Dieses Kapitel gibt einen Überblick über philosophische Debatten zum Umgang mit menschlicher Mobilität über nationalstaatliche Grenzen. Dabei wird zum einen auf die Diskussion über ein staatliches Recht auf Ausschluss bzw. ein individuelles Recht auf Einwanderung eingegangen, zum anderen wird die Frage beleuchtet, wer aufgrund einer besonderen Bedrohungslage im Herkunftsland einen Anspruch auf Aufnahme hat und wie Pflichten zur Aufnahme von Geflüchteten unter den Staaten zu verteilen sind.

El estudio de la paralingüística, esto es, los modos de comunicar sin recurrir al lenguaje, ya sea de manera consciente, intencional y voluntaria, o de algún otro modo, es un componente esencial de cualquier intento por reconstruir, comprender e interpretar los sistemas de comunicación cultural, social, institucional, moral e interpersonal en las sociedades modernas y antiguas. Tres aspectos específicos de la paralingüística, tal como son descritos en la oratoria ática, son examinados en este artículo: el rostro y los órganos faciales (...) (como la boca y la nariz), las manos y el modo de andar. La hipótesis es que las referencias a la paralingüística apuntan a ganarse al auditorio en el tribunal o en las asambleas políticas suscitando emociones e incitando una guerra entre los oponentes del orador y la comunidad ateniense, cuyos valores culturales y creencias, según son presentados, los oponentes transgreden. (shrink)

Socialism is a large and diverse political tradition, unified by opposition to capitalism. Economically, socialists also typically support common ownership or some form of social, democratic control over the bulk of the means of production. There are various views on whether this requires central planning or is compatible with some form of market economy. Others understand socialism as a set of values, and either way, those who understand socialism in economic terms are often motivated by what they see as the (...) ills of capitalism and the values that can be realized in a socialist society in their pursuit of these economic changes. Socialist values include ending exploitation and alienation and replacing them with human flourishing and self-realization, community, distributive justice, equality, and freedom. Some also see socialism as the way to environmental sustainability, gender equality, and racial justice. The question of socialist strategy—how to achieve socialism—has often been posed as a dichotomy between reform and revolution. This inadequately captures the content of fundamental disagreements among socialists. Instead, the disagreement can be understood as varying views on the use of parliamentary democracy in a capitalist state, the pace of social change, and the nature of the envisioned changes. (shrink)

Abstract This article examines the little-explored remarks on verification in Wittgenstein's notebooks during the period between 1930 and 1932. In these remarks, Wittgenstein connects a verificationist theory of meaning with the notion of logical multiplicity, understood as a space of possibilities: a proposition is verified by a fact if and only if the proposition and the fact have the same logical multiplicity. But while in his early philosophy logical multiplicities were analysed as an outcome of the formal properties of simple (...) objects and simple signs, Wittgenstein in the early 1930s connects the notion of logical multiplicity with the notion of ways of seeing. I will argue that the relevant ways of seeing are closely similar to seeing-as or aspect seeing. According to Wittgenstein's view in the early 1930s, logical multiplicities are part of our perceptual experience of propositions and facts. In this sense, the verification relation depends on how we experience propositions and facts as being surrounded by a logical space of possibilities. Strikingly, Wittgenstein's way of thinking about the verification relation offers solutions to a set of seemingly intractable problems connected with the versions of verificationism developed by members of the Vienna Circle. (shrink)

Gegenstand des Bandes ist eine umfassende Evaluation epistemischer, praktischer, veridiktiver Sachverhalte aus der Perspektive jener Modi des Nichtgelingens, der Störung oder der Irritation, die unter dem Stichwort „Irrtum“ verhandelt werden. Dies soll aber nicht nur aus der Perspektive der Negativität geschehen, vielmehr soll gefragt werden, inwieweit der Irrtum zum Ausgangspunkt und zur Bedingung gelingender epistemischer Praktiken zu werden vermag. Doch was ermöglicht und garantiert die Unterscheidung von Wahrheit und Irrtum? Was sind die Kriterien einer solchen Unterscheidung? Wer ist unter welchen (...) Bedingungen in der Lage und berechtigt, den Irrtum zu erkennen und als einen solchen festzustellen? Welche Instanzen sind an dieser Unterscheidung beteiligt und hierfür legimitiert? Vermögen wir aus Irrtümern zu lernen? Hier tut sich ein breites Problemfeld auf, das sich zunächst aus dem Antagonismus von Irrtum und Wahrheit ergibt. Diesen Facetten von Irrtum soll in der ganzen interdisziplinären Breite in der lateinischen und griechisch-byzantinischen, in der arabischen und hebräischen Tradition, in der Laien- und der Gelehrtenwelt, aber auch in der Alltagskultur nachgegangen werden. (shrink)

