Can philosophy help ordinary people confront their personal or interpersonal problems of living? Can it help a couple whose marriage is on the rocks, or someone going through a midlife crisis, or someone depressed over the death of a significant other, or who suffers from anxiety about making a life change? These and many other behavioral and emotional problems are ordinarily referred to psychologists, psychiatrists, clinical social workers, or other mental health specialists. Less mainstream is the possibility of consulting a (...) philosophical counselor or practitioner. Yet, there is presently a steadily increasing, world-wide movement among individuals with postgraduate credentials in philosophy to harness their philosophical training and skills in helping others to address their life problems. But is this channeling of philosophy outside the classroom into the arena of life a good idea? Are philosophers, as such, competent to handle all or any of the myriad emotional and behavioral problems that arise in the context of life; or should these matters best be left to those trained in psychological counseling or psychotherapy? Through a diverse and contrasting set of readings authored by prominent philosophers, philosophical counselors, and psychologists, this volume carefully explores the nature of philosophical counseling or practice and its relationship to psychological counseling and psychotherapy. Digging deeply into this relational question, this volume aims to spark more rational reflection, and greater sensitivity and openness to the potential contributions of philosophical practice. It is, accordingly, intended for students, teachers, scholars, and practitioners of philosophy, counseling, or psychotherapy; as well as those interested in knowing more about philosophical counseling or practice. (shrink)

This essay reconstructs the intellectual development of the philosopher of history Louis O. Mink Jr, in order to illuminate the philosophical background to in American historical epistemology. From around 1970, Mink was a prominent and influential defender of the view that historical narratives were imaginative constructions rather than representations of past actuality. This has since been understood as a characteristically postmodern view. Mink's wider sensibility, however, is better described as modernist than postmodernist. The crucial context for his philosophy was a (...) hostility to going back to his graduate years at Yale, and his epistemological views were of a piece with a defence of historical understanding as both distinctive and valuable. In both respects Mink was influenced by the philosophy of R. G. Collingwood, while he was himself an important influence on Hayden White. Mink's case therefore helps bridge the gap between interwar and later twentieth-century versions of Anglophone historical contructivism, while drawing attention to some cultural contexts in which the development of both modernist and postmodernist views of historiography must be understood. (shrink)

The correspondence between G. W. Leibniz and Samuel Clarke on the implications of Sir Isaac Newton’s physics to natural theology was the last battle that Leibniz fought with the Newtonians. That battle, not so famous as the one over the invention of calculus, ended abruptly with the death of Leibniz in November 1716; however, Clarke soon after translated the correspondence into English and published it in 1717. It became one of a relatively tiny number of Leibniz’s writings to be (...) published before the nineteenth century. Thus, besides being a meaningful clash of the rationalist and empiricist traditions, the correspondence between Leibniz and Clarke was one of the few primary sources that eighteenth-century philosophers had of the mature thought of one of Europe’s most celebrated thinkers. Furthermore, it was relevant to the philosophy of that day. Immanuel Kant, for instance, used the correspondence to launch his own formulation of space and considered his theory a resolution of the controversy. (shrink)

