Volume 20, Issue 7, July 2020, Page 77-80.

Chapter I: The Geometry of Visibles 1 . The N on- Euclidean Geometry of Visibles In the chapter "The Geometry of Visibles" in Inquiry into the Human Mind, ...

This paper investigates Hermann Weyl’s reception of philosophical concepts stemming from the German Idealist Johann Gottlieb Fichte. In particular, Weyl’s ‘agens theory’ of matter, which he held around 1925, will be looked at. In the extant literature, the—admittedly also important—influence of Husserl on Weyl has mainly been addressed. Thus, apart from investigating some detailed Fichtean inheritances in Weyl’s concepts of causality, chance and continuity, the general difference which Weyl saw between the philosophies of Fichte and Husserl will also be discussed. (...) For Weyl this is above all a difference between an active constructivism and a rather passive phenomenological seeing. Further, the paper shows in some detail the way Weyl was drawn into a certain reading of Fichte by his Zurich colleague, the philosopher Fritz Medicus. The methodological frame of the paper is that of Konstellationsforschung, a historical and systematic approach which proves to be particularly fruitful when investigating a German Idealist context and which allows special attention to be given to the acting subjects within the constellation under investigation. Conversely, Weyl’s agens theory suggests amendments to this methodology.Keywords: Hermann Weyl; Fritz Medicus; Johann Gottlieb Fichte; Theory of matter; Activity vs. passivity; Konstellationsforschung. (shrink)

I was seven or eight years old. In Hebrew school we had just learned the Aleph-Bet and were, haltingly, beginning to sound out words. As we spoke the ancient text, our teacher translated: "... And God said: 'Let there be light.' And there was light. ..."[note 2] Here was magic; here was the supernatural; here was the creation of the universe. I resonated to the story. I was filled with wonder, far more than had ever been elicited by any fairy (...) tale my parents had read to me. I pictured in my imagination the majesty of it: God speaks and Nature obeys. (shrink)

My suggestion that the H.A. was written during the reign of the Emperor Julian and in his interest has had, on the whole, ‘a bad press.’ Reviewers who have not thought it necessary to support with argument their doubts or their rejection of the theory are in a strong position: they remain practically unassailable. ‘The theory seems on a priori grounds improbable:’ a historical student can only reply that so is human nature—distressingly improbable, as he knows to his cost. ‘After (...) reading this book one puts it down “met een zekere onvoldaanheid:”’ what can an author do save express his regret for having caused Dr. Van de Weerd this discomfort? But two stalwart defenders of the conservative position—De Sanctis and Lécrivain’—have sustained with detailed argument their unqualified rejection of my theory; in their cases it is possible to attempt a rejoinder. (shrink)

Volume 19, Issue 10, October 2019, Page 52-54.

At a time when interest in the Wittgensteinian tradition has quickened, this volume brings together fourteen essays by Norman Malcolm, a prominent philosopher ...

The definitive study of the natural theology of Thomas Aquinas, the greatest medieval philosopher, written by one of the world's most eminent scholars of medieval thought.

We discuss how the law and scholars have approached three questions. First, what acts count as acts of entrapment? Secondly, is entrapment a permissible method of law-enforcement and, if so, in what circumstances? Thirdly, what must criminal courts do, in response to the finding that an offence was brought about by an act of entrapment, in order to deliver justice? While noting the contrary tendency, we suggest that the first question should be addressed in a manner that is neutral about (...) the answers to the other two. On the second question, we summarize various arguments about the permissibility of entrapment, while remaining largely neutral about their merits. With regard to the third question, we summarize the approaches to entrapment in various jurisdictions, and we note some patterns, across the jurisdictions here surveyed, concerning shifts from one sort of entrapment remedy to another. (shrink)

The Catalogue of Palm Leaf Manuscripts kept in the Otani University Library. Otani University Library, Kyoto 1995. lxxxi, 778 pp. No price given.

What are thought experiments? How and why do they work? What do they reveal about the nature of rationality? These are the problems that I attempt to solve in my inquiry. ;Regarding the first problem, my preliminary answer can be stated as follows: Thought experiments are our imaginative explorations of new ways to experience and understand our world. It is my conviction that the ability to try out new ways of experiencing and understanding various phenomena is essential to the growth (...) of our knowledge and is constitutive of our sense of meaningfulness in our world. This conviction is the guiding idea of my study. ;This conviction is debatable. It cannot be the starting point of my argument. My tactic, rather, is to select and examine certain kinds of thought experiments, to show how and why they work, and to uncover the rationality that supports their implementation. I will show that the rationality is not specific to thought experimentation but is constitutive of all sorts of human organizing activities. The importance of a proper analysis of thought experiment is that it can give us an insight into human rationality in general. ;Thought experiments have played a central role in scientific development in human history. Yet almost nobody has any insight into how and why they work. But now recent research on cognition, especially research on meaning, imagination, concepts, reasoning, and cognitive development has begun to shed light on the imaginative structure of thought experiments. Therefore, we now have a means to begin to analyze the central mechanism of thought experimentation. My inquiry suggests what such an analysis would look like. (shrink)