This article elucidates the spatial order that underpins the politics of the Anthropocene – the ecological nomos of the earth – and criticizes its imperial origins and legacies. It provides a critical reading of Carl Schmitt’s spatial thought to not only illuminate the spatio-political ontology but also the violence and usurpations that characterize the Anthropocene condition. The article first shows how with the emergence of the ecological nomos seemingly ‘natural’ spaces like the biosphere and the atmosphere became politically charged. This (...) challenges the modernist separation between natural facts and political norms. It then underlines the imperial origins of this nomos by introducing the concept of air-appropriation understood as the colonization of atmospheric space by CO2 emissions. Instead of assuming that the ecological nomos represents a transition from a colonial to an ecological and cosmopolitan world order, focusing on air-appropriation highlights forms of ecological imperialism that go along with the new nomos. Accordingly, the article calls for a just redistribution of ecospace that takes into account the imperial legacies and ongoing effects of air-appropriation. (shrink)

Hegels Theorie des äußeren Staatsrechts in seinen "Grundlinien der Philosophie des Rechts" weist ausdrücklich Kants Idee eines Völkerbundes in der Schrift "Zum ewigen Frieden" als unrealistisch zurück; es gebe "keinen Prätor, höchstens Schiedsrichter und Vermittler zwischen Staaten, und auch diese nur zufälligerweise." Beide Konzepte – die Unausweichlichkeit auch gewaltsamer Konfrontationen der Staaten bei Hegel, die Möglichkeit ihrer rechtlichen Integration bei Kant – bilden den Gegenstand dieses Buchs. In den Beiträgen des Bandes geht es nicht nur um die Rekonstruktion der Theorien (...) Hegels und Kants, sondern auch um ihr Weiterdenken unter den heutigen Bedingungen der Globalisierung und asymmetrischer Kriege. Mit Beiträgen von: Samir Arnautovic, Andreas Arndt, Werner Becker, Hans-Georg Bensch, Paul Cruysberghs, Kazimir Drilo, Walter Jaeschke, Jean-François Kervegan, Heinz Kimmerle, Igor Mikecin, Vladimir Milisavljevic, Zvonko Posavec, Vahidin Preljevic, Andrzej Przylebski, Davor Rodin, Leo Šešerko und Jure Zovko. (shrink)

