AT THE CENTRE OF KIERKEGAARD: AN OBJECTIVE ABSURDITY

1997 ◽  
Vol 33 (4) ◽  
pp. 433-441 ◽  
Author(s):  
ED. L. MILLER

No one doubts that Kierkegaard's Concluding Unscientific Postscript is one of the most important, one of the most artistically contrived, and certainly one of the wittiest works in the history of philosophy. Further, the Postscript has often been accorded a kind of centrality in the Kierkegaardian corpus. Kierkegaard himself seems to have assigned it some such role. He informs the reader in the ‘First and Last Declaration’ that he originally intended the Postscript to be his last word before retiring from his authorship (hence part of the significance of the word ‘concluding’). In The Point of View for My Work as an Author he himself calls it both ‘the turning-point’ (repeatedly) and ‘the middle point’ in the sense that ‘this work concerns itself with and sets “the Problem”, which is the problem of the whole authorship: how to become a Christian’. Aside from the way in which Kierkegaard may have conceived the Postscript as being central or pivotal to his whole enterprise, certainly scholars have sometimes treated the Postscript as, at least in some ways, his magnum opus and summum verbum – as I would also. But our concern here is not with the centrality of the Postscript but with the centrality within the Postscript. Most everyone would, I think, acknowledge that a central section of the Postscript may be identified, though I would go farther and claim that within this a central, pivotal, solitary statement may be identified.

1996 ◽  
Vol 6 (3) ◽  
pp. 335-344 ◽  
Author(s):  
Michael Bonner

Poverty in medieval Islam is an enormous topic. It is worth considering from a historian's point of view, especially in the light of what has been accomplished by historians of Rome, Byzantium, and the medieval and modern West who have dealt with poverty and the poor. But as always, the sources for Islamic history, especially for the formative early centuries, present difficulties. Here I wish to make a preliminary attempt at dealing with part of this problem. I shall begin by considering an event which represents a turning point in the history of the Muslim poor, or more accurately, in the way poverty and the poor have been represented in modern historical scholarship on medieval Islam. Then I shall suggest a way in which this event may be set in context, and a possible strategy for handling some of the relevant sources. This strategy involves the identification of different, competing ways in which the poor were defined in the first centuries of Islam.


2021 ◽  
pp. 44-54
Author(s):  
Michael Frede

This chapter evaluates the historical history of philosophy. Given the very strong philosophical assumptions underlying the early philosophical histories of philosophy, and given in particular the fact that they tended to be written from the point of view of some kind of idealism, it is not surprising that they should have met with some resistance, in particular outside philosophy. Thus, one finds Albert Schwegler criticizing Hegel’s method of treating the history of philosophy, rejecting any kind of philosophical history of philosophy as history. He insists that the systematical study of the history of philosophy is the task of a historian and has to be pursued in precisely the way one studies any other kind of history or history in general. Zeller therefore advocates a purely historical approach to the history of philosophy, a historian’s history of philosophy, and his own monumental work on the history of Greek philosophy is inspired by this conception, just as it, in turn, inspires a lot of work, at least on ancient philosophy of the same kind. The chapter then presents a systematical consideration of the historical history of philosophy.


Author(s):  
Abby S. Waysdorf

What is remix today? No longer a controversy, no longer a buzzword, remix is both everywhere and nowhere in contemporary media. This article examines this situation, looking at what remix now means when it is, for the most part, just an accepted part of the media landscape. I argue that remix should be looked at from an ethnographic point of view, focused on how and why remixes are used. To that end, this article identifies three ways of conceptualizing remix, based on intention rather than content: the aesthetic, communicative, and conceptual forms. It explores the history of (talking about) remix, looking at the tension between seeing remix as a form of art and remix as a mode of ‘talking back’ to the media, and how those tensions can be resolved in looking at the different ways remix originated. Finally, it addresses what ubiquitous remix might mean for the way we think about archival material, and the challenges this brings for archives themselves. In this way, this article updates the study of remix for a time when remix is everywhere.


Author(s):  
О.А. Матвейчев

Гермотим из Клазомен – фигура в истории греческой философии, можно сказать, маргинальная. В современной литературе он появляется разве что в ряду других колдунов и мистиков VII–VI вв. до н.э. В таком статусе он включается и в собрание Дильса. Анализируя сведения о Гермотиме, автор ставит перед собой цель найти ему место среди малоазийских философов первой величины, которых считают основателями греческой философии. Различение духа (души) и материи (тела) станет основополагающим принципом греческой философии, понятие Ума (нуса) выступит фундаментом для системы Анаксагора, первого афинского философа, с которого, собственно, и начнется история классической греческой философии. Автор разделяет точку зрения Э. Доддса и др., что появление нового для Греции представления о различии души и тела коренится в северной (гиперборейской?) ментальности, привнесенной в греческий мир во времена колонизации VII–VI вв. до н.э., а возможно – и в более ранние. Ключевые слова: история философии, Древняя Греция, Гиперборея, Гермотим из Клазомен, Анаксагор, шаманизм, нус, душа, тело Hermotimus of Clazomenae can be called a marginal figure in the history of Greek philosophy. In modern literature he is mentioned only among other sorcerers and mystics of the VIIth–VIth centuries BC. The collection of Hermann Diels describes him in the same manner. Analyzing available information about Hermotimus, the author makes an attempt to place him among the primary Anatolian philosophers who are considered the founders of Greek philosophy. The distinction between spirit (soul) and matter (body) will become the fundamental principle of Greek philosophy; the concept of Nous (cosmic Mind) will be the foundation for the system of Anaxagoras, the first Athenian philosopher, from which, in fact, the history of classical Greek philosophy begins. The author shares the point of view of E. Dodds and others that the emergence of a new concept about the difference between soul and body in Greece is rooted in the northern (Hyperborean?) mentality introduced into the Greek world during the colonization of the VIIth–VIth centuries BC or possibly in earlier times. Keywords: history of philosophy, Ancient Greece, Hyperborea, Hermotimus of Clazomenae, Anaxagoras, shamanism, nous, soul, body


