In this essay, we examine one of our perennial favorites, the story of “The Sneetches” as an exposition and condemnation of the role of shame and humiliation in maintaining oppressive social systems. We argue that Seuss’s Sneetches vividly demonstrate how we contribute to the unjustified oppression of a disadvantaged group when we allow our shaming behaviors to be guided by stereotypical presumptions about aperson’s moral character based on non-voluntary personal characteristics, rather than by evaluations of character based on the evidence (...) of voluntary behavior. (shrink)

Both the Green Revolution and GE foods have come under persistent attack by social philosophers, environmentalists, and other commentators, who argue that these technologies should be banned. In this essay, I examine five of the most common arguments for banning further development of GE crops, and show how they effectively reduce to two: distress at blurred boundaries, and hazards of a new technology. I will also show that both of these arguments can be addressed and defused—and so we can use (...) “Frankenfoods” to help feed the world. (shrink)

By building on work by Kit Fine, we develop a sound and complete truthmaker semantics for Lou Goble’s conflict tolerant deontic logic BDL.

We develop an exact truthmaker semantics for permission and obligation. The idea is that with every singular act, we associate a sphere of permissions and a sphere of requirements: the acts that are rendered permissible and the acts that are rendered required by the act. We propose the following clauses for permissions and obligations: -/- - a singular act is an exact truthmaker of Pφ iff every exact truthmaker of φ is in the sphere of permissibility of the act, and (...) -/- - a singular act is an exact truthmaker of Oφ iff some exact truthmaker of φ is in the sphere of requirements of the act. -/- We show that this semantics is hyperintensional, and that it can deal with some of the so-called paradoxes of deontic logic in a natural way. Finally, we give a sound and complete axiomatization of the semantics. (shrink)

Comparing knowledge with belief can go wrong in two dimensions: If the authors employ a wider notion of knowledge, then they do not compare like with like because they assume a narrow notion of belief. If they employ only a narrow notion of knowledge, then their claim is not supported by the evidence. Finally, we sketch a superior teleological view.

Vorwort der Herausgeber mit Schriftenverzeichnis Albert Mues - H. SEubert: Transzendentalphilosophie und Metaphysik heute. EIne Skizze - M. SCherbaum: Philosophie als Lebensform - oder: Die Krise des Nihilismus und die Validitat transzendentaler Argumentation. SYstematische Reflexionen zu Letztbegrundung, Grenze und Bedeutung von Philosophie - M. GErten: Der Charakter der Transzendentalphilosophie als fundamentaler Geltungsreflexion. HIstorische und systematische uberlegungen mit besonderem Blick auf den spaten Fichte - L. MOckl: Zur logischen Position der Hypothese - I. RAdrizzani: Die Zeitfiguration in der Transzendentalphilosophie. REinhard (...) Lauths Appositionslehre als Aktualisierung von Fichtes Zeitmodell - K. POllok: Kants Begriff der Normativitat im Kontext der fruhneuzeitlichen Philosophie - C. LOtz: Gewissen und Widerstand - M. FUchs: "Freiheit, die sich Dasein gibt". INdividuum und Staat bei Platon und Hegel - B. DIeckmann: Reich der Freiheit und Kreuzestheologie. OPfer bei Johann Gottlieb Fichte - W. KLausnitzer: Christentum versus Islam. uBerlegungen zum Thema der Gewalt in beiden Religionen - M. FAmula: Zwischen Grenzenlosigkeit und Ausgrenzung. LIebe als Kultivierungsprozess in Adalbert Stifters Brigitta. (shrink)