Samuel Thomson , a New Hampshire farmer, devised a form of medical treatment that became popular in the United States for about three decades to the middle of the nineteenth century. Thomson relied on steaming and botanical substances—mainly cayenne pepper and lobelia—to increase the body's temperature and restore health. He practiced on others, acquired a patent for his medicine, sold a “right” to others wishing to practice his methods, and formed the “Friendly Botanic Society.” In 1822 the first of (...) many editions of his New Guide to Health; or, Botanic Family Physician appeared, along with A Narrative of the Life and Medical Discoveries of Samuel Thomson. His practices were lucrative: even to buy the New Guide to Health at $2, a follower must already have purchased a right for $20. Going well beyond self‐help medicine, his publications also demanded reform in education, politics, religion, and attitudes to class and gender, among other spheres. Thomson's followers then produced their own books and journals, spreading Thomsonianism among reform‐minded Americans from North to South and into the Midwest.The People's Doctors, by John Haller, assumes that readers know this story and its context. The book opens not with Thomsonianism but with phrenology. A quotation from Daniel Drake, a prominent physician, seems then to herald a sophisticated study of this sect as an antiestablishment group of reformers. As Haller points out, such a study would be a prolegomenon to the later history explored in his three other books on American botanic medical practices. Instead, The People's Doctors primarily documents the development of Thomson's sect in three parts: “The Man and His Medicines,” “The Middle Years,” and “The Diaspora.” The central chronology is framed by two four‐page sections that introduce and explain Thomson's role in the history of American medicine. Ten appendixes present organizational records of Thomsonianism .Steeped in Thomsonian journals, this study demonstrates their richness for historical investigation. Thomson appears here in a gentler historical light than that of untutored lay healer; indeed, adopting modern terms, Haller portrays Samuel Thomson as a pioneer in the concept of a national prepaid health‐care plan . These journals also reveal the extent to which Thomsonianism was not monolithic, despite Samuel Thomson's bids to control both his medicines and his followers: by the late 1830s, “new light Thomsonians” emerged to pursue improvements on his original botanic medicines.Reliance on Thomsonian journals and Thomson's autobiography simultaneously leads to the adoption of the views of those studied. From the outset, for instance, the study refers to “Dr.” Thomson; it is some time before the uninformed reader learns that Thomson was not a doctor in the usual sense. The eventual split among followers is attributed in part to Thomson's having become “an angry old man” , drawn “deeper and deeper into petty quarrels,” who “seemed too opinionated” —despite evidence that, from an early age, Thomson had an unbridled urge for control exercised through lawsuits, defamation of character, and ostracism. More important, this reliance raises questions about context. The sect's publishing, organizing, and educational activities are not connected to the activities of mainstream medicine in the same period. Haller situates the sect historically only in his last section, “Reassessment,” but without citations; in fact, other studies on Thomsonianism are relegated mainly to the acknowledgments, with many excluded from the bibliography.A rich and potentially rewarding subject for social historians, Thomsonianism reflected intricately woven assumptions about reform issues in a turbulent period in American history. Haller has contributed an internal, organizational perspective on the sect that may aid future researchers. Yet while his observation that the “history of Thomsonism is illustrative of the divided soul of American sectarian medicine” may be true, we need a broad‐based, balanced history to be able to evaluate it. (shrink)

In lieu of an abstract, here is a brief excerpt of the content:Reviewed by:The Spirit-Driven Leader: Seven Keys to Succeeding under Pressure by Carnegie Samuel CalianTodd V. CioffThe Spirit-Driven Leader: Seven Keys to Succeeding under Pressure by Carnegie Samuel Calian Louisville, KY: Westminster John Knox Press, 2010. 125pp. $15.00Great leadership is indispensable to the success of any organization, yet it so often seems in short supply. Carnegie Samuel Calian, former president of Pittsburgh Theological Seminary for more than (...) twenty-five years, seeks to remedy the latter by providing insight into the former. Drawn from his years of experience as a successful leader and based on rigorous research on the subject, [End Page 198] Calian’s helpful volume on leadership should prove valuable for current and potential leaders from all sectors of life. Although this work contains multiple references to biblical texts, theological claims, and pietistic practices, Calian does not limit himself to religious references but draws upon what he deems are, as we often say today, the “best practices” of leadership.Each chapter proceeds by identifying a great leader or leaders (in Calian’s mind), and each example is examined with regard to the questions of what makes this person a great leader and what lessons can be drawn from such a person. Calian’s choice of examples is wide ranging, moving from obvious ones—such as Jim Sinegal (CEO of Costco), Wendy Kopp (founder of Teach for America), Asma Jahangir (a Pakistani lawyer and human rights advocate), and Martin Luther King Jr.—to less obvious ones, such as anecdotal references to Calian’s mother, a childhood pastor, and so forth. In the end, Calian is not satisfied simply to construct a “theory” of leadership; rather, he contends, we must look for approaches to leadership that have been tried, tested, and proven. The result is seven chapters on key leadership qualities: creativity, competence, commitment, character, collegiality, compassion, and courage, and an appendix containing practical resources (discussion starters, diagrams, questionnaires, and the like) for developing leadership vision and goals within an organization.More specifically, as the title suggests, a main theme of the book is to invite readers to consider ways in which religious traditions can provide resources for cultivating not only excellent leaders but also “spirit-driven” leaders. For instance, in a chapter on commitment, Calian writes in direct reference to his own Christian tradition: “My working hypothesis in life is that sustainable and creative leadership is nurtured and maintained by a renewed awakening of faith, hope, and love in our everyday lives” (32–33). Indeed, Calian is set on making a case that great leadership must be “nurtured by our spiritual roots” (36). Consequently, such phrases as “people of faith in almost every religious tradition” (86), “the divine destiny envisioned” (88), or “religious standards in every tradition” (99) are sprinkled throughout the book.It is clear that for Calian great leadership is nurtured by religious traditions. Yet what is not so clear is how exactly this works. In other words, his general claims about religious traditions, life, and practices are often ambiguous and confusing. In fact, what Calian actually means by “spirit-driven” is simply not clear, but given its prominence in the title of the book, it should be. Perhaps one criticism of the book, then, is that its use of religious sources is too superficial to be insightful and thus helpful. [End Page 199]Todd V. CioffCalvin CollegeCopyright © 2013 Society of Christian Ethics... (shrink)

