Both Kant and Dilthey distinguish between cognition and knowledge, but they do so differently in accordance with their respective theoretical interests. Kant’s primary cognitive interest is in the natural sciences, and from this perspective the status of psychology is questioned because its phenomena are not mathematically measurable. Dilthey, by contrast, reconceives psychology as a human science.For Kant, knowledge is conceptual cognition that has attained certainty by being part of a rational system. Dilthey also links knowledge with certainty; however, he derives (...) the latter from life-experience rather than from reason. Dilthey’s psychology begins with the self-certainty of lived experience and life-knowledge, but this turns out to fall short of cognitive understanding. In the final analysis, both Kant and Dilthey move beyond psychology to arrive at self-understanding. Because of his doubts about introspection, Kant replaces psychology with a pragmatic anthropology to provide a communal framework for self-understanding. Dilthey supplements psychology with other human sciences as part of a project of anthropological reflection.Author Keywords: Anthropology; Cognition; Dilthey; Kant; Knowledge; Psychology. (shrink)

The question of what ontological insights can be gained from the knowledge of physics (keyword: ontic structural realism) cannot obviously be separated from the view of physics as a science from an epistemological perspective. This is also visible in the debate about 'scientific realism'. This debate makes it evident, in the form of the importance of perception as a criterion for the assertion of existence in relation to the 'theoretical entities' of physics, that epistemology itself is 'ontologically laden'. This is (...) in the form of the assumption that things (or entities) in themselves exist as such and such determined ones (independent of cognition, autonomously). This ontological assumption is not only the basis of our naïve understanding of cognition, but also its indispensable premise, insofar as this understanding is a fundamentally passive, 'receptive' one. Accordingly, just as 'perception' is the foundation, ('objective') description is the aim of cognition, that which cognition is about. In this sense, our idea of cognition and our idea of the things are inseparably linked. Without the ontological premise mentioned we just would not know what cognition is, but it is basically just a kind of image that we have in our minds (an assumption that helps us understand 'cognition'). Epistemology not only shares this basic assumption (which it also shares with metaphysics), but it revolves (unlike metaphysics) entirely around it by making the idea and demand of 'certainty' a condition of 'real' knowledge. As 'certainty' is a subjective criterion this entails the 'remodelling' of the real, holistic cognitive situation (to which metaphysics adheres) into a linear subject-object-relation (which results in the strict 'transcendence' of the objects). And it also establishes, due to its 'expertise' in matters of cognition, the 'primacy of epistemology' over all other sciences. Now, on closer inspection, however, the expertise of epistemology seems not all that dependable, because it basically consists only of paradigms which, from the point of view of the holism of the real cognitive situation itself, are nothing more than relatively simplistic interpretations of this situation. However, we do not yet know what another conception of cognition might look like (which is not surprising given the high rank of the phenomenon of cognition in the hierarchy of phenomena according to their complexity). 'Certainty' as a criterion of cognition is thus excluded from the outset, and thus the linear relational model of cognition appears as what it is, a gross distortion of the real, holistic cognitive situation. The significance of this argumentation with regard to physics is that the linear epistemological model of cognition itself is a major obstacle to an adequate epistemological understanding of physics. This is because it is fixed 'a priori' to an object-related concept of cognition, and to 'description' as the only mode of ('real') cognition. But physics (without questioning our naïve notion of cognition on the level of epistemology) simply works past it and its basic assumptions. Its cognitive concept (alias heuristic) is fundamentally different from that of metaphysics. The acceptance of the real, holistic cognitive situation is, in my opinion, the condition for an adequate understanding of physics' heuristic access to objects, its transcendental, generalizing cognitive concept, as well as its ontological relevance and dimension of its own. (shrink)

