Dieser Sammelband vereinigt zeitdiagnostische Studien, in denen wichtige Tendenzen der Denkkultur der Gegenwart kritisch analysiert werden. So bekannte deutschsprachige Philosophen und Sozialwissenschaftler wie Hans Albert, Werner Becker, Malte Hossenfelder, Hans Lenk, Michael Schmid, Gerard Radnitzky, Ernst Topitsch usw. behandeln Themen wie: Ist Aufklärung heute noch aktuell? Wie gefährlich sind philosophische Heilslehrer und fundamentalistische Weltanschauungen? Ist das Theorem der Risikogesellschaft bloß ein Mythologem? Werden Utopien durch Demokratie domestiziert? Gibt es ein gemeinsames Verständnis von Glück? Ist die moderne Wohlfahrtsdemokratie mit individueller Freiheit (...) vereinbar? Was leistet die Rational-Choice-Theorie, die in sozialwissenschaftlichen Erklärungsmodellen eine immer größere Bedeutung gewinnt? (shrink)

What does it mean to be a good ally to the LGBTQ community? Does it count if you attach a rainbow pin to your backpack or post occasional messages of support on social media? We argue that in order to be a good ally involves avoiding the vice of complacency and that allies need to ask themselves two distinct, but related questions: (1) Who are you an ally to?; (2) How are you an ally? While reflecting on these questions helps (...) allies examine what they have or have not been doing so far, these questions point towards future action by encouraging allies to consider what else they need to be doing to help and who else they need to help. (shrink)

Kant’s reputation for making absolutist claims about universal and necessary conditions for the possibility of experience are put here in the broader context of his goals for the Critical philosophy. It is shown that within that context, Kant’s claims can be seen as considerably more innocuous than they are traditionally regarded, underscoring his deep respect for “common sense” and sharing surprisingly similar goals with Wittgenstein in terms of what philosophy can, and at least as importantly cannot, provide.

Euler ’s wave theory of light developed from a mere description of this notion based on an analogy between sound and light to a more and more mathematical elaboration on that notion. He was very successful in predicting the shape of achromatic lenses based on a new dispersion law that we now know is wrong. Most of his mathematical arguments were, however, guesswork without any solid physical reasoning. Guesswork is not always a bad thing in physics if it leads to (...) new experiments or makes the theory coherent with other theories. And Euler tried to find such experiments. He saw the construction of achromatic lenses, the explanation of colors of thin plates and of the opaque bodies as proof of his theory. When it came to the fundamental issues, the correctness of his dispersion law and the prediction of frequencies of light he was not at all successful. His wave theory degenerated, and it was not until Augustin Fresnel introduced transverse waves and an elaborate notion of interference that the wave theory again progressed. (shrink)

This paper explores Aristotle’s account of the human intellect, with special emphasis on how this account relates to Aristotle’s treatment of nature. In his complex account of the intellect, Aristotle distinguishes very broadly between two types of intellection. One type (nous) involves the reception of what things are and is non-discursive in character, while the other type (dianoia) is the result of intellectual activity and is discursive in character. While Aristotle affirms that both types of thinking are distinctive and essential (...) functions of the intellect, it is also clear that dianoia presupposes nous, insofar as dianoia assumes as given what nous has received. This paper also investigates Aristotle’s account of truth, arguing that the very principles of the intellect’s functioning are naturally given to the intellect. Given Aristotle’s account of the intellect as well as his account of truth and the principle of non-contradiction, one can see that, for Aristotle, nature has a primacy relative to the intellect. (shrink)

Die Arbeit setzt sich mit der neuzeitlichen Theodizeefrage auseinander. In einem ersten Schritt wird versucht, den genuinen Gehalt der Philosophie von Leibniz darzustellen, dessen Werk für die weitere Diskussion dieser Thematik maßgeblich wurde. Dabei wird aufgewiesen, dass die Argumente von Leibniz empiristischen und fideistischen Bestreitungen einer Theodizee standzuhalten und den Glauben an den allmächtigen und gütigen Gott mit dem Phänomen menschlicher Freiheit in Verbindung zu bringen vermögen. In einem zweiten Schritt werden die Positionen von Kant und Leibniz konfrontiert. Dabei zeigt (...) sich, dass Kant den von Leibniz bezeichneten Weg nicht verwirft, sondern weiterführt und die Theodizeefrage konsequent in der Praxis menschlichen Weltumgangs zu verorten vermag. (shrink)

Von Kants Vernunftrecht ausgehend, gelangt die Betrachtung unter Berucksichtigung von Stammlers Lehre vom Richtigen Recht und Kelsens Normenhierarchie zu der Einsicht, das Recht konne nur begriffen werden, wenn es auf Handlungsstrukturen abgebildet werde. Unter diesem Aspekt erweist sich die Frage nach dem Richtigen Recht als Scheinproblem.".