Although Wilhelm Dilthey and Franz Brentano apparently were pursuing roughly the same objective—to offer a description of our mental functions and of their relations to objects—and both called their respective research programs ‘descriptive psychology’, they seem to have used the term to refer to two different methods of psychological research. In this article, I compare analyses of these differences. Against the reading of Orth but also against a possible application of recent relativist accounts of the epistemology of peer disagreement (...) to this case, I argue that their apparent shared objective is not enough to support an understanding of their views as two alternatives within a given historical or scientific context, or as a mutual peer disagreement. I show that the impression of a shared objective can be explained away as stemming from the influence of their teacher Adolf Trendelenburg, and I stress that the case of introspection strongly suggests that an account in terms of peer disagreement is not plausible. Finally, I conclude that the opposition between two traditions, Austrian philosophy and historicism, might be better suited to account for the dispute and its apparent common historical context. (shrink)

Histories of German philosophy in the nineteenth century typically focus on its first half--when Hegel, idealism, and Romanticism dominated. By contrast, the remainder of the century, after Hegel's death, has been relatively neglected because it has been seen as a period of stagnation and decline. But Frederick Beiser argues that the second half of the century was in fact one of the most revolutionary periods in modern philosophy because the nature of philosophy itself was up for grabs and the very (...) absence of certainty led to creativity and the start of a new era. In this innovative concise history of German philosophy from 1840 to 1900, Beiser focuses not on themes or individual thinkers but rather on the period's five great debates: the identity crisis of philosophy, the materialism controversy, the methods and limits of history, the pessimism controversy, and the Ignorabimusstreit. Schopenhauer and Wilhelm Dilthey play important roles in these controversies but so do many neglected figures, including Ludwig Büchner, Eugen Dühring, Eduard von Hartmann, Julius Fraunstaedt, Hermann Lotze, Adolf Trendelenburg, and two women, Agnes Taubert and Olga Pluemacher, who have been completely forgotten in histories of philosophy. The result is a wide-ranging, original, and surprising new account of German philosophy in the critical period between Hegel and the twentieth century. (shrink)

Mit der Akademie-Ausgabe der aristotelischen Schriften, die von 1831 an erscheinen und ein großes Dokument der Zusammenarbeit von philologischer und philosophiehistorischer Forschung darstellen, sowie der Neubewertung der aristotelischen Philosophie in der Nachfolge Hegels und Schellings, erreicht die Rezeption des aristotelischen Werkes im 19. Jahrhundert ein neues Niveau. Zurecht wird auch davon gesprochen, daß die deutsche Philosophie seit den 1830er Jahren im Zeichen einer »Erneuerung des Aristoteles« steht. Auf der Grundlage der philologischen Forschung von Bekker und Brandis bis zu Bonitz und (...) der Philosophiegeschichtsschreibung von Schleiermacher und Ritter bis zu Zeller, geht es nicht bloß um philologische Grundlagenforschung, sondern auch um den Versuch, die Einheit des aristotelischen Philosophiekonzepts im Sinne einer »aristotelischen Weltanschauung« aufzufassen und diese zum Grundmuster der Wirklichkeitserkenntnis zu machen. Friedrich Adolf Trendelenburg, einer der einflußreichsten Schulphilosophen des 19. Jahrhunderts, verbindet diese beiden Aspekte der Aristoteles-Rezeption. Die Bedeutung der aristotelischen Philosophie läßt sich seiner Ansicht nach auf drei Leitlinien zusammenfassen: Zum einen wird sie den Anforderungen zeitgemäßen Philosophierens im Gespräch mit den Einzelwissenschaften gerecht; zum anderen liefert sie das Musterbild, wie Philosophie als »Theorie der Wissenschaften« dennoch eine prägende Funktion im Wissenschaftsdiskurs ausüben kann. Und sie bietet darüber hinaus auf einem hohen systematischen Niveau die Möglichkeit, mit der eigenen Denktradition im Gespräch zu bleiben. Die Wirkungsgeschichte dieser »Erneuerung des Aristoteles« verläuft über Rudolf Eucken, Wilhelm Dilthey und Franz Brentano bis in das 20. Jahrhundert. (shrink)

1. Bd. Erkenntnislehre.--2. Bd. Formale Logik.

First Published in 1999. Routledge is an imprint of Taylor & Francis, an informa company.

This is an annotated English edition of all of Nietzsche's work. The book is a translation of the celebrated Kritische Studienausgabe in 15 Bänden (1980) edited by Giorgio Colli and Mazzino Montinari.

Bd. 1. Die Pioniere der pädagogischen Bewegung.--Bd. 2. Ausbau und Selbstkritik.

Toward the beginning of 2013, I received reports of passages in the Black Notebooks that offered observations on Jewry, or as the case may be, world Jewry. It immediately became clear to me that the publication of the Black Notebooks would call forth a wide-spread international debate. Already in the Spring of 2013, I had asked Professor Friedrich-Wilhelm von Herrmann, last private assistant – and in the words of my grandfather, the “chief co-worker of the complete edition”, – if (...) he might review the Notebooks as a whole, based on his profound insight into the thought of Martin Heidegger, and in particular, review those Jewish-related passages that were the focus of the public eye. Publications about the Black Notebooks quickly came to propagate catchy expressions such as “being-historical anti-Semitism” and “metaphysical anti-Semitism”. The first question that obviously arises is: Does the thought of Martin Heidegger exhibit any kind of anti-Semitism at all? In this book Professor von Herrmann now advances his hermeneutic explication. With Professor Francesco Alfieri of the Pontificia Università Lateranense he has found a colleague who has drawn up a comprehensive philological analysis of volumes GA 94 through GA 97 of the Complete Edition. The fact that Heidegger designated the hitherto published “black notebooks” as Ponderings and as Observations has been given little consideration. He intentionally placed them at the conclusion of the Complete Edition because without acquaintance with the lectures, and above all, with the being-historical treatises that would come to be published in the framework of the Complete Edition, they would not be comprehensible. (shrink)