The objective of this article is to present an overview, based on the most recent specialist research, of Neoplatonist developments in the Cologne tradition of the later Middle Ages, with specific reference to a unique Proclian commentary presented by the German Albertist Dominican, Berthold of Moosburg (ca. 1300–1361). Situating Berthold in the post-Eckhart Dominican crisis of the 1340s and 1350s, his rehabilitating initiative of presenting this extensive (nine-volume) commentary on the Neoplatonist Proclus Lycaeus’ (412–485) Elements of Theology in his Expositio (...) super Elementationem theologicam Procli, the only of its kind from the Middle Ages, is contextualised with reference to Berthold’s discursive indebtedness to his Dominican predecessors, Albert the Great (ca. 1200–1280), Ulrich of Strasbourg (ca. 1220–1277) and Dietrich of Freiberg (ca.1250 – ca.1310), as well as two Dutch-Cologne successors, the Albertist Heymeric of Camp (1395–1460) and the Carthusian Thomist Denys de Leeuwis (1402–1471). Berthold’s unique contribution to the philosophical discourse of the Middle Ages is indicated therein that the Expositio provided a synthesis of the late Medieval version of Neoplatonism and contemporaneous German–Dominican theories. By contextualising the work of his Cologne predecessors and successors in the broad idea-historical landscape of antiquity and Neoplatonism, the article argues that Berthold succeeded in linking the Neoplatonic legacy with Cologne Albertism and provided an impetus for the overall consolidating ability of the Cologne tradition. By juxtaposing Berthold and his Expositio with the more conventional legacies of Ulrich, Dietrich, Heymeric and Denys, this exceptional Latin-Western intellectual tradition from Cologne is expanded and enriched with regard to its notable Neoplatonic contributions to philosophy in the later Middle Ages. Contribution: This article contributes to scholarship in Medieval philosophy by presenting an overview of Neoplatonist developments in the Cologne tradition of the later Middle Ages, with specific reference to the Proclian commentary presented by the German Albertist Dominican, Berthold of Moosburg (ca. 1300–1361). By contextualising the work of Berthold’s Cologne predecessors and successors in the broad idea-historical landscape of antiquity and Neoplatonism, the article indicates that Berthold succeeded in linking the Neoplatonic legacy with Cologne Albertism and provided an impetus for the overall consolidating ability of the Cologne tradition during the later Middle Ages. (shrink)

The selections contained in this volume were made by Richard Kik. The original edition Vom Licht in uns was published by Verlag J.F. Steinkopf, Stuhgart. It contains sayings of things highly spiritual nature as well as a description of the life of Richard Kik. One such selection is The beginning of all spiritual life is fearless belief in truth and its open confession. Albert Schweitzer (14 January 1875 4 September 1965) was a German-French theologian, musician, philosopher, and physician. He (...) was born in Kaysersberg in the province of Elsass-Lothringen (Alsace-Lorraine), at the time in the German Empire. Schweitzer challenged both the secular view of Jesus as depicted by historical-critical methodology current at his time in certain academic circles, as well the traditional Christian view, depicting a Jesus Christ who expected and predicted the imminent end of the world. He received the 1952 Nobel Peace Prize in 1953 for his philosophy of "Reverence for Life" expressed in many ways, but most famously in founding and sustaining the Albert Schweitzer Hospital in Lambarene, now in Gabon, west central Africa (then French Equatorial Africa). As a music scholar and organist, he studied the music of German composer Johann Sebastian Bach and influenced the Organ reform movement (Orgelbewegung). Schweitzer's passionate quest was to discover a universal ethical philosophy, anchored in a universal reality, and make it directly available to all of humanity. This is reflected in some of his sayings, such as: "Until he extends his circle of compassion to include all living things, man will not himself find peace." "I don't know what your destiny will be, but one thing I do know: the only ones among you who will be really happy are those who have sought and found how to serve.". (shrink)

