In Science of the Soul in Ibn Sina's Pointers and Reminders, Michael A. Rapoport provides a philological and interpretive guide for critically reading and interpreting Ibn Sina's (Avicenna, d. 1037) most challenging and influential text. Rapoport argues that chapters VII-X of the Pointers present scientific explanations for phenomena related to the human soul - from intellection to divination, magic, and marvels - within the framework of Ibn Sina's Metaphysics of the Rational Soul. This book dispels widespread notions that the (...) Pointers represents Ibn Sina's mystical or Sufi philosophy and therefore stands apart from the rest of his corpus. (shrink)

This volume brings together a diverse range of scholars to address important philosophical and interdisciplinary questions in the study of language. Linguistics throughout history has been a conduit to the study of the mind, brain, societal structure, literature and history itself. The epistemic and methodological transfer between the sciences and humanities in regards to linguistics has often been documented, but the underlying philosophical issues have not always been adequately addressed. -/- With 15 original and interdisciplinary chapters, this volume therefore tackles (...) vital questions relating to the philosophy, history, and theoretical interplay between the study of language and fields as varied as logic, physics, biology, classical philology and neuroscience. -/- With a four part structure, questions of the mathematical foundations of linguistics, links to the natural sciences, cognitive implications and historical connections, take centre stage throughout the volume. The final chapters present research related to the linguistic connections between history, philosophy and the humanities more broadly. Advancing new avenues of research, this volume is exemplary in its treatment of diachronic and cross-disciplinary interaction, and will be of interest to all scholars interested in the study of language. (shrink)

The article deals with the problem of the boundaries in contemporary humanities – if “everything is a text” and the process of assimilation and interpretation of new meanings is fundamentally open and infinite, then do we have any grounds to distinguish between different kinds of understanding of the cultural phenomena surrounding us? The central thesis of the article is that precisely those claims that are theoretical in nature should be read and discussed in a way that is alien to the (...) philological perspective. However, this is not necessarily a problem – the internal heterogeneity of humanitarian thinking may be an advantage considering the point of development reached in the “camp” of the natural sciences. (shrink)

A discussion of Nietzsche's philology as the prelude to his philosophy of science.

In lieu of an abstract, here is a brief excerpt of the content:Nietzsche’s Rhetoric on the Grounds of Philology and HermeneuticsAdrian Del Caro"The philosopher believes the value of his philosophy lies in the whole, in the structure: posterity finds it in the stone with which he built."Human, All Too Human, 1.201"All science only achieved continuity and constancy when the art of correct reading, that is philology, reached its height."Human, All Too Human, 1.270The complexity of Nietzschean rhetoric demands (...) first a basic working definition of rhetoric. In the etymological sense of Greek rhe¯torike¯, the art of oratory, and extrapolated to include the art of communicating effectively through writing, Nietzsche's rhetoric is a highly stylized, deeply self-aware manner of expression designed to convey meaning and to appeal. In the more limited sense of my essay, Nietzschean rhetoric is furthermore a discourse whose communicative and appealing aspects are aimed at the earth for the purpose of grounding human beings. By "rhetoric" I do not mean the negative connotation associated with "insincere or grandiloquent language" (Webster's), though it is certainly the case that Nietzsche's rhetoric frequently takes flight and requires grounding. It is to be expected that a classical philologist by training, and both a teacher and a writer by profession, would have a close understanding and practiced application of rhetoric; the particular challenge in explicating Nietzsche's rhetoric lies in the task to which his rhetoric is put, as well as in the zeal with which he pursued his task. I am not primarily concerned with what Nietzsche had to say about rhetoric while lecturing at the University of Basle, though I agree that Gilman, Blair, and Parent are right to emphasize the importance of rhetoric for the interpretation of Nietzsche's writings and in its own right as a competitor with philosophy (1989, xii, xvi, xx), rather, I am concerned [End Page 101] with the practice of rhetoric that distinguishes Nietzsche's writings from the early 1870s until the so-called Wahnsinnszettel (postcards and letters of madness) written in early January 1889. I also agree with Moore, who analyzes the specifically biological and medical idiom of Nietzsche and concludes "that new light can be thrown on [Nietzsche's] thought by situating it within the historical context of nineteenth-century theories of evolution and degeneration" (Moore 2002, 1-2).1In an early aphorism entitled "Origin of faith" Nietzsche concluded: "Habituation of spiritual principles [Grundsätze] without grounds [Gründe] is called faith."2 I provide the German to demonstrate that whenever possible, Nietzsche drew on the Germanic Grund in his discussions of grounding, even though he was keenly aware of Greek and Latin alternatives and could have used them. So for example Nietzsche's translator (say Holling-dale) could have chosen to use English "grounds" for German Gründe, but chose instead to use "reasons," which is also correct though not exactly in the spirit of Nietzsche's etymological nuance.3 Grundsätze, literally "grounding propositions," given idiomatically as "principles," has no comparable etymology in English. What one becomes accustomed to or adopts as a habit based on faith versus grounds, cannot by definition be grounded, whether or not it is a principle. Based on this example, living with grounds or reasons is living with foundation, with base and support. Living without grounds is simply acquiring habits, living by faith, living groundlessly. A similar usage is involved in English "grounds for dismissal," whereby "grounds" equals "reasons." Even the words founded and unfounded preserve some of the strength of "grounded" and "ungrounded" as I use them. In German "unfounded" is unbegründet or grundlos, participle and adjective respectively, and Nietzsche availed himself whenever possible of German expressions based on ground.The aphorism immediately following "Origin of faith" relies even more on Grund, and its translation into English deserves close attention. "Aus den Folgen auf Grund und Ungrund zurückgeschlossen" becomes "Reasons judged a posteriori on the basis of consequences,"4 which I would render as "grounds and ungrounds retroactively concluded from consequences." Nietzsche uses Grund twice already in the title, and in the body of this "aphorism" of thirty lines a variation of Grund occurs six more times (Gründe, Gr... (shrink)