Samuel Lebens takes the three principles of Jewish faith, as proposed by Rabbi Joseph Albo (1380-1444), in order to scrutinize and refine them with the toolkit of contemporary analytic philosophy. What could it mean for a perfect being to create a world from nothing? Could our world be anything more than a figment of God's imagination? What is the Torah? What does Judaism expect from a Messiah, and what would it mean for a world to be redeemed? These questions (...) are explored in conversation with a wide array of Jewish sources and with an eye towards diverse fields of contemporary research, such as cosmology, philosophical logic, the ontology of literature, and the metaphysics of time. The Principles of Judaism articulates the most fundamental axioms of Orthodox Judaism in the vernacular of contemporary philosophy. (shrink)

This paper is an attempt to lay out a meta‐ethical position that is inspired by the framework of Wittgenstein's later philosophy. To achieve this goal, this paper is divided into two parts. First, I explore recent attempts to tie Wittgenstein's epistemology in On Certainty to moral epistemology. I argue that there can be a meaningful parallel drawn between the epistemic certainties discussed in On Certainty and what I consider to be moral certainties. These moral certainties are unjustified fundamental moral attitudes (...) that underlie our moral practices. Then, I show how the debate over moral certainty has branched into two directions. One direction presents the concept of moral certainty as a naturalistic concept. On this reading, moral certainties transcend time and place since they are rooted in our natural tendencies to act or not act in certain ways. The other direction presents moral certainty as a distinctly relativistic concept. On this reading, we have our moral certainties because we belong to communities that agree on these certainties. In the second section, I argue that we have both natural, universal certainties and localized, relative certainties. I also argue that our localized certainties are constrained by non‐moral facts about ourselves and about the world. To make this argument, I rely on Wittgenstein's concept of “general facts of nature.” The result of the paper is a meta‐ethical position that can be located in between moral relativism and moral realism. (shrink)

Taking a thematic approach to Butler as a political thinker, this text develops Butler's theory of the political through an exploration of her politics of troubling.

Gadamer's book extends and codifies the main hermeneutical concepts of Bultmann, Heidegger, and their adherents, and can be considered a summa of what Robinson calls "The New Hermeneutic." By Robinson and other theologians, and by Continental literary critics, Wahrheit und Methode has been welcomed as a philosophical justification for "vital and relevant" interpretations that are unencumbered by a concern for the author's original intention. On this point "The New Hermeneutic" reveals its affinities with "The New Criticism" and the newer "Myth (...) Criticism." All three have impugned the author's prerogative to be the determiner of textual meaning. Gadamer, however, grounds his anti-intentionalism only partially in aesthetics and not at all in the collective unconscious but primarily in the radical historicism of Martin Heidegger. (shrink)

