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.

Globalization is often seen as a process of universal standardization under the auspices of market economics, technology, and hegemonic power. Resisting this process without endorsing parochial self-enclosure, Fred Dallmayr explores alternative visions that are rooted in distinct vernacular traditions and facilitate cross-cultural learning in an open-ended global arena.

Comparative political theory is at best an embryonic and marginalized endeavor. As practiced in most Western universities, the study of political theory generally involves a rehearsal of the canon of Western political thought from Plato to Marx. Only rarely are practitioners of political thought willing (and professionally encouraged) to transgress the canon and thereby the cultural boundaries of North America and Europe in the direction of genuine comparative investigation. Border Crossings presents an effort to remedy this situation, fully launching a (...) new era in political theory. Thirteen scholars from around the world examine the various political traditions of West, South, and East Asia and engage in a reflective cross-cultural discussion that belies the assumptions of an Asian "essence" and of an unbridgeable gulf between West and non-West. The denial of essential differences does not, however, amount to an endorsement of essential sameness. As viewed and as practiced by contributors to this ground-breaking volume, comparative political theorizing must steer a course between uniformity and radical separation--this is the path of "border crossings.". (shrink)

In 2000, a draft note of David Hilbert was found in his Nachlass concerning a 24th problem he had consider to include in the his famous problem list of the talk at the International Congress of Mathematicians in 1900 in Paris. This problem concerns simplicity of proofs. In this paper we review the traces of this problem which one can find in the work of Hilbert and his school, as well as modern research started on it after its publication. We (...) stress, in particular, the mathematical nature of the problem.1. (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.

The present cross-sectional study (N = 205) tested the hypothesis that the Dark Triad traits – narcissism, Machiavellianism, and psychopathy – and the PID-5 maladaptive personality traits – Negative Affectivity, Detachment, Antagonism, Disinhibition and Psychoticism – are associated with specific deception-related perceptions: perceived cue-based deception detectability, perceived deception production, and deception detection ability. Participants completed personality and deception measures in an online setting. All three Dark Triad traits and Antagonism were associated with perceived deception production ability, but not (substantially) with (...) perceived deception detection ability and cue-based deception detectability. The results provide a more fine-grained picture of biases associated with the Dark Triad traits in the context of deception and further support the relevance of Antagonism and Detachment as deception relevant personality traits. (shrink)

ExcerptIf recent discussions of Schmitt in these pages have made a broad case for the centrality of culture for his thinking, the current issue both specifies and generalizes this approach. The specificity derives from our focus on one key text by Schmitt that is often passed over but is in fact crucial for understanding his work. The generality is a result of the breathtaking sweep of issues that this text opens up for the contributors to this issue: the relation of (...) sovereignty to popular will, the ontological status of modernity, the role of myth in society, the representational structure of…. (shrink)

ZusammenfassungEine Analyse empirisch ausgerichteter Beiträge zu sportsoziologischen Themen und Fragestellungen in der vorliegenden Zeitschrift zeigt, dass gängige sozialwissenschaftliche Erklärungsmodelle bzw. Erklärungsansätze selten zum Einsatz gelangen. Es dominiert meist eine beschreibende und verstehende Methodologie. Dies führt u. a. zu einem Defizit von Erklärungswissen und in Folge wohl auch zu einer verlangsamten Theoriefundierung innerhalb der Sportsoziologie. Um die „erklärende Soziologie“ zu forcieren, werden die aktuell in der Soziologie detailreich und auch kontrovers diskutierten methodischen Erklärungsmodelle und Ansätze einschließlich ihrer Voraussetzungsbedingungen skizzierend dargestellt. Dies (...) geschieht in der Hoffnung, die methodologische Anwendungslücke zu minimieren, da eine auf Erkenntniszuwächse ausgerichtete Sportsoziologie nicht auf eine kriterienorientierte Methodologie verzichten sollte. (shrink)

We define the term \a set T of sentential-logical formulae grounds a sentential-logical formula A from a syntactic point of view\ in such a way that A is a syntactic sentential-logical consequence of T, and specific additional syntactic requirements regarding T and A are fulfilled. These additional requirements are developed strictly within the syntactics of sentential-logical languages, the three most important being new, namely: to be atomically minimal, to be minimal in degree, and not to be conjunction-like. Our approach is (...) independent of any specific sentential-logical calculus. (shrink)