In lieu of an abstract, here is a brief excerpt of the content:BOOK REVIEWS 471 One would have liked amplification of the final chapter on "Descartes and History," first, as to how he was a product of the intellectual climate of his times, and secondly, as to the influence exerted by "the father of modern philosophy" at home and abroad. Even brief comments would have been welcome--for example, on Descartes's reaction to the Thomistic heritage, to Montaigne, Pyrrhonism, and Stoicism, Jesuit (...) formation, to the theory of "honn~te homme" capable of wielding the sword and the pen. The book mentions Chomsky; but why is there no reference to the exchange of four letters between Descartes and the Cambridge Piatonist Henry More on language as the criterion of reason to distinguish man from beast? The crucial role of theology in that age could be further emphasized, as well as the three-cornered nature of the century's combat between "the old philosophers," the Cartesians, and the empiricists who gathered strength after Gassendi. One looks in vain for reference to Descartes's role in denigrating history and promoting the moderns as a possible influence first in "la querelle des anciens et des modernes" and then in the Enlightenment faith in progress. The chapter would have been enriched by comment on Descartes's influence on "iatrophysical" and "iatrochemical" iatromechanism, particularly in the medical sciences. No doubt because of limitations of space, the internationalism of Descartes's "rayonnement " was not brought to light. In Holland, England, Italy, Germany, and Switzerland the sparks spread. But it is not fair to blame an author for not writing someone else's book with more on the history of ideas. Dr. R6e, the Editor of Philosophy and its Past, has made a personal and significant contribution to Cartesiana. We are grateful to him for helping us to understand Descartes. LEONORA COHEN ROSENFIELD University of Maryland Giambattista Vico's Science of Humanity. Ed. Giorgio Tagliacozzo and Donald Phillip Verene. (Baltimore and London: The John Hopkins University Press, 1976. Pp. xxix + 480. $16.50) This is the second of two volumes of essays on Giambattista Vico, the early eighteenthcentury Neopolitan philosopher of history. The first volume was part of, and served to signal, a fairly intense quickening of interest in Vico.' Since its publication at least a half dozen books on Vico have appeared in English. The first Vico Conference to be held in this country took place in January, 1976, coinciding with the publication of this second volume.2 The Conference and the two volumes represent an effort to stimulate an interest in and manifest the riches of Vico's thought. They must surely be the fruits of a labor of love on the part of Professor Giorgio Tagliacozzo, Director of the Institute for Vichian Studies and co-editor of both volumes. The publication of the second volume, coming at the end of the most fruitful decade in Vichian scholarship in the English-speaking world, provides an opportunity for some assessment of the general trends emerging within that scholarship. I prefer to discuss two related but distinguishableaspects of those trends: first, their interdisciplinarycharacter, and second, the increasingly divergent nature of both the historical and methodological approaches to Vico. On the whole, the predominant disciplinary interest in Vico in books published or translated into English before 1969 has been philosophical and has been heavily influenced by Croce's ' Giambattista Vico: An International Symposium, ed. Giorgio Tagliacozzo and Hayden V. White (Baltimore: The Johns Hopkins University Press, 1969). "Vico and Contemporary Thought," sponsored by the Institute for VicoStudies, associated with the Casa ltaliana of Columbia University and the Graduate Faculty of the New School for Social Research. 472 HISTORY OF PHILOSOPHY idealist interpretation. Vichian research has been enriched and broadened in the last ten years by the growth of philological studies, and the present volume is representative of this development. It is divided almost equally between articles in philology and philosophy. The primarily philological articles range from analyses, occasionally technical, of Vico's ideas about language and myth, 3 to Vico's place in the historical development of linguistics, rhetoric, and language usage from Aristotle to the eighteenth century4 and to his relevance for the contemporary study of language usage and... (shrink)

"The Natural System" is the name given to the underlying arrangement present in the diversity of life. Unlike a classification, which is made up of classes and members, a system or arrangement is an integrated whole made up of connected parts. In the pre-evolutionary period a variety of forms were proposed for the Natural System, including maps, circles, stars, and abstract multidimensional objects. The trees sketched by Darwin in the 1830s should probably be considered the first genuine evolutionary diagrams of (...) the Natural System—the first genuine evolutionary trees. Darwin refined his image of the Natural System in the well-known evolutionary tree published in the Origin of Species, where he also carefully distinguished between arrangements and classifications. Following the publication of the Origin, there was a great burst of evolutionary tree building, but interest in trees declined substantially after 1900, only to be revived in recent years with the development of cladistic analysis. ¶ While evolutionary trees are modern diagrams of the Natural System, they are at the same time instances of another broad class of diagrams that may be called "trees of history": branching diagrams of genealogical descent and change. During the same years that Darwin was sketching his first evolutionary trees, the earliest examples of two other trees of history also appeared: the first trees of language evolution and of manuscript genealogy. Though these were apparently independent of evolutionary trees in their origin, the similarities among all these trees of history, and among the historical processes that underlie them, were soon recognized. Darwin compared biological evolution and language evolution several times in the Origin of Species, and both Ernst Haeckel and the linguist August Schleicher made similar comparisons. Both linguists and stemmaticists (students of manuscript descent) understood the principle of apomorphy—the principle that only shared innovations provide evidence of common ancestry—more clearly than did systematists, and if there had been more cross-fertilization among these fields the cladistic revolution in systematics might well have taken place in the nineteenth century. ¶ Although historical linguists and stemmaticists have in some respects had sounder theory than have systematists, at least until recently, they have also had the practical problem of very large amounts of data, a problem not often faced by systematists until the advent of molecular sequencing. The opportunity now exists for systematists to contribute to the theory and practice of linguistics and stemmatics, their sister disciplines in historical reconstruction, through application of our commonly used computer programs for tree estimation. Preliminary results from the application of numerical cladistic analysis to a large stemmatic data set have been very encouraging, and have already generated much discussion in the stemmatics community. (shrink)