"Have the courage to use your own understanding! - that is the motto of enlightenment." - Immanuel Kant The Enlightenment is one of the most important and contested periods in the history of philosophy. The problems it addressed, such as the proper extent of individual freedom and the challenging of tradition, resonate as much today as when they were first debated. Of all philosophers, it is arguably Kant who took such questions most seriously, addressing them above all in his celebrated (...) short essay, An Answer to the Question: What is Enlightenment? In this engaging and lucid book, Samuel Fleischacker first explains and assesses Kant’s philosophy of Enlightenment. He then considers critics of Kant’s views - from Burke and Hegel to Horkheimer and Adorno - and figures he regards as having extended Kant’s notion of enlightenment, such as Feuerbach, Marx, Habermas, Foucault, and Rawls. Throughout, he demonstrates how Kant holds two distinct theories of enlightenment. On the one hand, Kant proposes a ‘minimal’ view, where to be enlightened is simply to engage in critical public discussion, allowing diversity of opinion to flourish. On the other, he argues that Kant elsewhere calls for a ‘maximal’ view of enlightenment, where, for example, an enlightened person cannot believe in a traditional religion. With great skill Fleischacker shows how these two views are taken in a multitude of directions by both critics and advocates of Kant’s philosophy. Arguing that Kant’s minimal enlightenment is a precondition for a healthy proliferation of cultures, religious faiths and political movements, What is Enlightenment? is a fascinating introduction to a key aspect of Kant’s thought and a compelling analysis of philosophical thinking about the Enlightenment. Including helpful chapter summaries and guides to further reading, it is ideal for anyone studying Kant or the philosophy of the Enlightenment, as well as those in related disciplines such as politics, history and religious studies. (shrink)

This paper shows that Hannah Arendt was a theorist both of secularization as a process and the secular as a goal of modern politics. It reconstructs these arguments in her corpus, especially her book "On Revolution," and argues that this dimension of her work may have been a response to Carl Schmitt (and is in any event now usefully read in such a way). The paper ends by examining how Arendt might reply to currently influential challengers of a secular politics.

In Book II, Chapter xxi of An essay concerning human understanding, Locke claims that a mind's will is its power 'to order the consideration of any Idea, or the forbearing to consider it; or to prefer the motion of any part of the body to its rest, and vice versa in any particular instance' (Il. xxi. 5).l To exercise this power (that is, to will), Locke says, is to perform an act of volition (or: willing), volitions being actions of the (...) mind directed to the performance of other actions (of the mind or body). Locke claims further that a man's being free (or at liberty) with respect to some action A is his having the power to perform or to forbear performing A according to his volition in the matter (8). Thus, X is free with respect to A if and onty if (i) X is able to perform A if he wills to perform A and (ii) X is able not to perform A if he wills not to perform A. This analysis of freedom. (shrink)

Marxism has often been associated with two different legacies. The first rests on a strong exposition and critique of the logic of capitalism, grounded in a systematic analysis of the laws of motion of capitalism as a system. The second legacy refers to a strong historicist perspective grounded in a conception of social relations that emphasises the centrality of power and social conflict to the analysis of history. This article challenges the prominence of structural accounts of capitalism by showing how (...) the tension between these legacies has played out within Political Marxism, both orientations already having co-existed, somewhat uneasily, within Robert Brenner’s original contributions to the Transition Debate. Through this internal critique and re-formulation of Political Marxism, we wish to open a broader debate within Marxism on the need for a more agency-based account of capitalism, which builds more explicitly on the concept of social relations, to recover the historicist legacy of Marxism. (shrink)

I argue that Spinoza endorses "conceptual dependence monism," the thesis that all forms of metaphysical dependence (such as causation, inherence, and existential dependence) are conceptual in kind. In the course of explaining the view, I further argue that it is actually presupposed in the proof for his more famed substance monism. Conceptual dependence monism also illuminates several of Spinoza’s most striking metaphysical views, including the intensionality of causal contexts, parallelism, metaphysical perfection, and explanatory rationalism. I also argue that this priority (...) of the conceptual does not commit Spinoza to forms of idealism or mentalism. The question of how to understand different kinds of metaphysical dependence is quite controversial in Spinoza studies; I address major alternative readings in the notes. But there I also try to draw connections to the growing debate in contemporary discussions about metaphysical dependence, as this topic is a happy point of shared interest between Spinoza and contemporary metaphysicians alike. (shrink)