This book seeks to explain the critiques of humanism and the "negative" philosophical anthropologies that dominated mid-century philosophy and traces the ...

In this second edition, Joseph Rychlak has retained his analysis of the philosophical antecedents of psychology and, at the same time, has considerably revised more complicated material illustration rigorous humanism to make the book more accessible for students. Rychlak here offers an analysis of the philosophical traditions underlying the social sciences and shows how functionalism came to dominate the modern science of psychology in America.

Bien, Victor This article gives my views as a co-convenor of the Symposium held on 20 June in the NSW Parliament House. My colleague Dr Affie Adagio was the other convenor. Our use of the House was sponsored by Alex Greenwich, member for Sydney.

In this paper we propose to relate the humanistic and phenomenological spirit. In particular, by humanism we will refer to the rhetorical humanism that Ernesto Grassi was so concerned to recover. Our thesis would be that this humanism and phenomenology share a pathos, a sensibility and even a very similar fundamentalconcern: the showing (Aufweisung) of the real, a poetic, rhetorical, descriptive, and ontological task. By doing this, both humanism and phenomenology diverge from the predominant rationalist and epistemological tradition centered on (...) demonstration. (shrink)

In this paper I argue that Peter Kivy’s contention that music is incapable of profundity is correct only in a limited sense. So long as we associate profundity with depth of subject matter, even the revisions proposed by Stephen Davies and Julian Dodd are incapable of delivering an account of musical profundity which has the correct scope. Theories of profundity based on criteria of exemplification and non-denotational expression of content remain vulnerable to Kivy’s well-chosen counter-examples of non-profound artworks which meet (...) these criteria. However, the established debate presumes that profundity is only possible through a depth of subject matter; I argue that there is an alternative form off profundity which music does exhibit, relating to its formal complexity. This profundity I term ‘anti-humanist’. (shrink)

Extension of the system that includes the key substrates for sensation, perception, emotion, volition, and cognition, and all representational sources for cognition, supports the view that there is an extended mind and an extended body. These intellectual views can be made practical in a humanist system based on extensions and in religious systems based on extensions. Independently, there is also an institutional extension of secularism. Hence, I maintain, there are five principal forms of extension.

Sartre presented ‘Existentialism and Humanism’ to a popular audience in Paris late in 1945. As he implies in the discussion which is appended to the text of the lecture (pp. 57–58), he was here simplifying his views so as to make them intelligible to a wide audience. In this he succeeded only too well; the lecture has become exceedingly well known and has been regarded as a definitive presentation not only of Sartre's philosophy at the time, but also of ‘existentialism’. (...) One thing I hope to show in this essay is that this is not a sensible view to take; Sartre's text requires a good deal of interpretation and qualification in the light of his other writings of the period, and what emerges is a position which is uniquely his own. One way in which this can be seen is by considering Heidegger's ‘Letter on Humanism’ of 1947 which is a response to Sartre's lecture and is, indeed, Heidegger's only direct response to Sartre's work. In the lecture Sartre had associated Heidegger with himself as an ‘existential atheist’ (p. 26), but in his letter Heidegger emphatically dissociates himself both from atheism and from existentialism as characterized by Sartre, and goes on to criticize the position advanced by Sartre in the lecture. Yet despite the popular exaggeration of the significance of Sartre's lecture, it is certainly worth studying; for not only is it short and accessible, though in some respects misleading, it is also one of Sartre's few indications of the positive ethical theory which so many of his writings require but do not supply. (shrink)

This work has been selected by scholars as being culturally important, and is part of the knowledge base of civilization as we know it. This work was reproduced from the original artifact, and remains as true to the original work as possible. Therefore, you will see the original copyright references, library stamps (as most of these works have been housed in our most important libraries around the world), and other notations in the work.This work is in the public domain in (...) the United States of America, and possibly other nations. Within the United States, you may freely copy and distribute this work, as no entity (individual or corporate) has a copyright on the body of the work.As a reproduction of a historical artifact, this work may contain missing or blurred pages, poor pictures, errant marks, etc. Scholars believe, and we concur, that this work is important enough to be preserved, reproduced, and made generally available to the public. We appreciate your support of the preservation process, and thank you for being an important part of keeping this knowledge alive and relevant. (shrink)

One hundred years have passed since the birth of Bertrand Russell, major English bourgeois philosopher of the twentieth century, logician, mathematician, sociologist, publicist, and Nobel Laureate for literature, who died two years ago. Russell was a philosopher who always sought truth, who tried to use for philosophy the lessons and achievements of diverse sciences, who responded deeply to social events in England and other countries, and who participated actively in them. He was a prominent public figure, a passionate humanist, and (...) a fighter against militarism and for peace and just relations among peoples. The literature on Russell is enormous. (shrink)

Buber proclaims that 'in the beginning was relation'; that man is by his very nature a Homo Dialogus - incapable of realizing himself without communion with man, with the creation and with his Creator.Buber sought to anchor Zionism in what he defined as 'Hebrew Humanism': "the path of holiness" as opposed to "holy egoism".