Philology haunts the humanities, through both its defendants and its detractors. This article examines the construction of philology as the premier science of the long nineteenth century in Europe. It aims to bring the history of philology up to date by taking it seriously as a science and giving it the kind of treatment that has dominated the history of science for the last generation: to reveal how practices, instruments, and cooperation create visions of (...) timeless knowledge. This historical inquiry therefore asks how one modality of textual interpretation could morph into an integrated system of knowledge production, which ostensibly explained the whole human world. Ultimately, it advances a central argument: philology operated as a relational network, one that concealed diversity and disunity, projected unity and stability, and seemed to rise above the material conditions of its own making. The article scrutinizes the composition of philology as a heterogeneous ensemble, the functioning of philology comparable to other sciences, whether human or natural, and the historical contingency in the articulation of philology. (shrink)

A prehistory of today's humanities, from ancient Greece to the early twentieth century Many today do not recognize the word, but "philology" was for centuries nearly synonymous with humanistic intellectual life, encompassing not only the study of Greek and Roman literature and the Bible but also all other studies of language and literature, as well as history, culture, art, and more. In short, philology was the queen of the human sciences. How did it become little more than an (...) archaic word? In Philology, the first history of Western humanistic learning as a connected whole ever published in English, James Turner tells the fascinating, forgotten story of how the study of languages and texts led to the modern humanities and the modern university. The humanities today face a crisis of relevance, if not of meaning and purpose. Understanding their common origins—and what they still share—has never been more urgent. (shrink)

Joining the university context in the middle of the 19th century, Philology served as a comprehensive basis for what nowadays is meant by literary and linguistic studies. Depending on the specialization tendency that would settle down in the academic context, each of these areas followed separate or even divergent paths, losing, to a great extent, the contact with its initial basis. Despite this state of affairs, Philology has displayed a strong capacity of resistance, maintaining its traditional dimension active (...) or going through metamorphoses that resulted from the incorporation of new technologies, as well as from the epistemological adjustment that enabled it to overcome its first positivist stages. Trying to find a new place inside the general framework of Social Sciences and Humanities, literary studies need to recover its order and credibility, two factors that the new face of Philology can inspire. The present study aims at reconstructing the most recent trajectory undergone by this field of research and education, by identifying a space of reconnection that already seems to be adequate and beneficial. (shrink)

Finland is internationally known as one of the leading centers of twentieth century analytic philosophy. This volume offers for the first time an overall survey of the Finnish analytic school. The rise of this trend is illustrated by original articles of Edward Westermarck, Eino Kaila, Georg Henrik von Wright, and Jaakko Hintikka. Contributions of Finnish philosophers are then systematically discussed in the fields of logic, philosophy of language, philosophy of science, history of philosophy, ethics and social philosophy. Metaphilosophical reflections (...) on the nature of philosophy are highlighted by the Finnish dialogue between analytic philosophy, phenomenology, pragmatism, and critical theory. (shrink)

"Homer and Classical Philology," Nietzsche's 1869 inaugural lecture at the University of Basel, addresses not only the history of the Homer question as a problem but also raises the question of the discipline of classical philology as science . Thematically, Nietzsche's first lecture as a professor of classical philology focuses on the significance of style as such. In this meta-scholarly context, the issue of scholarly discernment is explored in terms of aesthetic judgment, as a judgment of (...) taste, a focus Nietzsche subsequently resumes in the second of his Untimely Meditations, "On the Utility and Liability of History for Life."1 To be . (shrink)

In The Nay Science, Vishwa Adluri and Joydeep Bagchee undertake a careful and rigorous hermeneutical approach to nearly two centuries of German philological scholarship on the Mahabharata and the Bhagavad Gita.

The Danish amateur scholar Christian Jürgensen Thomsen has often been described as a founder of modern “scientific” archaeology. Thomsen's innovation, this essay argues, reflects developments within neighboring fields, such as philology and history. He reacted against historians who limited themselves to histories of texts and therefore abandoned the earliest human history. Instead, he proposed a new history of objects, which included the entire history of humankind. Thomsen's work as director of the Royal Museum of Nordic Antiquities in Copenhagen was (...) especially important for this renewal. The arrangement of artifacts not only helped him formulate his theories, but also allowed him to present his arguments in a language of objects. At the same time, Thomsen's definition of archaeology as a museum science placed his branch of archaeology in a closer relationship with other museum sciences, such as geology and comparative anatomy. From the 1840s, Thomsen's museum became a model for how the study of human artifacts could deliver scientific insights into human nature and the laws of human development. (shrink)

This volume goes beyond presently available phenomenological analyses based on the structures and constitution of the lifeworld. It shows how the science of history is the mediator between the human and the natural sciences. It demonstrates that the distinction between interpretation and explanation does not imply a strict separation of the natural and the human sciences. Finally, it shows that the natural sciences and technology are inseparable, but that technology is one-sidedly founded in pre-scientific encounters with reality in the (...) lifeworld. In positivism the natural sciences are sciences because they offer causal explanations testable in experiments and the humanities are human sciences only if they use methods of the natural sciences. For epistemologists following Dilthey, the human sciences presuppose interpretation and the human and natural sciences must be separated. There is phenomenology interested in psychology and the social sciences that distinguish the natural and the human sciences, but little can be found about the historical human sciences. This volume fills the gap by presenting analyses of the material foundations of the "understanding" of expressions of other persons, and of primordial recollections and expectations founding explicit expectations and predictions in the lifeworld. Next, it shows, on the basis of history as applying philological methods in interpretations of sources, the role of a universal spatio-temporal framework for reconstructions and causal explanations of "what has really happened". (shrink)

The series is devoted to the study of scientific and philosophical texts from the Classical and the Islamic world handed down in Arabic. Through critical text editions and monographs, it provides access to ancient scientific inquiry as it developed in a continuous tradition from Antiquity to the modern period. All editions are accompanied by translations and philological and explanatory notes.

