Jede Lebensphilosophie benötigt eine mehr oder weniger umfangreiche hermeneutische Komponente - das ist die These, von der diese Untersuchung ausgeht. Lebensphilosophie ist Prozessphilosophie, und als solche muss sie nach der Erfassbarkeit dynamischer Verläufe fragen. Ein solches Erfassen nennen wir „Verstehen“.0Die Philosophie Henri Bergsons scheint dem nicht zu entsprechen, insofern sie zwar gemeinhin als Lebens- und Prozess-, nicht aber als hermeneutische Philosophie gelesen wird. Die vorliegende Untersuchung versucht, einen neuen, frischen Blick auf seine Texte vorzuschlagen: Sie erörtern Verlaufsformen, in denen der (...) Einzelne und sein Verstehen nur ein Moment des Gesamtprozesses darstellen. Sie fragen, auf welche Weise der Mensch solche Prozesse erfassen, aber auch, wie er sie in Gang setzen, in Gang halten oder neu in Gang bringen kann. (shrink)

Process reliabilism -- Virtue reliabilism: justified belief -- Virtue reliabilism: knowledge -- Knowledge first virtue reliabilism -- The competition -- The safety dilemma -- Lottery cases.

Die vorliegende Untersuchung verfolgt zwei Ziele: erstens die systematische Rekonstruktion der Grundstruktur von Hegels Erkenntnistheorie und Philosophy of Mind auf der Grundlage der Schriften des 'reifen' Systems, insbesondere der Wissenschaft der Logik und der Enzyklopadie. Zweitens die Eroffnung eines wechselseitig fruchtbaren Dialogs zwischen Hegel und der gegenwartigen analytischen Philosophie in den Debatten um Realismus / Antirealismus, Wahrheitstheorie, Externalismus / Internalismus und um die Struktur kognitiver Systeme. Inhaltlich wird der Nachweis gefuhrt, dass im Zentrum von Hegels Philosophy of Mind eine holistische, (...) anti-modulare Theorie des Geistes, im Zentrum seiner Erkenntnistheorie ein anti-skeptischer, anti-reprasentationalistischer, direkter Realismus steht. (shrink)

Virtue epistemology is one of the most flourishing research programmes in contemporary epistemology. Its defining thesis is that properties of agents and groups are the primary focus of epistemic theorising. Within virtue epistemology two key strands can be distinguished: virtue reliabilism, which focuses on agent properties that are strongly truth-conducive, such as perceptual and inferential abilities of agents; and virtue responsibilism, which focuses on intellectual virtues in the sense of character traits of agents, such as open-mindedness and intellectual courage. This (...) volume brings together ten new essays on virtue epistemology, with contributions to both of its key strands, written by leading authors in the field. It will advance the state of the art and provide readers with a valuable overview of what virtue epistemology has achieved. (shrink)

An influential thought-experiment by Derek Parfit sought to establish that people have a preference for unpleasant events to lie in the past rather than the future. In recent discussions of Parfit’s argument, this purported preference is modelled as a discounting phenomenon, as is the tensed emotion of relief, which Arthur Prior argued demonstrated that there is an objective metaphysical difference between the past and the future. Looking at recent work demonstrating some psychological past/future asymmetries that are more clearly instances of (...) discounting I argue that this existing philosophical literature fails to distinguish between what are clearly two quite different psychological phenomena. This affects recent attempts to respond to Prior’s metaphysical argument, because it is not clear that they have identified the right phenomenon to be explained. It also affects Parfit’s thought-experiment, because the purported unitary ‘preference’ may in fact be an amalgam of these two quite different psychological phenomena. (shrink)

The introduction charts Hans-Johann Glock’s academic career, introduces some of his core philosophical views, and provides an overview of the chapters included in the festschrift.

There seems to be a distinctive way in which we can remember events we have experienced ourselves, which differs from the capacity to retain information about events that we can also have when we have not experienced those events ourselves but just learned about them in some other way. Psychologists and increasingly also philosophers have tried to capture this difference in terms of the idea of two different types of memory: episodic memory and semantic memory. Yet, the demarcation between episodic (...) memory and semantic memory remains a contested topic in both disciplines, to the point of there being researchers in each of them who question the usefulness of the distinction between the two concepts. In this paper, I outline a new characterization of the difference between episodic memory and semantic memory, which connects that difference to what is sometimes called the ‘epistemic asymmetry’ between the past and the future, or the ‘epistemic arrow’ of time. My proposal will be that episodic memory and semantic memory exemplify the epistemic asymmetry in two different ways, and for somewhat different reasons, and that the way in which episodic memory exemplifies the epistemic asymmetry is manifest to the remembering subject in a way in which this is not the case for semantic memory. (shrink)

José Ángel Gascón’s essay "Where are dissent and reasons in epistemic justification?" is an exposition of a version of a social functionalist epistemology. I agree with Gascón's emphasis on reasons and on taking into account dissent as important parts of epistemology. But I think that these concerns do not require a social functionalist epistemology, but that, on the contrary, Gascón's social functionalist epistemology throws the baby out with the bathwater. It does so by excluding also a traditional, at its core (...) individualistic epistemology, which defines central concepts like 'justified', 'knowledge' still in individualistic terms as the result of a mental cognizing process but is open to social extensions, e.g. concerning cooperation in the acquisition of knowledge or the transfer of knowledge via argumentation. Such a socially open epistemology with an individualistic core – or "open individualistic epistemology" for short – is also the basis of the epistemological argumentation theory. In the following I want to explain and defend this open individualistic epistemology together with the epistemological argumentation theory (sect. 2) and explain on this basis some problems of Gascón’s theory (sect. 3). (shrink)