2021 ◽  
Vol 6 (5) ◽  
Author(s):  
Nguyen Thi Van

Truth is an issue that has been mentioned a lot in the history of philosophy. However, before Marx's philosophy was born, no school of philosophy had a complete and correct conception of truth. In this article, the author analyzes the point of view of Marxism - Leninism on the issue of truth.<p> </p><p><strong> Article visualizations:</strong></p><p><img src="/-counters-/edu_01/0874/a.php" alt="Hit counter" /></p>


2021 ◽  
Vol 76 (4) ◽  
pp. 1331-1362
Author(s):  
Alexander Maar

Father Frederick Copleston is best known for his carefully crafted works History of Philosophy and Thomas Aquinas. Copleston’s most notable metaphysical thesis is his interpretation of the argument from contingency, which he sees as the superior choice for theists. He draws on Aquinas and distinguishes between causa fieri and causa esse to argue that God is a higher order (vertical) cause of contingent causal series (horizontal). Copleston presents God not as a temporal first cause, but an ontologically ultimate cause necessary to explain a contingent universe. His contribution changed the way we read Aquinas. Copleston’s willingness to debate his thesis with different philosophical perspectives is illustrated by his acceptance to discuss God’s existence with Bertrand Russell, in 1948. This BBC radio debate epitomises the dispute between theists and atheists from the 1940s onwards. I undertake to expound and comment Copleston’s contribution to metaphysics, present relevant parts of the debate and provide criticism.


SATS ◽  
2020 ◽  
Vol 20 (2) ◽  
pp. 97-116
Author(s):  
Paolo Parrini

AbstractToday’s critical state of philosophy is examined by considering two of its aspects: the way in which philosophy presently is ever more typically practised (increasing professionalism and specialisation) and the new challenges it has to face to keep up with the changed scientific, and more generally cultural and social context. The essay outlines some prospects of progress in the light of those which still now can be considered the proper tasks of philosophical inquiry. Such tasks are singled out through an historical survey of the original characters of philosophy and an appraisal of its theoretical motivations. The importance of the history of philosophy and the necessity of achieving a virtuous relation among the various philosophical disciplines are stressed to contrast the dangers of excess specialisation and professionalism.


2019 ◽  
Vol 41 (1) ◽  
pp. 83-101
Author(s):  
Ermylos Plevrakis

AbstractAlthough Hegel does not pass up the opportunity to express his deep admiration for specific aspects of the Aristotelian notion of God, he is not interested in giving a concrete account of its systematic significance for his Philosophy of Mind as a whole. In this article, I seek to take an overarching perspective on both the Aristotelian God and the Hegelian mind. By contrast to the common practice of focusing on Hegel's interpretation of Aristotle in his Lectures on the History of Philosophy, I first examine the Aristotelian text itself and then focus on Hegel's Encyclopaedia Philosophy of Mind, in order to explore the coincidence between the two conceptions from a systematic point of view. With regard to Aristotle, I argue that ‘God’ represents the conceptual vanishing point of his philosophy at which all philosophical sciences appear to converge. With regard to Hegel, I show that it is precisely such conceptual convergence of all philosophical sciences that constitutes both the starting and ending points of the Philosophy of Mind. The result is a novel meta-scientific and non-theistic conception of ‘God’ that provides the means not only to re-evaluate the systematic relation between Hegel and Aristotle but also to reconsider the character, content and aim of speculative philosophy in general.


Philosophy ◽  
1958 ◽  
Vol 33 (126) ◽  
pp. 193-220
Author(s):  
Morris Lazerowitz

Occasionally there has appeared in the history of philosophy a thinker who has become aware of the chaotic condition of philosophy and of the intellectual anarchy that exists in all of its branches, and has attempted to remedy the situation. Descartes cast about for a guiding principle, a compass which would show him the way through the treacherous terrain of philosophy. As is well known he devised the method of systematic doubt, by means of which he hoped to discover an axiom on which he could securely erect a system of basic and reassuring beliefs. Leibniz had before his mind the notion of an ideal language which would by calculation solve problems with certainty. With this he thought we “should be able to reason in metaphysics and morals in much the same way as in geometry and analysis.” Descartes' attempt was a failure; and nothing came of Leibniz's ideal, even with the development of modern symbolic logic. Russell's claim that “logic is the essence of philosophy” frightened many philosophers and gave new hope to others; but his claim was as empty as the proverbial political promise. With G. E. Moore we have a further attempt to introduce sobriety and certainty into philosophy and to make fruitful research possible in it. He has made prominent a method for obtaining results in philosophy; and he has also formulated a philosophical platform, i.e., set out a list of Common-sense propositions which he says are known to be true by everyone, philosopher as well as non-philosopher, and are not, therefore, open to debate. The method, which he used extensively and with great skill, is the method of analysing concepts.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document