In the summer of 1486, Pico came into possession of what he regarded as the original Chaldean text of the Chaldean Oracles, whose Greek text thus came to appear to him as an incomplete and flawed translation. The now-lost purported original Chaldean Oracles were a back translation infused with kabbalistic elements produced by Flavius Mithridates. In his Conclusiones nongentae (Rome, 1486), however, Pico devoted to them fifteen conclusions. Through an overall analysis of these conclusions, the first part of the article (...) points out the kabbalistic themes and symbols that Pico descried in the original Chaldean Oracles. In the second part, an in-depth analysis of one of these conclusiones demonstrates that Pico’s reading of the oracle quoted therein implied that the Greek translator had missed the kabbalistic purport of the original. The article shows that Pico’s Conclusiones aimed at pointing out that the transmission of kabbalah to Zoroaster and from Zoroaster (although not without misinterpretations) to the Greek world – in other words, the existence of a divinely revealed prisca theologia transmitted through the ages – could be demonstrated on the basis of philological analysis and that, according to Pico, insofar as they provided a philological reconstruction of that science and its transmission, the Conclusiones should be reckoned as the culmination of the studia humanitatis. (shrink)

This statement by the late Franz Rosenthal is, in a sense, the uniting theme of the present volume's 35 articles by renowned scholars of Islamic Studies, Middle ...

In this paper I will argue not only that there is nothing new in the term “New Philology” , but that the old philology was in fact a new philology with respect to that which had preceded. Use of the labels “new” and “old,” applied to the dialectical development of a discipline, is a gesture sufficiently charged ideologically as to have little meaning in the absolute terms — before and after, bad and good — that it affixes. (...) On the contrary, to the extent that calling oneself “new” is a value-laden gesture which implies that something else is “old” and therefore less worthy, it constitutes a rhetorical strategy of autolegitimation — with little recognition, of course, that the process itself of declaring oneself “new” is indeed very old, or at least as old, where the present case is concerned, as Vico's Nuova Scienza, which some see as the beginning of philological science. The qualifier “new” is by definition a relational term. Vico conceived of his science as new with respect to the philosophy of Descartes; Meyer-Lübke and the Neo-Grammarians, with respect to the Romantics; the Italian New Philologists, with respect primarily to the textual methodology of Joseph Bédier. (shrink)

August Boeckh, in his Encyclopedia and Methodology of the Philological Sciences provides an account of the methodology of philology (or what otherwise might be called methodological hermeneutics) that is the culmination of the development of the science of philology in the nineteenth century. Boeckh importantly defines philology in relation to philosophy and to history. Philosophy is the knowledge of the truth, gnosis, while philology is the knowledge of what has been known, anagnosis. Boeckh's hermeneutics provide (...) the background for much of the theory and practice of the twentieth and twentieth‐first centuries. Those who have looked for method in hermeneutics have looked to Boeckh. Those, like Hans‐Georg Gadamer and Paul Ricoeur, who have been critical of the methodologism and scientism in nineteenth‐century hermeneutics, have often considered Boeckh a leading example of these features which they would overcome. (shrink)

The aim of this essay is to review Friedrich Nietzsche's "The Gay Science" in English Translation. It compares and contrasts the translations by Thomas Common, Walter Kaufmann, Josefine Nauckhoff, and R. Kevin Hill. First, I argue in favor of translating the work's title "Die Fröhliche Wissenschaft" as "The Gay Science" or perhaps more precisely as "The Gay Knowledge". Nietzsche who is likely the greatest stylist in the German language wrote with philological precision and succinctness. This exactitude and awareness (...) of the shaping influence of linguistic means on the contents expressed therefore needs to be reflected throughout in any kind of rendition of Nietzsche's artful texts and the evaluation and assessment thereof. (shrink)

Continental philosophy of science has developed alongside mainstream analytic philosophy of science. But where continental approaches are inclusive, analytic philosophies of science are not–excluding not merely Nietzsche’s philosophy of science but Gödel’s philosophy of physics. As a radicalization of Kant, Nietzsche’s critical philosophy of science puts science in question and Nietzsche’s critique of the methodological foundations of classical philology bears on science, particularly evolution as well as style (in art and science). (...) In addition to the critical (in Mach, Nietzsche, Heidegger but also Husserl just to the extent that continental philosophy of science tends to depart from a reflection on the crisis of foundations), other continental philosophies of science include phenomenology (Husserl, Bachelard, Merleau‐Ponty, etc.) and hermeneutics (Heidegger, Gadamer, Heelan, etc.), especially incorporating history of science (Nietzsche, Mach, Duhem, Butterfield, Feyerabend, etc.). Examples are drawn from the philosophy of sciences (chemistry, geology, and biology) other than physics. (shrink)