This book critically examines the debate on Martin Heidegger's concept of Entscheidung and his engagement and confrontation with Nazism in terms of his broader philosophical thought. It argues that one cannot explain Heidegger's actions without accounting for his idea of "decision" and its connection to his understanding of individual "fate" and national "destiny." The book looks at the relation of biography to philosophy and the ethical and political implications of appropriating Heidegger's thinking in these domains of inquiry. It highlights themes (...) such as Heidegger's differences with the neo-Kantians in Germany; Heidegger on Kant and practical reason; and his reading of Nietzsche and Hegel. It offers a philosophical assessment grounded in Heidegger's own texts, with reference to historical and other philosophical commentaries on the rise of National Socialism in post-Weimar Germany and the philosophical issues associated with the interpretation of Nazi genocide and ideology. An important intervention in Western philosophy, this book will be of great interest to scholars and researchers of political philosophy, continental philosophy, German philosophy, philosophy in general, and political studies. (shrink)

A remarkable feature of contemporary political discourse is the dominance of morality. One legacy of logical positivism and analytical philosophy was the reluctance of political theorists during the twentieth century to engage in substantive argument about appropriate social ends or individual rights and values. Philosophers were content to describe the linguistic framework within which related political proposals were discussed without offering any proposals themselves. It was felt that the philosopher was not especially qualified to give political advice or make any (...) recommendations. The technical political theorist was properly confined to the second level of inquiry, that is, explanation of the meaning of concepts, not the first level, which was concerned with questions of how we ought to live, or issues of public policy. Economists and sociologists might have the technical skills appropriate for inquiries into public policy, but as to the big questions—such as the ends and purposes of man and society—almost anybody could make pronouncements. The important point was that reason was incapable of adjudicating between rival versions of the good life. (shrink)

This paper shows how different axiomatic and constructive approaches within quantum field theory can be understood in terms of the so-called ,picture theory' of Heinrich Hertz. Each approach will count as a different picture due to the different status of the various concepts (symbols) they are employing, like observables, gauge invariance, confinement or the space-time continuum. An important difference with the original Hertzian approach is the fact that the different approaches in quantum field theory have partially overlapping, partially supplementing domains (...) of application. This also marks some of the parallels and differences with contemporary debates on structural realism and model-theoretic approaches in the philosophy of physics. The objection that the talk about different pictures just relies on the fact that quantum field theory is unfinished will be countered. Finally, the Hertzian approach will be briefly elaborated and embedded into its philosophical successor projects of Cassirer and Goodman. German Dieser Aufsatz zeigt, wie verschiedene axiomatische und konstruktive Ansätze in der Quantenfeldtheorie mit Hilfe der sogenannten ,,Bildtheorie“ von Heinrich Hertz verstanden werden können. Aufgrund der unterschiedlichen Stellungen der verschiedenen Konzepte (Symbole), die diese Ansätze benutzen - wie etwa Observable, Eichinvarianz, Confinement oder Raum-Zeit-Kontinuum - wird jeder als ein eigenes Bild zu betrachten sein. Ein wichtiger Unterschied zu Hertz' ursprünglicher Fassung der Bildtheorie sind dabei die unterschiedlichen Anwendungsbereiche der Ansätze in der Quantenfeldtheorie. Diese überschneiden sich zum Teil, zum Teil ergänzen sie einander. Dadurch ergeben sich für die bildtheoretische Interpretation wichtige Parallelen und Unterschiede zu anderen Positionen in der Philosophie der Physik, insbesondere zum Strukturrealismus und zur Modell-Theorie. Neben diesen diskutiere ich den Einwand, dass die Redeweise von verschiedenen Bildern in der Quantenfeldtheorie nur deshalb möglich sei, weil die Theorie noch nicht abgeschlossen ist. Schließlich erweitere ich die Hertzsche Bildtheorie und setze sie dabei in Beziehung zu ihren philosophischen Nachfolgeprojekten bei Cassirer und Goodman. (shrink)

The sciences are too important to be left exclusively to scientists, and indeed they have not been. The structure of scientific knowledge, the role of the sciences in society, the appropriate social contexts for the pursuit of scientific inquiry, have long been matters for reflection and debate about the sciences carried on both within academe and outside it. Even within the universities this reflection has not been the property of any single discipline. Philosophy might have been first in the field, (...) but history and the social sciences have also entered the fray. For the latter, new problems came to the fore, since reflection on the sciences is, in the case of the social sciences, necessarily also reflection on themselves as sciences. Reflection on the natural sciences and self-reflection by the social sciences came to be dominated in the 1960s by the term 'positivism'. At the time when this word had been invented, the sciences were flourishing; their social and material environment had become increasingly favourable to scientific progress, and the sciences were pointing the way to an optimistic future. In the later twentieth century, however, 'positivism' came to be a word used more frequently by those less sure of nineteenth century certainties. In both sociology and philosophy, 'positivism' was now something to be rejected, and, symbolizing the collapse of an earlier consensus, it became itself the shibboleth of a new dissensus, as different groups of reflective thinkers, in rejecting 'positivism', rejected something different, and often rejected each other. (shrink)

As a humanist I find it annoying when people claim that a life of creative activity and supportive relationships, taking on a determinate shape over time, is not enough because it lacks the essential element. It leaves out “spirituality” and has no room for God. What basis do they have for the claim that it’s not enough?