An homage to the men and women of science, and an exposition of Einstein's place in scientific history In this fascinating collection of articles and speeches, Albert Einstein reflects not only on the scientific method at work in his own theoretical discoveries, but also eloquently expresses a great appreciation for his scientific contemporaries and forefathers, including Johannes Kepler, Isaac Newton, James Clerk Maxwell, Max Planck, and Niels Bohr. While Einstein is renowned as one of the foremost innovators of modern (...) science, his discoveries uniquely his own, through his own words it becomes clear that he viewed himself as only the most recent in a long line of scientists driven to create new ways of understanding the world and to prove their scientific theories. Einstein's thoughtful examinations explain the "how" of scientific innovations both in his own theoretical work and in the scientific method established by those who came before him. This authorized Philosophical Library book features a new introduction by Neil Berger, PhD, and an illustrated biography of Albert Einstein, which includes rare photos and never-before-seen documents from the Albert Einstein Archives at the Hebrew University of Jerusalem. "What place does the theoretical physicist's picture of the world occupy among all these possible pictures? It demands the highest possible standard of rigorous precision in the description of relations, such as only the use of mathematical language can give" -Albert Einstein, "Principles of Research" Albert Einstein (1879-1955) was born in Germany and became an American citizen in 1934. A world-famous theoretical physicist, he was awarded the 1921 Nobel Prize for Physics and is renowned for his Theory of Relativity. In addition to his scientific work, Einstein was an influential humanist who spoke widely about politics, ethics, and social causes. After leaving Europe, Einstein taught at Princeton University. His theories were instrumental in shaping the atomic age. Neil Berger, an associate professor emeritus of mathematics, taught at the University of Illinois at Chicago in the Mathematics, Statistics, and Computer Science department from 1968 until his retirement in 2001. He was the recipient of the first Monroe H. Martin Prize (1975), which is now awarded by the University of Maryland every five years for a singly authored outstanding applied mathematics research paper. He has published numerous papers and reviews in his fields of expertise, which include elasticity, tensor analysis, scattering theory, and fluid mechanics. (shrink)

After a brief sketch of the state of Buridan studies, this review article examines the recent study, by Benoît Patar, of a commentary on Aristotle’s Physics that is generally attributed to Albert of Saxony, but which Patar believes to have been authored by John Buridan (the text is preserved in the manuscript Bruges, Stadsbibliotheek 477, fols. 60va–163vb, and was edited by Patar himself in 1999). Patar is utterly convinced that the Bruges Quaestiones represent Buridan’s prima lectura, that is, his (...) first course of lectures on the Physics, which preceded the two other redactions that are traditionally attributed to him. However, there is no textual evidence in support of this assumption, but only speculative circumstantial evidence. The article therefore rejects Patar’s thesis as highly problematic. (shrink)

Brian Barry was the leading European normative political theorist of his generation, his intellectual influence being felt in Europe, North America, Australasia, and indeed wherever normative political theory in the analytical mode is practised. As well as being a Fellow of the British Academy, he was a Fellow of the American Academy of Arts and Sciences and the only Briton to have received the prestigious Johann Skytte prize from the University of Uppsala for achievement in the study of political (...) science. During his life Barry published seven single-authored books and five co-edited volumes, as well as over seventy articles and a large number of reviews and review essays, some of the latter being full-length and original articles in their own right. He had a deep and abiding commitment to the professionalization of the study of politics and was an inspiration to many younger scholars. (shrink)