Salomon Munk (1803-1867) belonged to a group of German-Jewish scholars who pioneered the systematic study of Arabic, Judeo-Arabic and Islamic philosophy in Western Europe in the nineteenth century, as part of a movement that came to be known as the Science of Judaism. The Science of Judaism applied the tools of modern science (in particular philology) to the study of Judaism, seeking to shed light on its manifold aspects and historical contexts--an undertaking which eventually led to (...) the birth of Jewish studies as an academic discipline. Munk's ground-breaking studies of Arabic and Judeo-Arabic sources were to play a central role in this process, exerting a major influence on nineteenth century German and French Oriental studies as well as on modern philosophical historiography, and paving the way for the scientific study of the relationship between medieval Jewish, Islamic, and Christian thought. This book is an attempt to restore this extraordinary representative of German Jewry to the pantheon of the Science of Judaism, and in the process, to illustrate the fascinating origins of the academic field of Jewish and Islamic Studies. (shrink)

William Whewell (1794–1866), polymathic Victorian scientist, philosopher, historian, and educator, was one of the great neologists of the nineteenth century. Although Whewell's name is little remembered today except by professional historians and philosophers of science, researchers in many scientific fields work each day in a world that Whewell named. "Miocene" and "Pliocene," "uniformitarian" and "catastrophist," "anode" and "cathode," even the word "scientist" itself—all of these were Whewell coinages. Whewell is particularly important to students of the historical sciences for another (...) word he coined, one that was unfortunately not as successful as many of his others because it is difficult to pronounce. This word, "palaetiology," was the name Whewell gave to the class of sciences that are concerned with historical causation: the class we might today refer to as historical sciences. Although the disciplines Whewell included under the heading of palaetiology might seem to cut across conventional academic boundaries of his day and ours—his exemplary palaetiological sciences were geology and comparative philology—all these fields may be examined together, Whewell argued, because of their common interest in reconstructing the past. ¶ This paper is an essay in the palaetiological sciences, dedicated to Whewell on the bicentennial of his birth, an essay that examines some of the principles, maxims, and rules of procedure that these sciences have all in common. Its first purpose is to demonstrate the continuing validity of Whewell's classification of these sciences through a study of historical representation in three different palaetiological fields: systematics, historical linguistics, and textual transmission. Its second purpose is to continue the development of an extended analogy between historical representation and cartographic representation that I began in an earlier paper (O'Hara, 1993, Systematic Biology), an analogy that makes especially clear the common representational practices that are found throughout palaetiology. (shrink)

ABSTRACTIn response to the rising popularity of empirical models of scholarship and an increasingly sharp sceptic criticism against historiography, early modern historiographers strived to place their reconstruction of the past on a more ‘scientific’ basis through a new approach to historical writing. Their strategies included the mobilization of various other scholarly disciplines, such as geography, chronology, linguistics, ethnography, philology, etc. that came to function as ‘auxiliary sciences’ of early modern historiography. These came to fulfil three main roles in historical (...) writing. Firstly, they supplied knowledge on cultural-historical topics that were newly introduced into the subject range of historiography. Secondly, they offered new solutions to the problem of reliable historical evidence by opening up new sources of historical information. And thirdly, they proved helpful in deciding scholarly discussions among historical writers. Through a detailed study of the use of ‘auxiliary sciences’ in seminal texts from the new current in historical writing, I will shed light on the range of scholarly disciplines that were enlisted in early modern historiography and how they contributed to the development of a new, more ‘scientific’ approach to the reconstruction of the past. (shrink)

From the Series Editor's Introduction: For much of the twentieth century, French intellectual life was dominated by theoreticians and historians of mentalite. Traditionally, the study of the mind and of its limits and capabilities was the domain of philosophy, however in the first decades of the twentieth century practitioners of the emergent human and social sciences were increasingly competing with philosophers in this field: ethnologists, sociologists, psychologists and historians of science were all claiming to study 'how people think'. Scholars, (...) including Gaston Bachelard, Georges Canguilhem, Leon Brunschvicg, Lucien Levy-Bruhl, Lucien Febvre, Abel Rey, Alexandre Koyre and Helene Metzger were all investigating the mind historically and participating in shared research projects. Yet, as they have since been appropriated by the different disciplines, literature on their findings has so far failed to recognise the connections between their research and their importance in intellectual history.In this exemplary book, Cristina Chimisso reconstructs the world of these intellectuals and the key debates in the philosophy of mind, particularly between those who studied specific mentalities by employing prevalently historical and philological methods, and those who thought it possible to write a history of the mind, outlining the evolution of ways of thinking that had produced the modern mentality. Dr Chimisso situates the key French scholars in their historical context and shows how their ideas and agendas were indissolubly linked with their social and institutional positions, such as their political and religious allegiances, their status in academia, and their familial situation.The author employs a vast range of original research, using philosophical and scientific texts as well as archive documents, correspondence and seminar minutes from the period covered, to recreate the milieu in which these relatively neglected scholars made advances in the history of philosophy and science, and produced ideas that would greatly influence later intellectuals such as Foucault, Derrida and Bourdieu. This book will appeal to historians of science and philosophy, particularly Continental philosophy, and those with interest in the history of ideas and the historiography of the disciplines of the social sciences. (shrink)

While interest in early modern herbaria has so far mainly concentrated on the dried plants stored in them, this paper addresses another of their qualities – their role as manuscripts. In the 1670s, the German botanist Paul Hermann (1646–95) spent several years in Ceylon (today Sri Lanka) as a medical officer in the service of the Dutch East India Company. During his stay he put together four herbaria, two of which contain a wealth of handwritten notes by himself and several (...) later owners. First, it will be shown that these notes provide information on the linguistic skills and interests of those who collected plants in an overseas trading settlement. Hermann’s botanical practice demanded and, at the same time, generated knowledge of Sinhalese (an Indo-Aryan language that is spoken by the largest ethnic group on the island) and its script. In his herbarium, observations on the semantics, morphology, and pronunciation of Sinhalese are inextricably intertwined with those of botanical nature. Second, on the basis of these voluminous notes, the character of early modern herbaria as manuscripts will be highlighted. And third, Hermann’s herbaria will be integrated into an investigation of scribal practices and publication strategies of eighteenth-century botany. Along with field notes, letters, manuscripts, illustrations, and printed books, herbaria were knots in the textual–visual mesh of early modern botany. (shrink)