What follows shall provide an introduction to a predominantly philosophical and polemical, but historically revealing, paper on the foundations of the theory of probability. The leading Russian probabilist Aleksandr Yakovlevich Khinchin wrote the paper in the late 1930s, commenting on a slightly older, but still competing approach to probability theory by Richard von Mises. Together with the even more influential Andrey Nikolayevich Kolmogorov, who was nine years his junior, Khinchin had revolutionized probability theory around 1930 by introducing the modern measure-theoretic (...) approach, which is still standard today and which allowed for a sufficiently general treatment of important new notions such as “stochastic processes.” This development had its first culmination in Kolmogorov's booklet, Grundbegriffe der Wahrscheinlichkeitsrechnung, written in German in 1933, which has exerted an enormous influence world wide. (shrink)

The present volume is devoted to the theme of Divine Father in Second Temple Jewish and early Christian tradition and in its ancient pagan contexts. It brings together proceedings of a conference under the same title, held in Gottingen in September 2011. Selected articles by well-known scholars focus on religious and philosophical concepts of divine parenthood in antiquity, from the Hebrew Bible and Second Temple Judaism (the Dead Sea Scrolls, Targums, Philo and Josephus) to the field of the New Testament. (...) In addition, the volume deals with the designation of deity as father or mother from the broad spectrum of ancient Egypt and classical antiquity (Homer, Hesiod, Plato, and its reception) to late antiquity (Plotinus and Porphyry).". (shrink)

Hermeneutik gilt heutzutage meistens als Bestandteil der Philosophie. Das ist aber eine verkürzte Sicht ihrer Gegenwart und erst recht ihrer Geschichte. Denn von Haus aus bezeichnet Hermeneutik alle Verfahren zur Auslegung von Texten. Sie begann in der Antike mit der Neu-Interpretation klassischer Dichter. Anschließend lernten die Christen die jüdische Bibel im Sinne ihres Evangeliums auszulegen. Sodann brauchte auch schriftliches Recht Interpretation, ebenso die philologisch-historische Quellenkritik der Geschichtswissenschaft. Jetzt erst führte die Philosophie die verschiedenen Varianten zu einer allgemeinen Hermeneutik zusammen. Daneben (...) hatten aber vier andere Wissenschaften eigene Auslegungstheorien und Methodenlehren entwickelt. Diese fünf Entwicklungspfade des gesamten Feldes werden hier zum ersten Mal von den Anfängen bis zur Gegenwart im Überblick dargestellt. (shrink)

ArgumentIn the decade between 1983 and 1993, Herbert Mehrtens in West Berlin and I in East Berlin communicated closely about our parallel work on mathematics under the National Socialist (NS) regime. For a short period (1988–89), we worked on a joint book on this topic. We agreed that the book should be based primarily on empirical historical material, using a theoretical approach largely guided by Mehrtens’ work on social systems in mathematics (Mehrtens1981, 1987a). However, parallel work for his habilitation thesis (...) on modernity in mathematics increasingly captivated Mehrtens’ interests. This, together with ongoing resistance among older mathematicians and the insecurities of our individual careers during times of considerable political change, particularly in East Germany, led to the failure of our joint project.This paper aims at reconstructing—mostly by drawing on correspondence—parts of the dialogue between Mehrtens and me at the time. Our dialogue was influenced by our different upbringing and socialization in the two parts of Germany, and by different, though complementary, views about the combination of empirical and theoretical approaches to the historiography of mathematics.In the epilogue, I describe how my later work in the decades from the 1990s on the history of mathematics profited much from Mehrtens’ early theoretical and empirical work but was less influenced by his book on modernity. That later work of mine was, however, mostly done at a time when Mehrtens had largely left the field and considered himself increasingly as a “cultural scientist” (Kulturwissenschaftler). (shrink)

This paper is divided into a surveying and argumentative part and a slightly longer documentary part, which is meant to verify or at least make more plausible claims made in the first part. The first part deals in broad outline with the relationship of Frank and von Mises to the Vienna Circle of Logical Empiricism on the one hand and to the physicists and mathematicians in the German-speaking world on the other. The varying special positions, partly the non-conformity of the (...) two Austrian scientists are emphasized, in particular, their adherence to Ernst Mach’s epistemology and their shared interest in probability theory and applied mathematics. The impact of emigration and the after-effects in the U.S. are discussed. This leads to new insights into the fine structure of the Vienna Circle and the latter’s relationship to German academia within ‘Weimar Culture’. P. Forman’s interpretation (1971) of von Mises’ position is critically discussed. The second, documentary part, uses recently discovered correspondence between Frank and von Mises, and, to a lesser extent, von Mises’ personal diary. It aims at further substantiating some of the introductory theses and will at the same time provide material for a thorough biographical appreciation of the two scholars and friends. (shrink)