The question of what ontological insights can be gained from the knowledge of physics (keyword: ontic structural realism) cannot obviously be completely separated from the view of physics as a science from an epistemological perspective. This is also visible in the debate about 'scientific realism'. This debate makes it clear, in the form of the importance of perception as a criterion for the assertion of existence in relation to the 'theoretical entities' of physics, that epistemology itself is 'ontologically loaded'. This (...) is in the form of the assumption that things in themselves (independent of cognition, in an autonomous way) exist as so-and-so determined ones. This ontological assumption is not only the basis of our (naive) conception of knowledge, but also its indispensable premise, insofar as this conception is a fundamentally passive, 'receptive' one. This is true to the full extent of metaphysics, and to a not much lesser extent of epistemology. The interpretation of knowledge in the sense of 'description' seems to be without alternative. In the philosophy of science, this view is reflected in the emphasis on 'objectivity' as the essence of science, in the belief in 'induction' as the traditional method of science, and (ex negativo) in the problem of the 'theory laden nature of observation'. To these paradigms of epistemology, however, a further aggravating factor is added, namely the criterion of 'subjective certainty' as evidence of 'real' knowledge (only meaningful on the basis of the ontological premise mentioned above). Thus, due to its 'expertise' in matters of knowledge, epistemology becomes the 'prima philosophia'. But what is even more important, the real, holistic cognitive situation is transformed into a linear cognitive relationship, with the consequence of the 'transcendence' of the objects. Now, on closer inspection, however, there is not too much in the expertise of epistemology, because it basically consists only of paradigms which, from the point of view of the holism of the real cognitive situation itself, are nothing more than relatively simplistic interpretations of this situation. However, we do not yet know what another conception of knowledge might look like (which is not surprising given the position of the phenomenon of knowledge in the hierarchy of phenomena according to their complexity). 'Certitude' as a criterion of cognition is thus excluded from the outset, and thus the linear relational model of cognition also appears as what it is, a gross distortion of the real, holistic situation of cognition. The significance of this argumentation with regard to physics is that the linear epistemological model of cognition itself is a major obstacle to an adequate epistemological understanding of physics. This is because it is fixed 'a priori' to an object-related concept of knowledge, and to 'description' as the only mode of ('real') knowledge. The acceptance of the real, holistic epistemological situation is therefore, in my opinion, the condition for an adequate understanding of physics' heuristic access to objects, its transcendental, generalizing epistemological concept, as well as its ontological relevance and dimension. (shrink)

Excerpt from Philosophen-Lexikon: Leben, Werke und Lehren der Denker Die Verteilung des gewaltigen Stoffes auf einen einzigen, wenn auch stattlichen Band, bot nicht geringe Schwierigkeiten, und so wird man gewiß Nachsicht üben, wenn hier und da ein Artikel im Verhältnis etwas zu kurz oder zu lang ausgefallen ist, oder wenn sonst nochetwas vermißt wird. Es möge ferner beachtet werden, daß der Verfasser im Nachtrag am Schluß des Werkes noch eine Reihe Autoren, Schriften, Daten usw. Anführt, die aus diesem oder jenem (...) Grunde noch nicht im Texte enthalten sind. Eine absolute Vollständigkeit der Daten war freilich nicht zu erzielen. Der Ver fasser darf wohl hoffen, daß man über die Mängel, von denen ein solches Werk bei seinem ersten Inslebentreten kaum ganz frei sein kann, nicht die Menge des Gebotenen und das Ausmaß des selb ständig Erarbeiteten übersehen wird. About the Publisher Forgotten Books publishes hundreds of thousands of rare and classic books. Find more at www.forgottenbooks.com This book is a reproduction of an important historical work. Forgotten Books uses state-of-the-art technology to digitally reconstruct the work, preserving the original format whilst repairing imperfections present in the aged copy. In rare cases, an imperfection in the original, such as a blemish or missing page, may be replicated in our edition. We do, however, repair the vast majority of imperfections successfully; any imperfections that remain are intentionally left to preserve the state of such historical works. (shrink)