This article explores the potential resources of the Bakhtin’s theory of dialogism and its core concepts for the development of the philosophy and methodology of the human sciences. Focusing on Bakhtin’s late essays: “The Problem of the Text in Linguistics, Philology, and the Human Sciences;” “From Notes Made in 1970-71;” and “Toward a Methodology for the Human Sciences,” the author deals with such concepts as sense, semantic whole, superaddressee, the third, and outsideness. Metalinguistics is interpreted as a philosophical approach (...) to the problems of humanities methodology. The specifics of the human sciences, which Bakhtin put to the question, are described in comparison and correlation with the natural sciences. The author elaborates the idea of the communicative three-part relationship or trilogue. The role of the superaddressee as the third participant of the trilogue between the researcher and the text is discussed. The notion semantic whole and its implementation in the process of the sense’s becoming are analyzed. (shrink)

By a thorough study of the Posterior Analytics and related Aristotelian texts, Richard McKirahan reconstructs Aristotle's theory of episteme--science. The Posterior Analytics contains the first extensive treatment of the nature and structure of science in the history of philosophy, and McKirahan's aim is to interpret it sympathetically, following the lead of the text, rather than imposing contemporary frameworks on it. In addition to treating the theory as a whole, the author uses textual and philological as well as philosophical (...) material to interpret many important but difficult individual passages. A number of issues left obscure by the Aristotelian material are settled by reference to Euclid's geometrical practice in the Elements. To justify this use of Euclid, McKirahan makes a comparative analysis of fundamental features of Euclidian geometry with the corresponding elements of Aristotle's theory. Emerging from that discussion is a more precise and more complex picture of the relation between Aristotle's theory and Greek mathematics--a picture of mutual, rather than one-way, dependence. Originally published in 1992. The Princeton Legacy Library uses the latest print-on-demand technology to again make available previously out-of-print books from the distinguished backlist of Princeton University Press. These editions preserve the original texts of these important books while presenting them in durable paperback and hardcover editions. The goal of the Princeton Legacy Library is to vastly increase access to the rich scholarly heritage found in the thousands of books published by Princeton University Press since its founding in 1905. (shrink)

This work, by two of the most innovative and challenging of contemporary thinkers, pivots on a Remark added by Hegel in 1831 to the second edition of his Science of Logic. As a model of close reading applied both to philosophical texts and the making of philosophical systems, The Speculative Remark played a significant role in transforming the practice of philosophy away from system building to analysis of specific linguistic detail, with meticulous attention to etymological, philological, and rhetorical nuance. (...) The authors use their extended examination of the Remark to delineate certain overall strategies in several Hegelian texts that militate for language-oriented readings of Hegel, as shown in Nancy's redefinition of such key terms as aufhebung, mediation, and speculation. (shrink)

This essay examines Giambattista Vico’s philology as a contribution to democratic legitimacy. I outline three steps in Vico’s account of the historical and political development of philological knowledge. First, his merger of philosophy and philology, and the effects of that merge on the relative claims of reason and authority. Second, his use of antiquarian knowledge to supersede historicist accounts of change in time and to position the plebian social class as the true arbiters of language. Third, his understanding (...) of philological knowledge as an instrument of political change, and a foundational element in the establishment of democracy. By treating the philological imagination as a tool for bringing about political change, Vico’s plebian philology is radically democratic, and a crucial instrument in the struggle against the elite, from antiquity to the present. -/- . (shrink)

This article, originally meant for an Auroville publication, consists mainly, besides the quotations, of a wide range of suggestions related to a transcultural approach to various questions raised by transdisciplinary research. All these suggestions converge on a central focus; the virtual reality of a subject/object interaction that eludes narrow disciplinary restrictions as well as rigid cultural definitions. Here, significantly, etymology seems to lead towards mythical cultural watersheds, just as philology has been offering clues to some fundamental philosophical discoveries, from (...) Nietsche to G. Colli. The recent impact of Orientalist studies leads further into the same initiatic dimension, wherein metaphysics, ontology, aesthetics, linguistics, cosmology and psychology, all blend in a continuum of psychic experience, while variations of conscious awareness could only be described, and not sharply differentiated. All this would point, not only to the emergence of new cognitive methods, but also to correspondingly adequate means of expression. A transcultural approach could, moreover, provide vital links between today's originality and the spiritual traditions of the past, adding thus a sense of cultural continuity to our endeavours in understanding evolution. (shrink)

