Fichte, Eberhard, and the Psychology of Religion

2010 ◽  
Vol 104 (1) ◽  
pp. 93-110 ◽  
Author(s):  
Ben Crowe

In marked contrast to much of twentieth-century psychology and philosophy, prevailing accounts of affect, emotion, and sentiment in the eighteenth century took these phenomena to be rational and, to a certain extent, cognitive.1 Because of a combination of disciplinary diffusion and general lack of physicalist assumptions, accounts of affectivity in the eighteenth century also tended to be quite flexible and nuanced. This is particularly true of an influential stream of Anglo-Scottish and German thought on morality, aesthetics, and the philosophy of religion. Following Shaftesbury, many of the most prominent philosophers of the century regarded affective states and processes as playing a crucial role in accounts of value. In most cases, this tendency was combined with a sort of anti-rationalism, that is, with a tendency to minimize the role of reason in everything from common sense perceptual knowledge to religious belief. Hutcheson's moral sense theory and his well-known and influential criticisms of moral rationalism exemplify this trend.2 It is perhaps more pronounced in Lord Kames, who followed the lead of Shaftesbury and Hutcheson in aesthetics, moral theory, philosophy of religion, anthropology, and history.3 In Germany, this stream of thought was quite well-received by philosophers both inside and outside the dominant Wolffian tradition.4 Particularly important and influential in this respect were Johann Georg Hamann, who drew upon Hutcheson, Hume, and the “Common Sense” school to defend a conception of faith as “sentiment (Empfindung),” and Johann Gottfried Herder, a polymath and philosophical pioneer whose work in psychology, anthropology, history, aesthetics, biblical criticism, and theology consistently stresses the fundamental role of passion, affect, and sensibility in every aspect of human culture.5

Author(s):  
William E. Nelson

This chapter shows how common law pleading, the use of common law vocabulary, and substantive common law rules lay at the foundation of every colony’s law by the middle of the eighteenth century. There is some explanation of how this common law system functioned in practice. The chapter then discusses why colonials looked upon the common law as a repository of liberty. It also discusses in detail the development of the legal profession individually in each of the thirteen colonies. Finally, the chapter ends with a discussion of the role of legislation. It shows that, although legislation had played an important role in the development of law and legal institutions in the seventeenth century, eighteenth-century Americans were suspicious of legislation, with the result that the output of pre-Revolutionary legislatures was minimal.


2021 ◽  
pp. 255-304
Author(s):  
Diego E. Quijano Durán

The Austrian school of economics and the investment method known as value investing have a similar conception of the world, so that it is possible to find multiple links between them and form a coherent structure. To the economist, this allows for a much deeper understanding of the entrepreneurial function and the manner in which economic calculation is actually performed. To the investor, it offers a theoretical framework that explains economic phenomena, permitting him to better understand the role of the entrepreneur and to protect his investment when dangerous patterns can be observed. In this essay, we begin from the common stance of both schools of thought towards common sense, the use of realistic assumptions, the importance of prudence and the low value of complex mathematics in the fields of economics and finance. We then proceed to develop in greater depth nine aspects that have strong philosophical and scientific links. Key words: Value investing, Austrian school of economics, entrepreneurship, dynamic efficiency, economic calculation. JEL Classification: A12, G17, M20. Resumen: La Escuela Austriaca de Economía y el método de inversión en valor tienen una concepción similar del mundo que permite entrelazarlas coherentemente. Al economista, le permite profundizar el conocimiento del ejercicio de la función empresarial y la realización del cálculo económico en la práctica. Al inversor, le ofrece un marco teórico para comprender mejor el papel del empresario y los fenómenos económicos y detectar temprano patrones peligrosos y así protegerse. En este trabajo partimos de la base de que ambas escuelas de pensamiento tienen sus raíces en el sentido común y los supuestos realistas, que son prudentes a la hora de ver el futuro y que dudan de la utilidad de las matemáticas complejas en los campos económicos y financieros. Sobre ello, desarrollamos nueve aspectos en los cuales hay fuertes conexiones como, por ejemplo, la manera en que el ejercicio de la empresarialidad mejora la eficiencia del mercado y coordina los planes de las personas. Palabras clave: Inversión en valor, escuela austriaca de economía, empre-sarialidad, eficiencia dinámica, cálculo económico. Clasificación JEL: A12, G17, M20.


2013 ◽  
Vol 10 ◽  
pp. 87
Author(s):  
Markku Kekäläinen

The article deals with James Boswell’s (1740–1795) attitudes towards the courtly milieu in the context of eighteenth-century British court discourse. The central argument is that, strongly contrary to the anti-court ethos of his intellectual and social milieu, Boswell had an affirmative and enthusiastic attitude towards the court. Moreover, the fact that he was neither an Addisonian moralist ‘spectator’ nor a cynical court aristocrat like Lord Chesterfield, but in many senses a highly affective ‘man of feeling’ of the age, did not diminish the uniqueness of his positive view of court culture. On the one hand, Boswell’s appreciation of the court was connected with his firm monarchism and belief in hereditary rank; on the other hand, he was aesthetically fascinated by the splendour and magnificence of the courtly milieu. His appraisal of the court did not include the common-sense moralism of the moral weeklies or the cynical observations of the  aristocratic court discourse; rather his attitude was immediate, emotional, and enthusiastic in the spirit of the cult of sensibility.


2018 ◽  
Vol 24 (11) ◽  
pp. 1461-1472
Author(s):  
Heidi Willemse ◽  
Margot van der Doef ◽  
Henriët van Middendorp

Applying the Common Sense Model, this cross-sectional study examines associations between illness perceptions and quality of life and the mediating role of coping in 243 adults with alopecia areata, a chronic dermatological condition. At least some QoL impairment was reported by 84 percent of participants, with 31 percent reporting very to extremely large impairment. Stronger perceptions of consequences, emotional representations, identity, and lower attribution to chance were related to more impairment, with avoidant coping acting as (partial) mediator. Illness perceptions and avoidant coping seem to play an important role in QoL and are relevant intervention targets in alopecia areata.


Author(s):  
James W. Manns

A French Jesuit who flourished in the early eighteenth century, Buffier developed an outlook that he referred to as common-sense philosophy. While deeply influenced by the philosophies of Descartes and Locke, he saw their reliance on the testimony of inner experience to be conducive to scepticism concerning the external world. In reaction to this, he sought to establish the irrevocable claims of various ‘first truths’, which pointed towards external reality and qualified it in various respects. His work anticipates certain themes that surfaced later in the common-sense philosophy of Thomas Reid.


Author(s):  
William E. Nelson

This book examines the role of the common law in the life and politics of Great Britain’s North American colonies from the founding of Virginia in 1607 to the outbreak of the American Revolution in 1775–76. The main theme of the book is that when the different colonies were initially founded, they followed very different law—typically not the common law of England. But over the course of the seventeenth century and first half of the eighteenth century, the colonies all received the common law, with the result that by the 1750s the common law constituted the foundation of every colony’s law and every colony’s political system. Some of the colonies adopted the common law because of pressure from the Crown to do so, but others turned to the common law because of socioeconomic pressures on the ground. During the more than century-long process of reception, the common law gradually changed, and thus, what was on the ground in 1776 was not identical to the common law of England. Rather, it was a body of rules that would constitute a foundation for an Americanized version of the common law.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document