In lieu of an abstract, here is a brief excerpt of the content:Jacob Burckhardt, Religion, and the Historiography of “Crisis” and “Transition”Thomas Albert Howard*A great historical subject, the representation of which should be the high point of a historian’s life, must cohere sympathetically and mysteriously to the author’s innermost being.Jacob Burckhardt 1If you are to venture to interpret the past you can do so only out of the fullest exertion of the vigor of the present: only when you can (...) put forth your... qualities in all their strength will you divine what is worth knowing and preserving in the past.Friedrich Nietzsche 2The renowned nineteenth-century Swiss-German historian Jacob Burckhardt (1818–97) was a masterful historian of crises and transitional periods. Two of his major works, The Age of Constantine the Great (1852) and The Civilization of the Renaissance in Italy (1860), bear out this claim. In his Constantine Burckhardt deals with the transition from late pagan antiquity to the early Christian Middle Ages, and in his more famous Renaissance he deals with the transition from the late Middle Ages to the beginnings of secular modernity. In the [End Page 149] latter, as is well known, he established one of the most compelling and creative theses in the history of modern historiography, virtually creating the “idea of the Renaissance” that has long influenced both scholarly and popular conceptions of that period. 3What elicited Burckhardt’s interest in crises and transitions in general and in these two periods of crisis and transition in particular? In this article, I shall argue that there is a strong relationship between Burckhardt’s own historical experience in the early and mid-nineteenth century and his choice of subject and mode of analysis in these two monumental works. In theoretical terms one observes a “dialectical” form of objectivity in the execution of Burckhardt’s historiographical tasks: a structural affinity or kinship between subject (Burckhardt, his historical experience) and object (late antiquity, Renaissance) predisposes Burckhardt to his theme/argument and thus provides a key to understanding the genesis and the character of insights that he offers in these two works. 4 To establish this point I shall focus on the category of religion, on Burckhardt’s own experience of questions of religious truth and skepticism in the nineteenth century, and on his treatment of religion in these two works.The Young Jacob Burckhardt and ReligionReligion is a crucial but often neglected aspect of Jacob Burckhardt’s thought. 5 Like a number of nineteenth-century German intellectuals, Burckhardt was a Pfarrersohn, a “pastor’s son.” 6 He grew up in a profoundly conservative Protestant environment in Basel, nicknamed “pious Basel” for its dogged resistance to the “ideas of 1789” and for its earlier heritage of Reformation and pietist religiosity. During Burckhardt’s youth in fact, his father was a children’s minister and head-deacon (Obersthelfer) before becoming in 1838 the city cathedral’s Antistes, the highest and most prestigious ecclesiastical office in Basel. In short, as his biographer Werner Kaegi has noted, Burckhardt’s early [End Page 150] upbringing and education were strongly shaped by the world of his father, a world of “old Protestant piety.” 7Following his father’s example, Burckhardt started out on the clerical track, studying theology at the University of Basel. However, during his Theologie-studium (1837–39) he experienced a profound crisis of faith brought on by an encounter with German historical biblical criticism and liberal theology represented in the person of W. M. L. de Wette (1780–1848). A radical theologian and biblical scholar, de Wette had wound up in Basel in 1822 after being dismissed from the University of Berlin for holding views considered heterodox and politically threatening by the conservative Prussian government. 8 In a letter to his friend Johannes Riggenbach written in August 1838 Burckhardt tells how de Wette’s critical theology had unseated his faith. “In my eyes,” Burckhardt wrote,de Wette’s system grows in stature every day; one simply must follow him, there is no alternative; but every day a part of our traditional church doctrine melts away under his hand. Today, finally, I realized that he regards the birth of Christ simply as a myth... (shrink)

The term of responsibility is ambiguous. In a general sense it means nothing more than answering questions about human behaviour (in Greek: logon didonai; in Latin: rationem reddere). In order to get a more precise sense of responsibility this article discusses concepts of responsibility, worked out by Albert Schweitzer, Hans Jonas, Richard Niebuhr and Dietrich Bonhoeffer. The discussion is concentrated on two problems: (1) extensification of responsibility in accordance with the expansion of technological power; (2) limitation and intensification of (...) responsibility in accordance with human capability and readiness. The central question is that of the subject of responsibility: How becomes man, who abdicates responsibility, ‘the responsible self’ (Niebuhr)? Referring to this question the biblical language is of great importance as the word, which re-establishes communication between God and man. Responsibility in the biblical sense means the response to this word of God. Therein lies not only a radicalising and intensifying of responsibility, but also its enabling and limiting. (shrink)

Die Demonstratio evangelica des Eusebios von Kaisareia hat zu allen Zeiten weit weniger Interesse und Leser gefunden als ihr Gegenstück, die Praeparatio evangelica. Dementsprechend spärlich ist auch die handschriftliche Überlieferung des Textes in byzantinischer Zeit. Die zweite Hälfte des Werkes , die Photios wohl noch kannte, ging bis auf einige Fragmente des XV. Buches verloren, die erste Hälfte ist in vergleichsweise wenigen Handschriften überliefert, von denen nur drei vor dem 15. Jh. entstanden sind. Nach Heikel, von dem die heute noch (...) maßgebende Edition stammt, gehen alle erhaltenen Textzeugen auf den Codex Parisinus gr. 469 aus dem 12. Jh. zurück. Dieser Sachverhalt läßt sich schon daraus erschließen, daß alle weiteren Handschriften – mit zwei zu besprechenden Ausnahmen – zu Beginn , in Buch V und am Ende Lücken aufweisen, die durch Blattverluste im Parisinus bedingt sind. Vor allem die umfangreiche Lücke von 8 Folien zu Beginn des Parisinus hatte eine erhebliche Verstümmelung des Werkes zur Folge, die in den frühen Drucken nicht beseitigt werden konnte. Erst Johann Albert Fabricius druckte in seinem 1725 in Hamburg erschienenen Delectus argumentorum et syllabus scriptorum veritatis religionis Christianae den fehlenden Text des Anfangs und Endes aus einem Codex der Bibliothek des Fürsten der Walachei, Nikolaos Mavrokordatos, ab. Den fehlenden Abschnitt von Buch V ergänzte dann Heikel selbst aus dem Codex Bononiensis 3644 , der nach ihm ebenso wie der ‚Codex Maurocordati‘ des Fabricius eine Abschrift aus dem noch nicht verstümmelten Parisinus ist. (shrink)