_Nietzsche: Naturalism and Interpretation_ offers a resolution of one of the most vexing problems in Nietzsche scholarship. As perhaps the most significant predecessor of more recent attempts to formulate a postmetaphysical epistemology and ontology, Nietzsche is considered by many critics to share this problem with his successors: How can an antifoundationalist philosophy avoid vicious relativism and legitimate its claim to provide a platform for the critique of arguments, practices, and institutions? Christoph Cox argues that Nietzsche successfully navigates between relativism (...) and dogmatism, accepting the naturalistic critique of metaphysics and theology provided by modern science, yet maintaining that a thoroughgoing naturalism must move beyond scientific reductionism. It must accept a central feature of aesthetic understanding: acknowledgment of the primacy and irreducibility of interpretation. This view of Nietzsche's doctrines of perspectivism, becoming, and will to power as products of an overall naturalism balanced by a reciprocal commitment to interpretationism will spur new discussions of epistemology and ontology in contemporary thought. (shrink)

Architekturkritiker und -historiker verwenden eine Vielzahl von Ausdrücken, um anzugeben, was Bauwerke bedeuten. Es ist beispielsweise die Rede davon, dass sie etwas ausdrücken, repräsentieren, zitieren, manifestieren, darstellen oder aussagen; man kann von Gebäuden lesen, die mehrdeutig sind, als Metaphern fungieren oder auf etwas anspielen. In diesem Aufsatz frage ich, wie Bauwerke bedeuten können, um die Grundzüge einer Theorie der Bedeutungsweisen von Bauwerken und ihren Teilen vorzustellen, die als Rahmen für Einzelanalysen und historische Untersuchungen verwendet werden kann. Anstatt die meist unklaren (...) und oft einander widersprechenden Verwendungsweisen der erwähnten Ausdrücke in der Architekturtheorie vergleichend zu analysieren, präsentiere ich zumindest für einige von ihnen Vorschläge, sie für theoretische Zwecke durch technische Termini zu ersetzen, die in den relevanten Anwendungsfällen anstelle der fraglichen Ausdrücke verwendet werden können. Die Vorschläge beruhen auf der allgemeinen Symboltheorie, die Nelson Goodman in Sprachen der Kunst entwickelt hat, und interpretieren die Bedeutungsweisen von Bauwerken damit als Symbolisierungsweisen. (shrink)

We can not just see, hear or feel how things are at a time, but we also have perceptual experiences as of things moving or changing. I argue that such temporal experiences have a content that is tenseless, i.e. best characterized in terms of notions such as 'before' and 'after' (rather than, say, 'past', 'present' and 'future'), and that such experiences are essentially of the nature of a process that takes up time, viz., the same time as the process that (...) is being experienced. Both claims have been made before, though usually separately from each other, and I don't believe the connection between them has been sufficiently recognized. (shrink)

Seit ihrer Verurteilung vor allem im Deutschen Idealismus hatte die Popularphilosophie, in der zweiten Halfte des 18. Jahrhunderts eine der einflussreichsten Stromungen, einen faden Beigeschmack. Dabei verstand sich die Diskussion uber eine Philosophie, die mehr Nahe zum Leben der Menschen suchte, als Teil der umfassenden Selbstverstandnisdebatte von Aufklarung insgesamt. Vor allem die Auseinandersetzung mit der kritischen Philosophie Kants zwang dazu, Anspruch, Grenzen und Moglichkeiten popularer Philosophie zu uberdenken. So wurde Popularitat zu Programm und Problem von Philosophie, damals wie heute. - (...) Der vorliegende Band zeichnet die Geschichte der Popularphilosophie nach: ihre Vorgeschichte, die Diskussion im 18. und ihre Nachklange im 19. und fruhen 20. Jahrhundert bis hin zur gegenwartigen Auseinandersetzung. Since its condemnation, above all by German idealism, popular philosophy, which had been one of the most influential movements of the 18th century, had a negative connotation. The discussion about a philosophy which tried to get closer to peoples lives did however see itself as a part of the widespread debate on self-understanding of Enlightenment as a whole. It was mainly the study of Kant's critical philosophy which forced people to rethink the demands, limitations and possibilties of popular philosophy. Thus popularity became the agenda and the problem of philosophy, then as now. This volume traces the history of popular philosophy: its previous history, the discussion in the 18th century and its reverberations in the 19th and early 20th centuries up to the present time. (shrink)

In this chapter, I discuss some ways in which debates about temporal experience intersect with wider debates about the nature of perception in general. In particular, I suggest that bearing in mind some general questions about the nature of perception can help with demarcating different theoretical approaches to temporal experience. Much of the current debate about temporal experience in philosophy is framed in terms of a debate between three specific main positions sometimes referred to as the extensional model, the retentional (...) model and the cinematic model. It is typically assumed that the differences between these three models are obvious. Yet, on closer inspection, it turns out to be surprisingly difficult to make out what exactly distinguishes the cinematic model from the extensional one, on the one hand, and from the retentional model, on the other. I criticise some existing ways in which the models are sometimes demarcated from one another, before suggesting that the differences between the three views become clearer if the debate between them is seen as turning on contrasting pictures of the nature of perceptual experience they embody. (shrink)

This paper explores the phenomenon of meta-emotions. Meta-emotions are emotions people have about their own emotions. We analyze the intentional structure of meta-emotions and show how psychological findings support our account. Acknowledgement of meta-emotions can elucidate a number of important issues in the philosophy of mind and, more specifically, the philosophy and psychology of emotions. Among them are (allegedly) ambivalent or paradoxical emotions, emotional communication, emotional self-regulation, privileged access failure for repressed emotions, and survivor guilt.