During the Weimar Republic, Siegfried Kracauer established himself as a trenchant theorist of film, culture, and modernity, and he is now considered one of the key thinkers of the twentieth century. When he arrived in Manhattan aboard a crowded refugee ship in 1941, however, he was virtually unknown in the United States and had yet to write his best-known books, _From Caligari to Hitler_ and _Theory of Film_. Johannes von Moltke details the intricate ways in which the American intellectual and (...) political context shaped Kracauer’s seminal contributions to film studies and shows how, in turn, Kracauer’s American writings helped shape the emergent discipline. Using archival sources and detailed readings, von Moltke asks what it means to consider Kracauer as the New York Intellectual he became in the last quarter century of his life. Adopting a transatlantic perspective on Kracauer’s work, von Moltke demonstrates how he pursued questions in conversation with contemporary critics from Theodor Adorno to Hannah Arendt, from Clement Greenberg to Robert Warshow: questions about the origins of totalitarianism and the authoritarian personality; about high and low culture; about liberalism, democracy, and what it means to be human. From these wide-flung debates, Kracauer’s own voice emerges as that of an incisive cultural critic invested in a humanist understanding of the cinema. (shrink)

Während der letzten zehn Jahre wurde viel über den ‘Humanismus’ des jungen Marx gesprochen. Osteuropäische Marxisten, die bemüht sind, ihren Anti-Stalinismus durch Berufung auf die Autorität von ‘Marx selbst’ zu untermauern, gebrauchen den Ausdruck ‘Humanismus’ in einem ungenauen Sinn, etwa gleichbedeutend mit ‘Anthropozentrismus’. Aber wenn man sagt, daß Marx’ Haltung anthropozentrisch sei, so sind damit die Hauptfragen erst gestellt, nicht schon gelöst.‘Humanismus’ mag etwa soviel wie ‘Säkularismus’ bedeuten — der Mensch, nicht Gott, wird als im Mittelpunkt stehend gedacht. Die anthropozentrische (...) Haltung kann verschiedene Formen annehmen, vor allem die Formen, die man als ‘Humanismus der Ideale’ und als ‘Humanismus der Prinzipien’ bezeichnen könnte. Der Humanismus der Ideale ist ausdrücklich an derZukunft orientiert, der Humanismus der Prinzipien aber an derGegenwart. Nur ein Humanismus der Prinzipien, dem es darum geht, den Eigenwert existierender Individuen zu behaupten und zu verteidigen, verdient es, ‘ethischer Humanismus’ genannt zu werden. Marx, sogar der jüngste Marx, war kein ethischer Humanist in diesem Sinn. Und nur ein Humanismus in diesem strengen Sinn würde einen philosophischen Standort bieten, von dem aus man den Stalinismus oder Neo-Stalinismus angreifen könnte.Marx war ein Säkularist, und er entwarf ein humanistisches Ideal für die Zukunft, aber humanistische Prinzipien für die Gegenwart lehnte er ab. Er betonte, daß nur dem nicht entfremdeten, produktiven Individuum der kommunistischen Zukunft ein eigener Wert zukomme. Bis dahin haben Individuen nur einen geschichtlich instrumentalen Wert: jene, die an der Verwirklichung der kommunistischen Gesellschaft arbeiten, sind zu respektieren; diejenigen, welche dabei Widerstand leisten oder versagen, müssen ausschließlich als Hindernisse auf dem Wege des geschichtlichen Fortschritts behandelt werden.In diesem Sinn ist der Leninismus und sogar der Stalinismus und Neo-Stalinismus in dem zukunftsorientierten Humanismus der Ideale des jungen Marx einbegriffen, oder zumindest davon nicht ausgeschlossen. Selbst der jüngste Marx machte sich den Modeirrtum des 19. Jahrhunderts zu eigen — den Irrtum des ‘aufgeschobenen Wertes’ oder des ‘zeitlich verstellten Wertes’ und nahm damit eine mit dem ethischen Humanismus grundsätzlich unvereinbare Position ein. (shrink)

This book is a novel contribution to contemporary research on Simone de Beauvoir, and a defense of the importance of the humanities. It reveals previously unexplored dimensions of Beauvoir's work by exposing her as a significant and inspiring humanist thinker. These essays argue that her works and influence testify to the transformative potential of humanistic research.