichtspunkten folgt als die vor den Augen Gottes. Heute scheint an dieser Debatte vor allem der Umstand interessant, daß eine der kantischen nicht unähnliche Moralkonzeption mit einer trotz aller augustinischen Einfüsse noch aristotelischen Position konfrontiert wird. Die dennoch feststellbare theoretische Nähe beider Autoren könnte Hinweise für eine mögliche Verknüpfung dieser beiden wohl wichtisten Ethikkonzepte der abendländischen Philosophiegeschichte geben. (shrink)