The contribution of Jesuits to the different fields of knowledge, including philosophy, is historically well known. In fact, since the foundation of the Society of Jesus, in the 16th century, Jesuits from different generations and cultures have taken part in the philosophical debates of their time and their different contexts. Since the foundation of the Society of Jesus, in 1540, the Jesuits, individually and as a body, have engaged in a fruitful dialogue between the Christian tradition and different dimensions of (...) human culture. During almost five centuries, numerous Jesuits taught philosophy in academic institutions all over the world. Some of them have their names recorded in the history of philosophy. Of course, the majority of them is not anymore remembered, despite their valuable contribution to the development of the Jesuit intellectual tradition up to our times. In fact, as an heir of the Roman College, the first academic institution founded by the Society of Jesus, in 1551, the Pontifical Gregorian University, in Rome, is a witness to this tradition, which has been kept alive thanks to the discrete work of both Jesuits and lay intellectuals. Known as the University of the Nations, this institution corroborates not only the capacity of the Jesuit tradition to put faith in dialogue with reason, but also the option to take the concrete reality of each human culture and its historical context as its point of departure. The Jesuits’ willingness to engage in dialogue with different intellectual perspectives is underpinned by one of the most defining traits of the Jesuit charism, namely, the conviction that God can be found and served in all things. Accordingly, Jesuits have adopted, from the beginning, an amenable stance towards the world with its different cultures and intellectual trends. As such, Jesuits have, since the beginning, inhabited the frontiers of human thought. According to the contemporary philosopher Paul Gilbert, SJ, within the institutions under the leadership of the Society of Jesus, it was always possible to maintain an equilibrium between two principles: “intellectual unity” and “openness to the world.” Without detriment to the Jesuit identity, the companions of Ignatius have been willing to dwell in the various dimensions of human reality, in their multiplicity and plurality. Either in the renewal of Aristotle’s and Aquinas’ metaphysics, or in the dialogue with modern philosophers such as Descartes, Kant, or Hegel, and even in the inculturation in non-European contexts, the Jesuits have been able to preserve the Christian tradition through an original development of human culture in all its richness and diversity. With respect to the last century, it has to be acknowledged that a significant number of Jesuits made significant contributions, with recognized competence, to philosophy. Certainly, the 20th century was particularly complex in many respects. It would be enough to recall that this period, which brought with it unprecedented social, scientific, and technological developments, was also the stage for the two World Wars. With the emergence or consolidation of philosophical currents such as Marxism, Phenomenology, Existentialism, Structuralism, and Post-Modernism, the past century was, without any doubt, fascinating from the intellectual point of view. Jesuits such as Karl Rahner, Frederick Copleston, Bernard Lonergan, William Norris Clarke, John F. Kavanaugh, Teilhard de Chardin, Gaston Fessard, Jean Daniélou, Henri de Lubac, Michel de Certeau, Xavier Tilliette, Paul Valadier, Paweł Siwek, Ignacio Ellacuría, Francisco Taborda, Henrique de Lima Vaz and, in the Portuguese context, Diamantino Martins or Júlio Fragata, among many others, were able to engage different philosophical currents, problems and controversies of their times. Faithful to their long tradition of being present in the frontiers of thought, those Jesuits have engaged in a fruitful dialogue with these intellectual trends, offering relevant contributions to different ongoing debates. Within this context, the present volume recalls and discusses the philosophical contribution of some of the most prominent Jesuit protagonists of the intellectual interchange that took place in the 20th century. This volume also intends to celebrate the 75th anniversary of the Revista Portuguesa de Filosofia, which happens just before the inauguration of the Ignatian Year. Decreed by Father Arturo Sosa, the Superior General of the Society of Jesus, this celebratory Year will start on May 20, 2021, precisely 500 years after Ignatius of Loyola, the founder of the Jesuit Order, was wounded at the battle of Pamplona. We are happy that this volume could bring together outstanding specialists in the thought of some of the most prominent Jesuits philosophers of the last century, namely Paul Valadier, Paul Gilbert, Józef Bremer, Jacek Poznański, Alexander Maar, Patrick H. Byrne, M. Ross Romero, Carlos Alvarez, Hélio Pereira Lima, José Gama, Domingos Terra, Gabriel Flynn, Marie-Gabrielle Lemaire, José Sols Lucia, Lorena Zuchel Lovera, Pedro Pablo Achondo Moya, Enzo Solari, Massimo Borghesi, Mendo Castro Henriques, João Barbosa, and Dominique Lambert. In addition, in the celebration of the 100th anniversary of Júlio Fragata’s birth, Maria Teresa Fragata presents a memory of his life and thought. We hope that this volume may be useful to all those interested in the Jesuit philosophical tradition. Hopefully, it will stimulate scholars to pursue a fruitful and creative dialogue with contemporary philosophy, in the footsteps of the Jesuit philosophers featured here. We would like to thank all the authors and all those who, in different ways, made this volume possible. (shrink)

Within the European history of ideas, at least three conceptions of metamorphosis can be distinguished. First, as celebrated in Ovid’s Metamorphoses, there is the vision of an open-ended flux of shapes in all directions, potentially with the ambiguous result of wavering identity. Secondly, at the centre of the synoptic gospels Jesus’s transfiguration is presented as a luminous elevation, rendering his true nature unambiguous. Thirdly, alchemy conceives of metamorphosis as contingent upon a meeting of polarities. The distinction is fit to disclose (...) crucial aspects of works of art, particularly of musical compositions. (shrink)

This paper argues for two claims. (1) In his biological views, Kenelm Digby tries to reconcile aspects of an Aristotelian theory of composite substance with early modern corpuscularianism. (2) From a methodological point of view, he uses the Stoic-Epicurean epistemology of common notions in order to show the adequacy of his conciliatory approach. The first claim is substantiated by an analysis of Digby’s views on the role of mixture and homogeneity in the process of animal generation. The second claim is (...) substantiated by an analysis of Digby’s views on the role of the concept of quantity in the evaluation of scientific hypotheses. Both arguments make use of the context of Digby’s philosophy: the first argument draws on his background in the work of early modern corpuscularian Aristotelians such as Daniel Sennert; the second argument draws on his background in the epistemology of Pierre Gassendi. (shrink)

