Karl Jaspers’ existential concept of psychotherapy

2013 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jann E. Schlimme
Keyword(s):  
The Other ◽  
Human Beings ◽  
Karl Jaspers ◽  
General Psychopathology ◽  
Other Hand ◽  
The One

Karl Jaspers developed and portrayed his existential understanding of psychotherapy in a number of papers and in the different editions of his General Psychopathology. In this chapter I will first describe Jaspers’ own understanding of psychotherapy and will argue that for Jaspers’ we, as human beings, need to philosophize with respect to existential questions, as they cannot be tackled in a scientific manner. This entails that there is a gap between the two kinds of liberty which can be achieved through a psychotherapeutical modulation of our behaviour, on the one hand, and which can be grasped as existence in a Jaspersian sense, on the other hand. Accordingly I will argue that due to methodological reasons, Jaspers did not intend to develop an existential form of psychotherapy, but an existential understanding of psychotherapy. I will demonstrate that his writings offer a rich framework for such an understanding.

scholarly journals Two Conceptions of Second Nature

2020 ◽  
Vol 3 (1) ◽  
pp. 68-80 ◽  
Author(s):  
Georg W. Bertram
Keyword(s):  
The Other ◽  
Human Beings ◽  
Open Future ◽  
Second Nature ◽  
Other Hand ◽  
The World ◽  
Cognitive Activities ◽  
The Open Future ◽  
The One ◽  
First Nature

AbstractThe concept of second nature promises to provide an explanation of how nature and reason can be reconciled. But the concept is laden with ambiguity. On the one hand, second nature is understood as that which binds together all cognitive activities. On the other hand, second nature is conceived of as a kind of nature that can be changed by cognitive activities. The paper tries to investigate this ambiguity by distinguishing a Kantian conception of second nature from a Hegelian conception. It argues that the idea of a transformation from a being of first nature into a being of second nature that stands at the heart of the Kantian conception is mistaken. The Hegelian conception demonstrates that the transformation in question takes place within second nature itself. Thus, the Hegelian conception allows us to understand the way in which second nature is not structurally isomorphic with first nature: It is a process of ongoing selftransformation that is not primarily determined by how the world is, but rather by commitments out of which human beings are bound to the open future.

Filosofia, politica e società ai tempi della pandemia. Agamben e la «paranoia della ragione»

2021 ◽  
Vol 77 (2-3) ◽  
pp. 617-642
Author(s):  
Antonio Di Chiro
Keyword(s):  
Social Life ◽  
The Other ◽  
State Of Exception ◽  
Human Beings ◽  
Giorgio Agamben ◽  
Other Hand ◽  
Intimate Relations ◽  
To Come ◽  
The One

In this essay we will try to analyze the thought of the philosopher Giorgio Agamben on the pandemic. The aim of the work is twofold. On the one hand, we will try to demonstrate that Agamben’s positions on the pandemic are not to be understood as mere extemporaneous statements, but as integral parts of his philosophy. On the other hand, we will try to show how these positions are based on a deeply paranoid and anti-scientific vision, since Agamben believes that the effects of the epidemic have been exaggerated by the centers of power in order to create a “state of exception” that allows to crumble social life and to use the fear of poverty as a tool to dominate society. We will try to demonstrate that it is precisely starting from the critique of Agamben’s positions that it is possible to rethink a philosophy and a politic to come and a new reorganization of social and intimate relations between human beings.

Païdeia et Sport

1998 ◽  
pp. 1-9
Author(s):  
Leo-Paul Bordeleau
Keyword(s):  
Social Practice ◽  
The Other ◽  
Human Beings ◽  
Modern Education ◽  
Other Hand ◽  
The World ◽  
The One

Can sport claim to be an educative means, and what becomes of Greek paideia in the world of sport? The author intends to answer these questions through the use of a semantic and historical clarification of the notions of sport and education. Indeed, on the one hand, sport appears like a social practice not much propitious to education; on the other hand, modern education seems to have deviated from the Greek paideia’s trajectory. Therefore, to take into account this deviation and, by doing so, to make precise the idea of education, and then demonstrate that sport carries all characteristics of modern rationality which has produced it, will allow the author to conclude that sport could be considered one of the preferential means of human beings’ formation. Nevertheless its educative function more likely belongs to the nature of "poïèsis" than to the nature of "praxis."

