Augustine on the Economy of Angels

Angelology is a major theme in Augustine’s important works such as The City of God, The Literal Meaning of Genesis and Enchiridion. This essay explains Augustine’s theology of angelic economy from three perspectives -- creation, governance and kingdom. 1) The relationship between the angelic economy and the creation: it is here argued that the economic ability of the angels is originated in the intellectual intuition of God and of the creation, as, even prior to creation, angels had already stored the created in their minds as concepts; 2) The relationship between the angelic economy and governance is originated in the concept of “divine apparition.” Angels govern as God’s agents, but their governance is impersonal; 3) The relationship between the angelic economy and the kingdom is originated in the union between the holy angels and the holy people, which occurs in God’s will. In this union, Angels act as guides leading human beings to the kingdom of peace. This essay also points out that Augustine’s angelology is related to his three major theological principles, i.e. the theories of creation, governance and salvation.

Anschauung, Anschauen (Intuition)

Since Plato’s metaphor of the light of knowledge used in the “Allegory of the Cave” from his dialogue Politeia, the concepts of Anschauen or Anschauung (intuition) and their corresponding lexical field, including the terms light, sun, and eye, represent key notions and much-debated issues in philosophical thinking. In his literary, scientific, and philosophical writings, Goethe does not articulate a systematic and explicit theory of these concepts; on the contrary, most of his remarks on the topic of “intuition” are aphoristic or tacitly integrated into his poetic and scientific works. One of his main contributions to the philosophical debates surrounding Anschauen and Anschauung is that he developed and integrated into his works different modes of a specifically creative and productive—as opposed to a merely receptive and sensory—form of Anschauen. This productive form of Anschauen, for which he also uses the terms “Phantasie” (phantasy), “Einbildungskraft” (imagination), “exakte sinnliche Phantasie” (exact sensory phantasy or imagination) or “anschauende Urteilskraft” (intuitive power of judgment) in various contexts, can serve as both a creative faculty in his poetry and a precise scientific or philosophical instrument of cognition. Within the context of the philosophical tradition, and apart from the heritage of Plato and Platonism, Goethe’s notion of Anschauen can be understood, on the one hand, in the context of classical German philosophy and its debates on “anschauender Verstand” (intuitive understanding) and “intellektuelle” or “intellektuale Anschauung” (intellectual intuition). On the other hand, it is also phenomenologically grounded and anticipates the main insights of Edmund Husserl (1859–1938) and the phenomenological movement in the 20th century, one of the most important of which is the so-called phenomenological Wesensschau (eidetic intuition).

Intellektuelle Anschauung und realer Verstandesgebrauch in Kants Inauguraldissertation

I will reinterpret the term ‘real use of the understanding’ in the outcome of the suspension of intellectual intuition. Kant applied both terms for the first time in the inaugural dissertation. The ‘objects’ of this use of the understanding thus obtain a more critical meaning and are transformed from substances to functions. Nevertheless, there is still a decisive difference between the inaugural dissertation and the critique of pure reason. Kant shifted his perspective rather than his subject. The question concerning facts (quid facti) turns into the question concerning legal matters (quid iuris). However, ‘noumena’ are no substances which exist independently of consciousness in the inaugural dissertation. Therefore, they must retain a critical meaning even after the Copernican turn. This essay aims to highlight this critical meaning by focusing on the reflective figure of intellectual intuition in the inaugural dissertatio.

Towards a Platonic critique of ideology

Plato is accused by some of being a totalitarian, “top-down” thinker, a claim that is linked not just to his politics but to his philosophical proclivities more generally. This essay will argue that Plato’s method and metaphysics collectively provide a few avenues for questioning this outcome. I think Plato’s Socratic-style provides resistance to a hegemonic and carapaced metaphysics, and moreover I would argue that there is a greater coherence between Plato’s method and his positive teaching than is allowed for by some. Through an engagement with central Platonic doctrines, namely his account of philosophical dialogue, the transcendental Good, as well as participation, and recollection, it is argued that Plato’s relational metaphysics does not fit seamlessly into an “ideological” or “naïve” rendering of intellectual intuition, an exclusionary dualism of material and spiritual substance, or an uncritical evocation of “innate ideas,” and, moreover, that it allows for a greater plurality of perspectives, all ordered towards a deeper realism and unity within the Good Beyond Being.