Para el pensamiento especulativo de Hegel, parece que lo que desde Husserl y Alfred Schütz se llama «Lebenswelt» no tiene ningún significado sistemático especial. Justamente lo que se refiere a la conciencia del mundo de la vida parece mostrarse solo en su aspecto negativo: como modos de conocimiento deficitarios, contaminados de sensibilidad, como ausencia de la razón y de su concepto –como «no-razón»- y por tanto como renuncia a la razón. El saber inmediato en el sentido de la «creencia» de (...) Jacobi, cuyo concepto ciertamente se retrotrae de hecho a la filosofía del sentido común de Thomas Reid, es para Hegel –según la indicación del §63 de la Enciclopedia de 1830- «lo mismo que en otros lugares se llama inspiración, revelación en el corazón, contenido implantado por la naturaleza en el ser humano e incluso también, de modo particular, sano entendimiento humano, common sense, sentido común. Todas estas formas cumplen el mismo cometido: la inmediatez con que se encuentra un contenido en la conciencia, un hecho en su interior lo convierten en principio.». (shrink)

The Unified Enterprise Modelling Language (UEML) aims to support precise semantic definition of a wide variety of enterprise- and IS-modelling languages. In the longer run, it is also intended as a...

While Wittgenstein examines the relationship between language and the world in the Tractatus, he establishes a paradox which cancels out the possibility of the work being either true or nonsense. The crucial question arises as to whether this paradox succeeds in undermining the whole work or whether the work continues to function in some way in spite of it. In this article, I explain why previous interpretations aiming to resolve the tractarian paradox have failed, for instance the “traditional view” and (...) the “resolute reading view”. My purpose is to propose a third interpretation, which I believe constitutes a possible resolution of the tractarian paradox, since, through this, the role of the paradox is clarified, namely to create space for mysticism. (shrink)

We introduce strong Goodstein principles which are true but unprovable in strong impredicative theories like IDn.

: In a recent issue of Der Islam, Stephen R. Shoemaker has contributed an extensive article in which he challenged the processes and findings of a number of studies conducted by Gregor Schoeler, Harald Motzki, and Andreas Görke. The following article offers a response to his findings. Whereas the three authors argued the case for the possibility that authentic traditions of the first century of the Hijra can be reconstructed, Shoemaker holds the contrary point of view, as already stated (...) in the abstract of his study: “While az-Zuhrī and occasionally other authorities of his generation can often be persuasively linked with the tradition in question, the reach back to ’Urwa is generally not convincing …” Yet he is not entirely consistent in his views. In his study several statements are to be found that in fact support the views of the authors whose studies he critically examines. Overall, Shoemaker makes more concessions towards the possible authenticity of some of the material traced back to the first century than any “sceptic” prior to him. Unfortunately, Shoemaker’s criticism and rendering of the three authors’ studies is fraught with misunderstandings and inconsistencies. They are the focus of attention in this critical review. In addition, hitherto unknown traditions as well as sources that Shoemaker mentions without quoting or paraphrasing them will be presented. This material also challenges a number of Shoemaker’s key conclusions. (shrink)

In responding to Barbara Herrnstein Smith's article, “The Chimera of Relativism: A Tragicomedy,” this essay addresses a number of recently published research papers attempting to identify the neuronal correlates of cultural selves. However, underlying these studies of the “cultures of human nature” are some very strong assumptions about the nature of human culture. Current discussions of cultural effects on the brain are therefore not simply about reducing identity to brain states; they also show how a notion of identity is transformed (...) and reconfigured by its relation to a brain domain of knowledge making. Understanding these dynamics, both at a discourse level and at a brain level, this piece suggests, may provide a useful case for a contemporary discussion of relativism. (shrink)

A central claim of biosemiotics is the ascription of semiotic competence to nonhumans. For strange historical reasons, this claim has been quite controversial in much of standard biological discourse. An analysis of ethnographic material from Greenland demonstrates that people regard animals as nonhuman "persons". i.e., as sensing and thinking beings. Like humans. animals are supposed to have knowledge about their environment. Taking this semiotic competence as a fact beyond any doubt enables skilled hunters and fishermen to rely not only on (...) their own interpretation of the environment. but also on the animals' interpretation of their environment The behaviour of fish, seals, and land animals, meditated by their acknowledged semiotic competence, can thus be interpreted as giving signs about the behaviour, e.g., of whales and icebergs. This a priori ascription of semiotic competence is also apparent in discussions about management and regulation of animals. Rather than discussing whether "the stock" is depleted, much of the discourse among fishermen and hunters focuses on whether animals can be semiotically disturbed by what people are doing. (shrink)