Leibniz on Apperception and Animal Souls

Dialogue ◽  
1994 ◽  
Vol 33 (4) ◽  
pp. 701-724 ◽  
Author(s):  
Murray Miles
Keyword(s):  
The Other ◽  
Necessary Condition ◽  
Sufficient Condition ◽  
Human Beings ◽  
Mental Processes ◽  
Other Hand ◽  
Forms Of Life ◽  
The One

InLeibniz: Perception, Apperception, and Thought, Robert McRae alleges a flat “contradiction” (McRae 1976, p. 30) at the heart of Leibniz's doctrine of three grades of monads: bare entelechies characterized by perception; animal souls capable both of perception and of sensation; and rational souls, minds or spirits endowed not only with capacities for perception and sensation but also with consciousness of self or what Leibniz calls (introducing a new term of art into the vocabulary of philosophy) “apperception.” Apperception is a necessary condition of those distinctively human mental processes associated with understanding and with reason. Insofar as it is also a sufficient condition of rationality, it is not ascribable to animals. But apperception is a necessary condition of sensation or feeling as well; and animals are capable of sensation, according to Leibniz, who decisively rejected the Cartesian doctrine that beasts are nothing but material automata. “On the one hand,” writes McRae, “what distinguishes animals from lower forms of life is sensation or feeling, but on the other hand apperception is a necessary condition of sensation, and apperception distinguishes human beings from animals” (McRae 1976, p. 30). “We are thus left with an unresolved inconsistency in Leibniz's account of sensation, so far as sensation is attributable both to men and animals” (ibid., p. 34).

Spinoza, Descartes, and the “Stupid Cartesians”

2019 ◽  
pp. 658-677
Author(s):  
Steven Nadler
Keyword(s):  
The Other ◽  
Other Hand ◽  
The One

Spinoza’s relationship to Descartes and his followers is complex. On the one hand, he was clearly inspired and influenced by the metaphysical and epistemological principles of Cartesian philosophy. On the other hand, his system represents a significant departure from some of that philosophy’s most fundamental principles. In this chapter, I consider those aspects of Descartes’s thought that Spinoza, over the course of his philosophical career, accepted, modified, and rejected, as well as his tense relations with later Cartesians who sought to distance themselves from a “heretic” perceived by ecclesiastic, academic, and civil authorities as one of their own.

Dignity and Equality in Pufendorf’s Natural Law Theory

2019 ◽  
pp. 147-168 ◽  
Author(s):  
Simone Zurbuchen
Keyword(s):  
Social Inequality ◽  
Natural Law ◽  
Moral Status ◽  
The Other ◽  
Moral Standing ◽  
Human Beings ◽  
Other Hand ◽  
Natural Law Theory ◽  
The One ◽  
In Virtue Of

The chapter explores the ambiguity of the notion of dignity in Pufendorf’s natural law theory. On the one hand, dignity (dignatio) denotes the moral status of human beings in virtue of which they have to treat each other as equals. On the other hand, Pufendorf holds dignity and natural equality to be compatible with social inequality, notably with servitude and slavery. Moreover, when he deals with the comparative value and reputation (existimatio) of human beings, he admits that their moral status is conditioned by their readiness to behave as social beings. Human beings can thus lose their basic moral standing and are then considered as common enemies of all.

A New Materiality

2018 ◽  
Author(s):  
Mikael Wiberg
Keyword(s):  
The Other ◽  
The Road ◽  
Other Hand ◽  
Look Back ◽  
Material Turn ◽  
The One

The previous chapter provided us with a theory of the materiality of interaction. So, where do we go from here? Well, in order to move forward, I use this chapter to suggest that we might now need to look back in order to see the road ahead of us more clearly. In this chapter I therefore present how a focus on the materiality of interaction one the one hand leaves any distinctions between the physical and the digital behind, and how it on the other hand presents us with three distinct challenges as we move forward through the material turn.