Excerpt from Worterbuch der Philosophischen Begriffe, Vol. 1: Historisch-Quellenmassig Bearbeitet; A bis N Die Anordnung des Materials ist so getroffen worden, dafs in erster Linie die Ubersichtlichkeit des Stoffes gesichert wurde. Die logisch - systematische und die chronologisch-genetische Dispositions weise wurden nach Moglichkeit miteinander combiniert. Auf allzu subtile Einteilungen kam es hier, in einem Worterbuchs, nicht so sehr an, verfuhrt doch eine solche, die gewohnlich durch allerhand Voraussetzungen und Annahmen bedingt ist, selbst also den Charakter einer Theorie, einer Hypothese hat, (...) zur Subjectiviernug der Darstellung, wahrend doch dem Herausgeber au moglichster Objectivitat lag; diese ist denn auch von der Kritik anerkannt werden. Den eigenen Standpunkt, den der Fachmann als einen in so mancher Beziehung selbstandigen erkennen wird, hat der Herausgeber in den an der Spitze der einzelnen Artikel stehenden Begriffs. Bestimmungen zwar kurz, pracis, aber, wie er glaubt, nicht nu wissenschaftlich, entwickelt. About the Publisher Forgotten Books publishes hundreds of thousands of rare and classic books. Find more at www.forgottenbooks.com This book is a reproduction of an important historical work. Forgotten Books uses state-of-the-art technology to digitally reconstruct the work, preserving the original format whilst repairing imperfections present in the aged copy. In rare cases, an imperfection in the original, such as a blemish or missing page, may be replicated in our edition. We do, however, repair the vast majority of imperfections successfully; any imperfections that remain are intentionally left to preserve the state of such historical works.". (shrink)

Distributor statement from label mounted on t.p.

The article traces out the history of the evolution in meaning of the phenomenological reduction in husserl's writings. The starting point is husserl's conviction that what is lacking most to philosophy as well as to science is a truly rigorous scientific method. Already in the "logical investigations" (1901) the phenomenological reduction is presented as the core of this method. But here this reduction is understood as a deliberate restriction or limitation of the mind to what is adequately perceived in an (...) "adequately fulfilling intuition" within the immanence of consciousness, Excluding any transcendence. In his lectures on "the idea of phenomenology" a significant expansion of the notion of reduction begins to appear. There is still the insistence on the absolutely given, But this now begins to include a certain "real transcendence" extending beyond the sphere of "real immanence to consciousness." this change appears first in his published works in the "ideas" of 1913. (shrink)

This work has been selected by scholars as being culturally important and is part of the knowledge base of civilization as we know it. This work is in the public domain in the United States of America, and possibly other nations. Within the United States, you may freely copy and distribute this work, as no entity (individual or corporate) has a copyright on the body of the work. Scholars believe, and we concur, that this work is important enough to be (...) preserved, reproduced, and made generally available to the public. To ensure a quality reading experience, this work has been proofread and republished using a format that seamlessly blends the original graphical elements with text in an easy-to-read typeface. We appreciate your support of the preservation process, and thank you for being an important part of keeping this knowledge alive and relevant. (shrink)

Eislers Grundlagenwerk von 1905 bietet eine systematische Ubersicht samtlicher philosophischer Grundfragen. Seine kritische Stellungnahme zu verschiedenen Losungsansatzen fuhrt zu selbststandiger Reflexion im Gebiet der Erkenntnis- und Prinzipienlehre. Rudolf Eisler (1873-1926) war osterreichischer Philosoph und Mitbegrunder der Soziologischen Gesellschaft in Wien. Als sein Hauptwerk gilt heute das Worterbuch der philosophischen Begriffe." Aus seinem Nachlass veroffentlicht wurde ausserdem das Kant-Lexikon." Sein Philosophiestudium absolvierte Eisler in Leipzig, Prag und Wien. Eislers philosophische Schriften wurden insbesondere von Immanuel Kant und Wilhelm Wundt beeinflusst. Eislers (...) besonderes wissenschaftliches Bestreben lag darin, Realismus und Idealismus im Idealrealismus sinnstiftend zu verbinden.". (shrink)