In lieu of an abstract, here is a brief excerpt of the content:Semina Ignis:The Interplay of Science and Myth in the Song of SilenusMichael Paschalis1. Introductionhinc lapides Pyrrhae iactos, Saturnia regna,Caucasiasque refert uolucris furtumque Promethei(Virg. Ecl. 6.41-42)The list of myths in Virgil's Eclogues 6.41-42 has intrigued critics since the time of Servius. The problem most commonly pointed out is its lack of chronological and logical order vis-à-vis the mainstream mythological tradition. Virgil does not mention the first creation of man (...) but passes directly to his regeneration from Pyrrha's stones. This is the story of the repopulation of the earth after the Flood and hence ought to have preceded Saturn's reign, which presumably represents man's initial happy state. In addition, Prometheus' punishment comes before his theft of fire; this could indeed be interpreted as a hysteron proteron, but there remains the difficulty that Prometheus is Deucalion's father and Pyrrha's uncle1 and his furtum ought to have preceded Pyrrha's creation of mankind.The majority of critics believe that there is indeed a lack of chronological order and that it is deliberate. I will give a few examples. Zeph Stewart claims that the chronological problem is explicable in terms of Virgil's intention to give random examples of one branch of didactic poetry associated with the name of Hesiod, that is, genealogical and mythological tales of the origin and early history of mankind.2 According to Eleanor Leach the displacement of chronology aims at puzzling readers and causing them to seek an explanation. She furthermore makes the [End Page 201] important observation that these myths "may even seem contradictory for they are not all commonly found in the same accounts" and proceeds to explain that "they provide three distinct ideas of the nature of mankind."3 Charles Segal thinks that behind the deliberate chronological disorder, there is a theme which is central for the song of Silenus, namely "the flawed character of human existence and man's removal from any absolute purity of life or spirit."4 Other critics, however, see no chronological problem in the order of myths. Boyle and Clausen, for instance, note a progression from the creation of mankind (the myth of Pyrrha) to the golden age (Saturn's reign) and from there to the age of technology (Prometheus' theft of fire), which they interpret either as mankind's fall from a happy state or as morally indifferent.5 Patricia Johnston has argued that the relation of men generated from stones to the Saturnia regna conforms to a consistent chronological pattern in Virgil's works and to an overall conception of the Golden Age, which in her view "appears to require that it be preceded by a race of mortals hardened either by primitive existence or by military activities."6In what follows I intend to suggest a somewhat different approach to the passage in question. The interpretation I propose is based on arguments derived from the close relation of these myths to the preceding "scientific" section. The two sections share thematic and semantic features which, as I show in part 4 of this essay, are also prominent in other parts of Eclogue 6.In an article published in 1923 Günther Jachmann7 made two points which are important for any discussion of Virgil's cosmogony and the section on Pyrrha and Prometheus:1. Jachmann objected to Servius' observation that line 41 begins a new section ("relictis prudentibus rebus de mundi origine, subito ad fabulas transitum fecit"), which the majority of Virgilian scholars have adopted without giving it much thought. He pointed out that the initial cosmogony forms a thematic whole with the section treating the origin (Pyrrha) and early history of man (Saturn's reign and the theft of fire by Prometheus). Jachmann noted in this respect that a similar pattern is visible in Orpheus' song in Apollonius (Arg. 1.496-511.), one of the models of Virgil's cosmogony. The difference is that Orpheus' cosmogony [End Page 202] is followed by a theogony and focuses on the gods (503-11), while Silenus' cosmogony is followed by an anthropogony and focuses on man, approximately as Ovid, Metamorphoses 1.76-150... (shrink)

This essay seeks to make the case for reading hermeneutic philosophy of science with Feyerabend. In addition, there is the question of science, as Nietzsche raises this question along with Feyerabend’s programmatic recommendations for traditional philosophy of science. Including a discussion of method in history as in theology and philology, including Nietzsche’s hermeneutics, this essay reviews Feyerabend’s exchanges with Lakatos along with the resistance of mainstream philosophy of science to hermeneutics as such. A discussion of (...) Feyerabend’s ‘gods’ engages what he invokes as ontological abundance as well as his criticism of the limitations of Popper’s critique of Parmenides requiring both historical/historiographical context, an understanding of science in practice, via a contextualization of Schrodinger, and via Plato’s epistemology along with Duhem on experiment and Riegl on style, crucial for Feyerabend on the notion of ‘progress,’ key for Lakatos and others, in art and science. (shrink)

In lieu of an abstract, here is a brief excerpt of the content:American Journal of Philology 125.1 (2004) 140-144 [Access article in PDF] C. J. Tuplin and T. E. Rihll, eds. Science and Mathematics in Ancient Greek Culture. Foreword by Lewis Wolpert. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2002. xvi + 379 pp. 21 black-and white ills. 3 tables. Cloth, $80. It has become something of a truism to say that, whatever their ambitions for abstraction, scientists remain profoundly caught up (...) in the life of their culture. Yet, that is a truism only at a certain level. No one is surprised to hear that Euclid had to eat and drink just like everyone else and relied on royal patronage for the leisure to pursue his studies, but it may occasion surprise to learn that the shape of his number theory should owe something to the particular way in which his eye fell upon a multiplication table. That Galen was influenced by his teachers is not news; but that his commitment to a particular school of philosophy could cause him to see and not see certain things when he was conducting dissections—here is something of interest. The papers in this volume, which were first delivered at a conference in Liverpool in 1996, have it as their common task to show how ancient forms of life influenced the pursuit and acquisition of knowledge on the part of scientists like Euclid and Galen.Heading the collection is a study by Andrew Barker of some idiosyncratic features of Greek harmonic theory. Archytas, Aristotle, and Ptolemy each attempted to characterize the physical basis of the two opposite sound qualities, oxusand barus. As Aristotle himself observed, the terms are metaphors drawn from the tactile realm, and trouble arose because in that realm they are heterogeneous opposites, i.e., the proper opposites of "sharp" and "heavy" are "dull" and "light." Barker uncovers a corresponding uncertainty in the texts about whether these sound qualities should be analyzed as something more like weight or something more like sharpness. Thus, an excessive trust in the descriptive adequacy of ordinary language terms led these thinkers to frustration.Harry Hine's paper on earthquakes and vulcanology deals with ancient knowledge of two phenomena that elicited the attention of scientist and non-scientist alike. Like Barker, Hine draws our attention to a terminological deficiency: although there was a fairly elaborate vocabulary for seismoi, neither Greek nor Latin possessed a generic noun that could properly be translated as [End Page 140] "volcano." This deficiency seems to be correlated with the fact that earthquakes form a regular part of the meteorological curriculum, while volcanoes usually received independent treatment in works such as the Aetna. Particularly intriguing is Hine's suggestion that the opinion of locals, especially sailors, may have been the source of certain scientific theses about volcanoes, e.g., that Aetna's behavior was closely correlated with the weather.The difference between ancient astronomy as practiced and as it was popularly believed to operate is the subject of Alan Bowen's paper. His central question is, when did astronomers first set out to make predictions of eclipses? The surprising answer is that, despite popular beliefs to the contrary, such prediction was never practiced by astronomers in a serious way before Ptolemy. Along with scrutiny of the misunderstanding in Herodotus, Diodorus, and Pliny, the paper offers thorough analysis of the most well-documented "prediction," that of a lunar eclipse that took place the night before the battle of Pydna in 167 B.C.E., which was supposedly foreseen by the Roman (!) general C. Sulpicius Gallus. Bowen casts doubts upon the entire tradition, showing how adherence to an ideology of the well-rounded commander led the sources to inflate his achievement: while some reports have Gallus simply assuaging his troops' fears at the event, others have him explaining its causes or even foretelling it. Bowen's skepticism is well founded, and one must regard these supposed feats of eclipse-prediction as a kind of science fiction, prescient yet false all the same.R. Hanna's subject is the format and function of the parapegma calendar first devised by... (shrink)