In 1922, Aleksander Birkenmajer presented an unknown work of Albert of Saxony, Quaestiones de sphaera, in a manuscript at the Dominicans in Vienna. In 1989, Jürgen Sarnowsky found a second manuscript in Rome. This paper presents a third complete manuscript (BNE Madrid) and an incomplete one (Amploniana Erfurt) of this work. Furthermore, it is argued that an anonymous expositio of Sacrobosco’s treatise can be ascribed to Albert of Saxony. Finally, an anonymous commentary on Albert’s questions in two (...) manuscripts (Munich, Salzburg) is presented. The possibility that this commentary stems from the famous Viennese master John of Gmunden (d. 1442) is considered, but no decisive result could be achieved yet. In an appendix, a complete list of the titles of Albert’s questions is added. (shrink)

Johannes Bernhardi of Feldkirch (1490-1534), Melanchthon’s close collaborator elaborated significantly the Lutheran method in works written shortly before his untimely death in 1534. He seems to have systematized to a considerable degree the Melanchthonian concept of method and to have developed it towards an explicitly Aristotelian and even scholastic framework. In doing so, he did not merely imitate his authorities, who included above all Aristotle and Albert the Great: these figures served as sources for his Melanchthonian/Lutheran manner of presenting (...) and organizing scientific knowledge. The example from Bernhardi’s discussion of causes shows that his contribution to the discussion on method did not remain at the level of mere theorizing, but was applied to some degree in his own teaching of natural philosophy. (shrink)

Als wir bei Sonnenuntergang gerade durch die Herde Nilpferde hindurchfuhren, stand urplötzlich, von mir nicht gesucht, das Wort »Ehrfurcht vor dem Leben« vor mir. Der Pfad im Dickicht war sichtbar geworden. Nun war ich zu der Idee vorgedrungen, in der Welt- und Lebensbejahung und Ethik miteinander enthalten sind. Albert Schweitzer Seit fast 100 Jahren steht der Name Albert Schweitzer für aktives humanitäres Engagement. Dank seiner Philosophie der »Ehrfurcht vor dem Leben«, die er gemeinsam mit seiner Frau Helene Bresslau (...) im Urwaldhospital in Lambarene verwirklichte, gehört er zu den am meisten bewunderten Menschen der Welt. Mit dreißig Jahren ein geachteter Theologe und gefeierter Interpret der Orgelwerke Johann Sebastian Bachs entschloss er sich, noch ein Medizinstudium zu absolvieren, um den Ärmsten der Armen zu helfen. Ernst Luther nähert sich diesem Humanisten mit philosophisch-kritischen Betrachtungen, ordnet dessen Leben und Werk in die Umbrüche seiner Zeit ein und resümiert, was von Schweitzers Gedankengut bewahrt werden sollte. Ernst Luther, Jg. 1932, Studium der Pädagogik, Geschichte/Germanistik, extern Philosophie, Gasthörer Medizin an der Universität Halle; Promotion Dr. phil. 1961 zur medizinischen Anthropologie Viktor von Weizsäckers an der Universität Greifswald; Dr. sc. phil. 1970 Universität Halle mit einer Arbeit über Ethik in der Medizin. Herausgeber und Mitautor zahlreicher Arbeiten zur Ethik in der Medizin. Mitglied im Albert-Schweitzer-Komitee e. V. Weimar, im Deutschen Hilfsverein für das Albert-Schweitzer-Spital Lambarene, Frankfurt a. M., in der Internationalen Albert-Schweitzer-Vereinigung. Von 2000 bis 2002 Mitglied der Enquete-Kommission des Deutschen Bundestages Recht und Ethik in der Medizin. Inhalt: Vorwort Albert Schweitzer - der friedlichen Menschheit zugehörig Das »Bergwerk der Ethik« Das Menschenbild aus Schweitzers philosophischer und religiöser Sicht Albert Schweitzer und Karl Marx Albert Schweitzers Gedanken zu Kultur und Ethik in den Weltreligionen Albert Schweitzer und die Ethik in der Medizin Ethik und Völkerfrieden Sozialethik gegen Kolonialpolitik und Rassenhass. (shrink)

