Die Philosophie der Lebenskunst begnügt sich nicht nur mit abstrakten Begründungen, sondern widmet sich praktischen Aspekten, die für ein gelungenes Leben entscheidend sind. Sie greift auf eine lange Tradition zurück, die bei Sokrates beginnt und bis zu Foucault und Wilhelm Schmid reicht. Bei den neueren Vertretern bildet die Auseinandersetzung mit Nietzsche und seiner Thematisierung der Selbstsorge einen zentralen Fokus. Als philosophischer Arzt suchte Nietzsche herauszufinden, was für den einzelnen Menschen und die Kultur im Gesamten förderlich oder schädlich sei. Das Handbuch (...) stellt Nietzsches Kontexte und Konzepte der Lebenskunst übersichtlich und polyphon dar. Mit Beiträgen von: Eike Brock, Almuth Bruder-Bezzel, Tobias Brücker, Marco Brusotti, Mirella Carbone, Gaia Domenici, Ferdinand Fellmann, Günter Gödde, Helmut Heit, Beatrix Himmelmann, Kristina Jaspers, Joachim Jung, Hans-Per Klie, Manuel Knoll, Rolf Kühn, Torsten Lerchner, Roman Lesmeister, Kevin Liggieri, Diana Lohwasser, Nikolaos Loukidelis, André Martins, Martin Morgenstern, Jörn Müller, Nicola Nicodemo, Johannes Oberthür, Manos Perrakis, Martin Poltrum, Birgit Recki, Renate Reschke, Pia Daniela Völz, Hans Gerd von Seggern, Werner Stegmaier, Michael Steinmann, Barbara Straka, Paul von Tongeren, Vivetta Vivarelli, Robert Zimmer, Jörg Zirfas. (shrink)

Hempel and Oppenheim, in their paper 'The Logic of Explanation', have offered an analysis of the notion of scientific explanation. The present paper advances considerations in the light of which their analysis seems inadequate. In particular, several theorems are proved with roughly the following content: between almost any theory and almost any singular sentence, certain relations of explainability hold.

The conditions are examined under which one theory is said to be replaceable by another, while preserving those features of the original theory which made it serviceable for a given purpose. Among such replacements, special attention is given to ones which qualify as so-called reductions of a theory, and some theorems are proved concerning the notion of a reduction.

This book interprets the theory of relation of John Buridan, one of the most influential thinkers of the late Middle Ages. In so doing it examines his whole wider oeuvre in the context of the history of scholastic debate.

This chapter discusses the ordering of color percepts, and starts by presenting an overview of the critical issues surrounding the topic and by examining the relationship between stimuli and percepts. Certain types of variability were found by experimental psychology in the relationship between stimulus and response as a result of observation conditions. In the twentieth century, the view that the normal human color-vision system has a standard implementation and that all perceptual data are appropriately treated with normal statistical distribution methodology (...) became the standard paradigm. However, the idea that the large number of color percepts humans can experience must fit into some kind of ordering system is an old one, going as far back to Aristotle and his proposed color categories based on a scale of chromatic colors between white and black. The strengths and limitations of the more recently developed kinds of color order systems are also touched upon here. (shrink)

The nature and functions of classifications are first discussed and the differences between natural and artificial classifications are explicated. It is shown that borderline-case type problems result not from classifications, but from extending them to wider domains. Some methods of solving such problems are considered. The differences between monothetic and polythetic classifications are also taken up. A new treatment of trees as relations and their levels is developed. Certain kinds of hierarchies such as the classificatory, the inclusional, and the structural (...) are then characterized by means of the tree concept. (shrink)

"Die Begriffe Raum und Zeit stellen massgebliche Propositionen des Denkens von Wirklichkeit dar. Sie gelten als Grundvoraussetzung allen ontologischen und epistemologischen Denkens. Während beide Begriffe in Europa als absolut gedacht wurden und somit zur Schaffung von Differenz beigetragen haben, hat es in China weder eine Trennung noch eine Absolutsetzung beider gegeben. Dieser Band vereint Beiträge aus unterschiedlichen disziplinären Positionen, die aus ihren jeweiligen Perspektiven die Zusammenhänge von Zeit, Raum und Wirklichkeit(en) in China untersuchen."--Back cover.

ZusammenfassungDer Text versucht in Auseinandersetzung mit den Ansätzen von Jürgen Moltmann, Johann Baptist Metz und Odo Marquard und im Anschluss an lutherische Theologie zu einer Verhältnisbestimmung von Theodizeefrage und Kreuzestheologie zu gelangen. Dabei wird Luthers Einsicht fruchtbar gemacht, dass Gott verborgen im Leiden wirkt, das Leiden aber nicht zu seiner Wesenseigenschaft wird. Vielmehr eröffnet sich in der Klage des leidenden Menschen die Möglichkeit, das Leiden an Gott zu beenden und gegen Gott zu Gott zu fliehen. Von Luthers Kreuzestheologie her ist (...) eine gegenseitige Durchdringung von Theodizeefrage, Hamartiologie, Kreuzestheologie und Eschatologie anzumahnen. Gleichzeitig verhelfen Klage und Anklage dazu, sich aufgrund von erfahrenen Leiden nicht in sich selbst zu verschließen, sondern kontrafaktisch an Gott festzuhalten.SummaryDiscussing the thoughts of J. Moltmann, J. B. Metz and O. Marquard the essay attempts – whilst following Martin Luther's theologia crucis – to find a relation between the theodicy-question and the theology of the cross. For this concern it refers to the aspect that God acts in suffering in a hidden way but does not posses suffering as an intrinsic characteristic. Rather, the lament of suffering people address to God, as we find it in the Psalms, gives the opportunity of bringing suffering from God's hiddenness to an end and to “flee from God to God”. Returning to Luther's theologia crucis should lead to further reflections on theodicy, sin, theology of the cross and eschatology. At the same time, lamentation as bringing human suffering before God provides an aid for suffering people not to lock their suffering in themselves, but to maintain the relationship to God – even against the supposedly factual evidence of the experience of suffering. (shrink)

The study investigates the »Four Principles of Biomedical Ethics« published by Tom Beauchamp and James Childress with a particular concern for the principle of respect for autonomy. The leading question is in which philosophical background autonomy is dealt with by Beauchamp/childress and by the enlightenment philosopher Immanuel Kant, while the more emipirical theoretical framework of Beauchamp/childress and the rationalistic framework of Kant are being analyzed. After having considered the foundation of autonomy both in Beauchamp/childress and Kant, the study turns to (...) the relationship of autonomy and human dignity by exploring the implicit extension of autonomy, human dignity and being human, and asks which consequences have to be drawn from a theological point of view. (shrink)

The following article is a response to K. Mainzer's ‘Knowledge-Based Systems; Remarks on the Philosophy of Technology and Artificial Intelligence’. We show, that Mainzer does not reach any of his aimsto analyse the possibilities and limits of AI-technology.to reduce anxiousness and hostility against AI, which is motivated by phantastic speculations.to evaluate the factual impact of AI on our lives and on society.His article contributes on the contrary to phantastic speculations, which are not technologically justified in any way. There are two (...) main reasons for his misleading view: (a) the state of the art of knowledge-based systems is incorrectly described; (b) the roots, paradigms and alternatives to AI are not in the least sufficiently analysed. We examine issues (a) and (b) in Chapter 1 and Chapter 2. In Chapter 3 we discuss, how the conclusions, which Mainzer draws, have to be modified. In analysing the lines of argumentation of Mainzer we try to clarify the methodological errors and the philosophical attitude of Mainzer, which is in many respects not adequate to the subject of the article. (shrink)