In Search of the Heraclitean Logos

The paper attempts to clarify the essence of logos as found in the teaching of Heraclitus. The author identifies meanings which Heraclitus attributes to the concept, investigates his suggested method of cognizing logos, and analyzes the benefits bestowed upon a human being by comprehension of logos. It is hypothesized that the Heraclitean logos is not an originating principle, like a supreme god or cosmic fire, but its attribute – the verbalized intelligence of being inherent both in the world as a whole and one’s soul. As a mental-verbal projection, logos is open not to the sensory organs or even reason, but to the intellectual intuition. Therefore, the knowledge of logos cannot be taught, but can be obtained through self-cognition. Comprehension of logos leads to following the universal, which, in polity’s life, is equal to the common good. However, according to Heraclitus, this is something attainable only by wise and virtuous, “the best”, not by wicked and ignorant majority.

THE ISSUE OF INTELLECTUAL INTUITION IN METAPHYSICS

The article presents problems of intellectual intuition in metaphysics from a semiotic point of view. There are various types of intuition in philosophy: rational intuition, irrational intuition, and sensual intuition. All of them are immediate ways of cognition. Classical metaphysics uses intellectual intuition as its main method to find out and justify its statements. The main problem of intellectual intuition is an intersubjective approach to the object of metaphysics. The main aim of this paper is the objectivization and rationalization of intellectual intuition in language. The semantic notion of meaning and the pragmatic notion of understanding are the fundamental tools which are used to translate the issue of intuition from the subject-ma$er level into the language level. This operation allows to look at intuition in a non-psychological manner. It enables the objectivization of the method of intellectual intuition in the light of the understanding of meanings.

SENSES AND “SENSUAL DATA”

One of the main goals of modern philosophy was to achieve an in-depth insight into the foundations of empirical knowledge. The problem was expected to be resolved by the analysis of experience. However, the road to a plausible account of experience was at the very beginning obstructed by turning the analysis into a search for clear and distinctive elements of experience and by sticking to purely intellectual intuition as means of this analysis. Moreover, clear and distinctive elements of experience were thought of as the basis of cognitive certainty. Both psychology and philosophy, at least until the nineteen-thirties, were deeply influenced by this essentially rationalistic conception of sensor experience. It is gestalt psychology and phenomenology that should be merited for overcoming that ill-conceived model. Only by taking into account the immediate sensor relation between the human subject and the environment, it is possible to show the kind of unity which is the prerequisite of human intellect.

Kant’s Critical Objection to the Rationalists in the B-Deduction

According to a familiar reading of Kant, he denies the possibility alleged by the rationalists of our having non-sensible or intellectual intuition. I argue in this article that he simply holds the possibility to be groundless. To put the contrast in terms of a distinction Kant makes in the A-Paralogisms, he raises a “dogmatic” objection to the rationalists in the former case, and a “critical” one in the latter. By analyzing the two-step argument in the B-Deduction, I defend the “critical” reading, which may, I hope, shed light on how Kant can justify his claim – which may be regarded as a second-order, methodological one pivotal to his Critical project – that possible experience serves as the only guideline for proving that we can cognize objects a priori.

Schopenhauer’s Understanding of Schelling

Schopenhauer is famously abusive toward his philosophical contemporary and rival, Friedrich William Joseph von Schelling. This chapter examines the motivations for Schopenhauer’s immoderate attitude and the substance behind the insults. It looks carefully at both the nature of the insults and substantive critical objections Schopenhauer had to Schelling’s philosophy, both to Schelling’s metaphysical description of the thing-in-itself and Schelling’s epistemic mechanism of intellectual intuition. It concludes that Schopenhauer’s substantive criticism is reasonable and that Schopenhauer does in fact avoid Schelling’s errors: still, the vehemence of the abuse is best perhaps explained by the proximity of their philosophies, not the distance. Indeed, both are developing metaphysics of will with full and conflicted awareness of the Kantian epistemic strictures against metaphysics. In view of this, Schopenhauer is particularly concerned to mark his own project as legitimate by highlighting the manner in which he avoids Schelling’s errors.