One of the three consequences of Einstein’s theory of general relativity was the curvature of light passing near a massive body. In 1911, he published a first value of the angle of deflection of light, then a second value in 1915, equal twice the first. In the early 1920s, when he received the Nobel Prize in Physics, a violent controversy broke out over this result. It was then disclosed that the first value he had obtained in 1911 had been calculated (...) more than a century before by a German astronomer named Johann von Soldner. The aim of this article is therefore to compare the methods used by Soldner and then by Einstein leading to this first value and to explain the importance of the doubling of this value in the framework of Einstein’s theory of general relativity. Such a consequence of this theory lies at the intersection of several scientific fields such as Mathematics, Physics, Astronomy and Philosophy. (shrink)

Aufgrund der Tatsache, dass Albert Schweitzer seine Ethik der Ehrfurcht vor dem Leben auf Anorganisches wie auf die Gesellschaft und die Welt im Ganzen beziehen kann, nimmt der Beitrag anstelle des Gegenstandsbereichs den Begriff der Ehrfurcht in den Blick. Immanuel Kants und Johann Wolfgang von Goethes Konzeptionen säkularer Ehrfurcht weisen den Weg zu Schweitzers Ehrfurcht als einer Verschränkung des ethischen Selbst- und Weltverhältnisses des menschlichen Subjekts als Ergebnis einer konsequent reflektierten Selbstkultivierung zur Verantwortungsbereitschaft. Mit Nietzsche verweigert sich Schweitzer (...) jeglicher normativen Ausformulierung seiner Haltungsethik, die als ihr einziges normatives Prinzip die grenzenlose Bereitschaft, Leben zu erhalten und zu fördern und sich der Vernichtung von Leben zu enthalten, akzeptiert. Due to the fact that Albert Schweitzer can relate his ethics of reverence for life with the inorganic as well as society and the world as a whole, this paper will focus, instead on the subject field, on the notion of reverence. Concepts of secular reverence by Immanuel Kant and Johann Wolfgang von Goethe point the way toward Schweitzer’s reverence as entanglement of ethical relationships of human subject towards self and the world, as a result of a consequent reflective self-cultivation for willingness to take responsibility. With Nietzsche, Schweitzer rejects any kind of normative formulation of his attitude ethics, which as its exclusive normative principle accepts the unlimited willingness to preserve and promote life, and to refrain from its destruction. (shrink)