Scholars in the early seventeenth century who studied ancient Greek scientific theories often drew upon philology and history to reconstruct a more general picture of the Greek past. Gassendi's training as a humanist historiographer enabled him to formulate a conception of the history of philosophy in which the rationality of scientific and philosophical inquiry depended on the historical justifications which he developed for his beliefs. Professor Joy examines this conception and analyzes the nature of Gassendi's historical training, especially its (...) relationship to his career as a physicist and astronomer. She shows how he rehabilitated Epicurean atomism by bringing together the arguments of the Greek atomists and those of his contemporaries. In doing so, he produced an account of the natural world which made it an object of empirical study and mechanical explanation. (shrink)

ArgumentBer Borochov, the Marxist Zionist revolutionary who founded the political party Poyle Tsien, was also one of the key theoreticians of Yiddish scholarship. His landmark 1913 essay, “The Tasks of Yiddish Philology,” was his first contribution to the field and crowned him as its chief ideologue. Modeled after late nineteenth-century European movements of linguistic nationalism, “The Tasks” was the first articulation of Yiddish scholarship as a discrete field of scientific research. His tasks ranged from the practical: creating a standardized (...) dictionary and grammar, researching the origins and development of the language, and establishing a language institute; to the overtly ideological: the “nationalizing and humanizing” of the Yiddish language and its speakers. The essay brought a new level of sophistication to the field, established several of its ideological pillars, and linked Yiddish scholarship to the material needs of the Jewish people. Although “The Tasks” was greeted with a great deal of skepticism upon its publication, after his death, Borochov became widely accepted as the “founder” of modern Yiddish studies. (shrink)

Forums, I extensively analysed Tartaglia’s corpus: science of weights, geometry, arithmetic, mathematics and physics–trajectories of the projectiles, fortifications, included its intelligibility science in the military architecture. The latter is exposed in Book VI of the Quesiti et invention diverse (hereafter Quesiti). In Quesiti there is La Gionta del sesto libro—a kind of appendix to the Book VI containing drawings of the geometric shape of the Italian fortifications. It is based on Euclidean geometry and other figures where a scale (...) is displayed. The interest—included intellectual history and cultural foundations of science—is: what is the role–played by La Gionta del sesto libro in the Quesiti? Is it independent booklet/speeches? If yes, when Tartaglia did write it? In this paper, I present an historical–philological–foundational hypothesis on the Tartaglia’s fortifications corpus, as exposed in the Book VI and La Gionta del sesto libro; with respect to dates of editions of Quesiti (1546, 1554). This goal is important to make historically clear both the editorial role–played by Curzio Troiano Navò (fl. 16th) in the Tartaglia’s corpus before—after Tartaglia’s death (1557) and the particular interest and development of subject of fortifications by Tartaglia between 1537–1546 and 1554. (shrink)

The modern reinterpretations of Vico are a good example of the rethinking by historians of one age of the rethinking by historians of previous ages of the original thought of a philosopher. The present volume stresses the unique unity of theory and practice in Vico's thought and dispels some unfounded criticisms, such as his alleged reliance on the geometric method, inconsistencies in his use of the terms "philosophy" and "philology," and the mechanical acceptance of the patterns of development of (...) Greece and Rome as the patterns for all nations. Above all, it is suggested that, although Providence was central to Vico's conception of historical development, his system does not collapse by modern rejection of this force. The principle of the continuity of human nature which lies at the core of Dilthey's insight into the special character of history was stated in its pure form by Vico a century and a half earlier. Vico's ideas were sharpened in his critiques of Grotius, Selden, Pufendorf, and Francis Bacon. While drawing some positive inspiration from each, he found in them the common deficiency of reading their own abstract principles into history. Descartes, however, emerges as Vico's bête noire because of his dismissal of history as incapable of producing certainty. Vico's biting polemic against Descartes pales the criticisms of Arnauld and Gassendi, and, at the same time, illustrates the sweep and power of his own historically-grounded concepts. The author gives major attention to Vico's notion of the limits of knowledge, to his notion of cause, to the historicity of human society and its laws and governments, to the vital role of language, to the distinction between imaginative universals and rational universals, and to the necessary union in his New Science of philosophy and philology. Manson is an unrestrained admirer of Vico and he makes no effort to dilute his enthusiasm by taking critical exception to any fundamental aspect of Vico's epistemology.--H. B. (shrink)