Loving Tolerance

2019 ◽  
Vol 11 (1) ◽  
pp. 55-64
Author(s):  
Mohammad Hussein Ganji ◽  
Keyword(s):  
The Other ◽  
Human Beings ◽  
Historical Experience ◽  
Absolute Truth ◽  
Moral Basis ◽  
Other Hand ◽  
Self Knowledge ◽  
The One ◽  
Epistemological Basis

The deepening and development of epistemological issues on the one hand, and the unpleasant historical experience on the other hand, made modern humanity after the Renaissance gradually became tolerant and recognized "the Other." The epistemological basis for tolerance is the obscurity and complexity of truth and difference in the understanding of human beings. Its moral basis is not to see oneself as above others and to endure the intricacies of practicing morality. Tolerance is rational for two reasons: one is the epistemological basis that hinders the dogma of possessing absolute truth, self-knowledge, and repudiating others; the other is the advantages of tolerance for collective living. This article seeks to show that Rumi, while paying attention to the moral and epistemological principles of tolerance, goes beyond the rational tolerance of calculating profits, losses, and trading. According to his mystical view, his tolerance is a “loving tolerance,” a tolerance which is based solely on love and compassion towards human beings, rather than being based on calculations of profit and loss, with no expectation for reward.

The Art of Misunderstanding Moral Bioenhancement

2014 ◽  
Vol 24 (1) ◽  
pp. 48-57 ◽  
Author(s):  
INGMAR PERSSON ◽  
JULIAN SAVULESCU
Keyword(s):  
The Other ◽  
Moral Enhancement ◽  
Human Beings ◽  
Moral Bioenhancement ◽  
Other Hand ◽  
The Future ◽  
The One ◽  
Scientific Technology

Abstract:In our book Unfit for the Future and a number of papers, we have argued that there is a dangerous mismatch between, on the one hand, the tremendous power of scientific technology, which has created societies with millions of citizens, and, on the other hand, our moral capacities, which have been shaped by evolution for life in small, close-knit societies with primitive technology. To overcome this mismatch before it results in the downfall of human civilization, human beings stand in acute need of moral enhancement, not only by traditional means but also by biomedical means, should this turn out to be possible. After summarizing this argument, we respond to two critics, Michael Hauskeller and Robert Sparrow.

scholarly journals The Anthropocene as a regime of visibility: the posthumanist paradox between domination and liberation

2020 ◽  
Vol 11 (3) ◽  
Author(s):  
Alice Dal Gobbo ◽  
Emanuele Leonardi
Keyword(s):  
Political Ecology ◽  
Ecological Crisis ◽  
The Other ◽  
Human Beings ◽  
Historical Contingency ◽  
Neoliberal Governmentality ◽  
Other Hand ◽  
The World ◽  
The One ◽  
Forms Of Knowledge

The discourse of the ‘Anthropocene’ has quickly become pervasive, cross-cutting different fields of knowledge. However, it is also a deeply contested category. In the critical light shed by political ecology, we reflect on the conceptual blindspots that mark its narrative, identifying it as a symptom of a broader impasse of the neoliberal governmentality of nature and of the ecological crisis today. On the one hand, the Anthropocene narrative proposes a post-humanist vision, which potentially de-centres anthropocentrism. On the other hand, this same vision becomes an alibi for ever deeper and less reflective interventions of human beings on the biosphere, in particular through technoscientific developments. This paradox responds to a specific need for capitalist valorization of ‘Nature’ and, at the same time, does not seem capable to elaborate solutions to the ecological crisis as a whole. However, if the Anthropocene becomes visible only in the present historical contingency and due to specific kinds of knowledge, we suggest that reflecting on epistemological issues is key to the search for more ecological ways of situating in the world. Which forms of knowledge allow us to understand the emancipatory potential of post-humanism within the Anthropocene while avoiding new predatory effects on the biosphere?

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document