In lieu of an abstract, here is a brief excerpt of the content:BOOK REVIEWS 497 Both theologians and philosophers need to see a completely integrated treatment of both rational and faith aspects of Aquinas's theology of creation. To this end, more work on theology as science also would be helpful. Emery's treatment of the end and subject of a science is not quite neoplatonic enough. His presentation of the subject of theology forces God, its subject in the Summa theologiae, on (...) earlier texts of Albert (49) and Aquinas (302). In I Sent. Aquinas says the subject is ens divinum, "being as related to the divine," which is much wider than God, who is the end but not subject oftheology. His model is Avicenna's ens commune as the subject of a metaphysics with God as its end. More work also must be done on the articles of faith, part of the subject of theology for Albert; but theology's proper principles for Aquinas. How primordial the articles are, and the interplay of reason and faith in knowing them, are still unresolved issues. In sum, one hopes this fine book by Fr. Emery will be the first of many helping give Thomism the new look it deserves. Centerfor Tlwmistic Studies Houston, TX R. E. HOUSER Relation als Vergleich: Die Relationstheorie des Johannes Buridan im Kontext seines Denkens und der Scholastik. By ROLF SCHONBERGER. Studien und Texte zur Geistesgeschichte des Mittelalters, Band 43. Leiden/New York/Koln: E. J. Brill, 1994. Pp. 489. $108.75 (cloth). This book is a revised version of the author's 1990 Habilitationsschrift at Ludwig-Maximilians-Universitat in Munich. It aims to articulate the theory of relations developed by the noted Parisian philosopher, John Buridan (ca. 1295-1358), "in connection with the extensive scholastic discussion of this problem," and, in particular, to show how the same arguments were advanced or refuted by different philosophers from "fundamentally different starting points" (ix, 59). This stems from the author's working hypothesis that the medieval debate on the nature of relations proceeded dialectically, and that Buridan's contribution to it can be better understood by taking its argumentative context into consideration. The scope of the book is wide-ranging, to say the least. Readers expecting a book about Buridan's theory of relations will find the title somewhat misleading, however, since background material and a survey of the "scholastic context" of Buridan's theory fill up the first 372 pages, with the author's presentation and discussion of the theory itself limited to the final 498 BOOK REVIEWS 75. Furthermore, the author seems to regard the relevance of the former discussion to the latter as self-evident. This is fine where the connections are fairly uncontroversial, as in the case of William of Ockham, but where they are less so, as in the cases 0f Giles of Rome, Henry of Ghent, Meister Eckhart, Durand of St. Pour~ain, and Peter John Olivi, one is left in the dark about why separate chapters are devoted to each. Giles and Olivi are not even mentioned in the chapters on Buridan. Henry and Durand make one appearance each, both in the course of the trivial observation that unlike in their theories, "consideration of the doctrine of the Trinity plays no role in Buridan's theory of relations" (399). Eckhart is mentioned a few times, but in terms so speculative as to be useless for the general reader. For example, the author finds Jan Pinborg's characterization of Buridan as a someone who "took the arbitrariness of language seriously" to be "of course... too microscopic " (393). The reason is that Pinborg allegedly failed to see the radicalization of conventionality in the fourteenth century in terms of an "epochal shift" from "the symbolic and quasi-naturalistic conception of language in the early Middle Ages," a conception that, the author parenthetically notes, "is perhaps still to be found (or further strengthened) in Bonaventure or Meister Eckhart" (ibid.). But even bracketing the question of how this description fits the latter authors, the Buridan story is more complex than this. Buridan does emphasize that spoken and written expressions signify conventionally, but he never abandons the Aristotelian/Boethian tripartite conception of language, according to which concepts are said to... (shrink)

In spite of the fact that Henry of Gent had a major and lasting influence on the developments at the University of Paris after the condemnation of the errores philosophorum in 1277, the Gandavistae – pupils of Henry of Gent – are hardly known by their proper names in the history of philosophy. As a member of the theological and philosophical faculty, Henry broke with the predominant Averroistic approach to Aristotle’s conception of science and concentrated, instead, on the Aristotelian tradition. (...) He defended a revised version of the Aristotelian doctrine of the categories along the lines of the pseudo-Boethian Liber de sex principiis and ascribed fundamental eminence to relatio, a category which was considered ontologically “debilissimus” among the Aristotelians. John de Polliaco was a pupil of Albert the Great, Thomas Aquinas, Henry of Gent and Godfrey of Fontaines during the seventies of the 13th century. In his Quodlibet I, q. 7, dating from 1307, he gave a controversial account of the notion of relation that was favoured by Henry’s adherents: “Does the relation, expressed as a respect, differ from the respects expressed by the six principles?” In this discussion he attacks the intentional and modal interpretation given by the Gandavistae and calls them non-reales. Is this accusation already an indication of the rise of 14th century nominalism? (shrink)

