philosophical method
Recently Published Documents


TOTAL DOCUMENTS

327
(FIVE YEARS 126)

H-INDEX

8
(FIVE YEARS 2)

2021 ◽  
Vol 30 (4) ◽  
pp. 339-348
Author(s):  
Ivaylo Dimitrov ◽  

According to leading Kant scholars, in mid-1760s Kant realizes that his program for the reform of metaphysics cannot be developed by the method of conceptual analysis which he had previously considered to be more adequate than the synthetic method of the Wolffians that imitates the mathematical one. In this paper, I put into question the claim of a pre-Critical project of ‘analytical metaphysics’ by trying to show that even for the ‘pre-Critical’ Kant the proper method of metaphysics is genuinely synthetic, but the synthetic construction in question should have been prepared by a Critical and subsequent exhaustive analysis of key material-instrumental concepts of the peculiar philosophical science under question.


CREPIDO ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 3 (2) ◽  
pp. 96-109
Author(s):  
Agam Ibnu Asa ◽  
Misnal Munir ◽  
Rr. Siti Murti Ningsih

The responsive laws of Nonet and Selznick's thinking became one of the results of conceptual ideas about the laws that are elaborated periodically. The development of responsive law may be less comprehensive when it has not been found the historical fundamental aspects on which it is focused. It is thus important to study the concept of Nonet and Selznick's responsive legal philosophically. The method in this research is the philosophical method. The results of this study include: first, the development of law in Nonet and Selznick's view is divided into three periods of repressive law, autonomous law, and responsive law. Second, Nonet and Selznick's responsive law when reviewed in historical perspective gained an understanding that responsive law exists from a constantly creative legal subject by looking at legal issues and realities in an increasingly complex society, and responsive law is a law that has always served as part of cultural dynamics.


2021 ◽  
pp. 17-65
Author(s):  
Hub Zwart

AbstractDialectics is a philosophical method developed by Hegel (1770–1831), but building on an intellectual tradition whose origins can be traced back to ancient Greece. Dialectics was initially practiced as an educational technique for conducting philosophical discussions. For Hegel, however, dialectical processes can be discerned in the dramatic unfolding of nature, history and human thinking as such. The first dialectical thinker, in the genuine sense of the term, according to Hegel (1971), was Heraclitus (535 – c. 475 BC), in whose “obscure” aphorisms Hegel recognises the awareness that dialectics is more than merely a technique to foster critical reflection. Heraclitus already refers to a basic logic guiding the dynamics of nature as such, to a λόγος at work in actual processes of becoming and change, giving rise to contrasting and contradictory developments (“objective dialectics”, as Hegel phrases it). For dialectical thinkers, the dialectical method is fundamentally in tune with nature, because nature as such is inherently dialectical. Hegel considered Aristotle as ancient philosophy’s most thoroughly dialectical thinker, as we have seen, while Hegel himself is regarded as a modern Aristotle (Beiser, 2005, p. 57; Pippin, 2019, p. 301).


2021 ◽  
pp. 1-18
Author(s):  
Karen Ng

I am very grateful to Karen Koch and Sebastian Rand for their generous and thoughtful engagement with some of the core arguments of my book. Whereas Koch raises a number of questions concerning the purposiveness theme and Hegel's relation to Kant, Rand's questions revolve around the interpretation of Hegel's Science of Logic, asking after the status of the a priori, singularity, and death in relation to the logical concept of life. Their critical questions provide an opportunity for me to both clarify and defend one of the central claims of my book, namely, that there is a distinctly logical concept of life at work in Hegel's philosophy that is key for understanding his philosophical method. In the book, I argue that this concept, operative in Hegel's writings from the Differenzschrift through the Phenomenology to his Science of Logic, is primarily inherited from Kant, specifically from problems surrounding the concept of inner purposiveness developed in the Critique of Judgement. I will begin by replying to Koch, followed by a response to Rand.


2021 ◽  
Vol 8 (2) ◽  
pp. 35-44
Author(s):  
Nara M. Figueiredo
Keyword(s):  

Conatus ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 6 (1) ◽  
pp. 61
Author(s):  
Anthony Udoka Ezebuiro ◽  
Obiora Anichebe ◽  
Anthony Chimankpam Ojimba

In our day-to-day life and experiences, when one doubts or questions unusually, he is branded a skeptic and consequently resisted. Skeptics, over the years, are seen as people whose basic mood is that of doubt; those who deny absolutely that true knowledge is possible. Although this is not completely true of skepticism, the present work demonstrates, though arguably, that skepticism is more of a philosophical method of inquiry; an epistemological attitude towards knowledge but whose goal is indeed certainty, although it selects a serious doubt concerning all knowledge as the starting point of the inquiry into the possibility of true knowledge. It can rightly be said that the work displays the paradox of skepticism. The word ‘paradox’ originates from a Latin term paradoxum, which has a Greek association paradoxon, or paradoxos, signifying “conflicting with expectation.” Thus, the word paradox signifies a tenet or proposition contrary to received opinions. It is a statement or sentiment that is seemingly contradictory or opposed to common sense and yet, perhaps true in fact. The need for this work is necessitated by the fact that in the present age, it has become no longer the case that the best way to certainty is only by accepting entirely all that one is told, especially when such comes from a sage or a tradition. Obviously, we live in a dispensation where almost every human situation challenges the human rational faculty hence the tendency to change facts and hang-on to lies generates serious fever in every thinking mind. The result of this work therefore is that imperatively, the work demands that whoever wants knowledge should proceed through doubt. The method through which this work arrives at this conclusion is the analytic process of discussion and presentation.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document