These lectures, delivered at New York University from February 20th till March 1, 1913, appeal less to students and philosophers than to the cultured public at large. I take this opportunity of expressing my sincere gratitude to the New York University, and especially to Chancellor Elmer E. Brown, for all the kindness and interest shown to me during my stay in New York.RUDOLF EUCKEN.JENA, June, 1913.

From the INTRODUCTION. The measurement of intelligence at the present time is a well recognized part of psychology. The growth of this work and the interest shown in it during the last three decades have been truly remarkable. We have witnessed the establishment of innumerable clinics and the appearance of the "mental tester." This growth has been characterized by the practical considerations of clinical examinations. The need for a psychological examination has been recognized and answers to practical situations have been (...) demanded before the psychologist has really had time to formulate his own conceptions of the whole problem. Theoretical considerations have lagged behind the practical application of mental tests. We have been measuring intelligence long before we have decided as to what intelligence really is. Far from being a drawback, as this at first sight would appear to be, it has in fact proved' to be of distinct advantage, since the measurement of this something, that we have been making, is leading us slowly but surely to a real knowledge of what can with profit be called "general intelligence." Only after considerable work with mental tests did psychologists arrive at the now generally accepted definition of intelligence, as enunciated by Stern, that "Intelligence is a general capacity of an individual consciously to adjust his thinking to new requirements: it is general mental adaptability to new problems and conditions of life." Although even this definition of intelligence may be modified in the future, it serves, at the present time, as a good working hypothesis for the selection of tests for mental measurement. Other conceptions of general intelligence are numerous and many are very similar. Binet, for example, says: "It seems to us that in intelligence there is a fundamental faculty, the alteration or the lack of which is of the utmost importance for practical life. This faculty is judgment, otherwise called good sense, initiative, the faculty of adapting one's self to circumstances. To judge well, to comprehend well, to reason well, these are the essential activities of intelligence." Meumann says general intelligence depends on two qualities, "(1) on the capacity for independent, productive thought (productive, synthetic thinking).... (2).the intensity of the whole mental life." Ebbinghaus makes intelligence include abstraction and the ability to compare and contrast. Burt says that the result of his work "strongly suggests that it is one feature or function of attentive consciousness which forms the basis of intelligence, namely, the power of readjustment to relatively novel situations by organizing new psycho-physical co-ordinations." And lastly Hart and Spearman look upon general intelligence as a "common factor" or "central tendency" not exactly definable, but entering into all sorts of mental activities to a greater or less degree. In addition to these hypotheses as to the nature of intelligence, theoretical considerations as to the growth of intelligence and the general distribution of the various grades of intelligence are arising as a direct result of the practical work being done. Questions as to the rate of increase in normal mentality are being raised, and the theoretical assumptions, upon which we base our classification of individuals into different groups, are being discussed. (shrink)

In der Reihe werden herausragende monographische Untersuchungen und Sammelbände zu allen Aspekten der Philosophie Kants veröffentlicht, ebenso zum systematischen Verhältnis seiner Philosophie zu anderen philosophischen Ansätzen in Geschichte und Gegenwart. Veröffentlicht werden Studien, die einen innovativen Charakter haben und ausdrückliche Desiderate der Forschung erfüllen. Die Publikationen repräsentieren damit den aktuellsten Stand der Forschung.

The comment focusses on O'Neill's advocacy of Classical Institutionalism (CI) and the problems of the ideal-regarding approach to the construction of institutions. It maintains that CI shows no signs of progress which would justify a renewed exclusive interest in this paradigm and that the ideal-regarding approach needs some consequentialist balancing to avoid obvious risks of totalitarian denaturation.