InhaltVorwortSiglenverzeichnisDaniel BREAZEALE: »Der Blitz der Einsicht« and »der Akt der Evidenz«. A Theme from Fichte’s Berlin Introductions to PhilosophyJürgen STAHL: Von der Form der Anschauung zur Anschauung der Form. Zu Fichtes Verständnis des Formbegriffs Albert MUES: Die Position der Anschauung im Wissen oder Die Position der Anschauung in der Welt. Der Unsinn der SubjektphilosophieChristoph ASMUTH: Transzendentalphilosophie oder absolute Metaphysik? Grundsätzliche Fragen an Fichtes SpätphilosophieMarek J. SIEMEK: Unendlichkeit und Schranke. Zum Fichteschen Entwurf einer transzendentalen Ontologie des WissensTom ROCKMORE: On Fichte (...) and IdealismSabine AMMON: Realismus oder Idealismus? – Irrealismus!Akira OMINE: Der Begriff des Übersinnlichen in der Philosophie FichtesRoderich BARTH: Wahrheit als Sein von Einheit. Die gewißheitstheoretische Reformulierung des absoluten Wahrheitsbegriffs in Fichtes Phänomenologie von 1804-IIArkadij LUKJANOW: Auf der Suche nach einer neuen Theorie des Absoluten. Die Idee der Synthesis in den späteren Systemen von Fichte und Schelling«Lu De VOS: Der Gedanke des Lebens in den späten Schriften FichtesMichael GERTEN: Geistige Blindheit und der Sinn für Philosophie. Das systematische Problem einer Einleitung in Fichtes WissenschaftslehreKai GREGOR: »Revolution der Gesinnung« und »Vollendung der Freiheit« – Wesen und Möglichkeit höherer Lebensformen bei Kant und FichteVioletta L. WAIBEL: Die bildende Kraft des Wissens vom Wissen in der Spätphilosophie Johann Gottlieb Fichtes Elvira GAREEWA: Wissen als ein freies und selbständiges Leben in den »Thatsachen des Bewußtseyns« Franco GILLI: Die Präsenz der ›Populärphilosophie‹ im Spätwerk FichtesHans Georg von MANZ: Die Funktion der »Tatsachen des Bewußtseins« im Blick auf die Wissenschaftslehre George di GIOVANNI: Sacramentalizing the World: On Fichte’s Wissenschaftslehre of 1810Stamatios D. GEROGIORGAKIS: Der Begriff Schema in Fichtes Spätwerk. Seine Unterschiede zum Schemabegriff in Fichtes Frühwerk und seine Einbettung in der philosophischen Tradition vor KantJacinto Rivera de ROSALES: Die transzendentale Logik . Ihr systematischer Ort und ihre BedeutungAlessandro BERTINETTO: Die transzendentale Argumentation in der Transzendentalen Logik FichtesMarc MAESSCHALCK: Attention et réflexivité dans la Logique de 1812 et la dernière philosophie de Fichte. (shrink)

Zusammenfassung In early modernity, church historians initially showed little interest in Berthold of Moosburg. They knew him as a commentator of Proclus, but they did not recognise his importance for the history of Neoplatonism. The librarians and bibliographers who came across Berthold’s commentary on Proclus in the Balliol College Library at Oxford showed no interest in the philosophical content of this work. An article on Berthold in the monumental work Scriptores Ordinis Praedicatorum summarised the available information. It was Johann (...) Albert Fabricius who took notice of it. Fabricius was very interested in Proclus as well as in Neoplatonic theology and its narration in the Elements of Theology; he had started to collect all available information regarding this issue and had also come across Berthold’s commentary. However, he did not ignore him, as many had done before, but properly recognised the importance of Berthold for the history of the reception of Proclus’s philosophy. Fabricius always referred to the Dominican thinker when dealing with Proclus’s Elements of Theology, in particular in his own Bibliotheca graeca. One of the attentive readers of this work was the German philologist Friedrich Creuzer. In 1822, within the framework of publishing Neoplatonic writings, Creuzer reedited Proclus’s Elements of Theology. As a consequence of this new edition, Proclus together with his medieval commentator came into the focus of leading representatives of classical German philosophy. (shrink)