Investigations of Worth: Towards a Phenomenology of Values Dale Hobbs Jr
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
Load more
Recommended publications
-
What Is That Thing Called Philosophy of Technology? - R
HISTORY AND PHILOSOPHY OF SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY – Vol. IV - What Is That Thing Called Philosophy of Technology? - R. J. Gómez WHAT IS THAT THING CALLED PHILOSOPHY OF TECHNOLOGY? R. J. Gómez Department of Philosophy. California State University (LA). USA Keywords: Adorno, Aristotle, Bunge, Ellul, Feenberg, Habermas, Heidegger, Horkheimer, Jonas, Latour, Marcuse, Mumford, Naess, Shrader-Frechette, artifact, assessment, determinism, ecosophy, ends, enlightenment, efficiency, epistemology, enframing, ideology, life-form, megamachine, metaphysics, method, naturalistic, fallacy, new, ethics, progress, rationality, rule, science, techno-philosophy Contents 1. Introduction 2. Locating technology with respect to science 2.1. Structure and Content 2.2. Method 2.3. Aim 2.4. Pattern of Change 3. Locating philosophy of technology 4. Early philosophies of technology 4.1. Aristotelianism 4.2. Technological Pessimism 4.3. Technological Optimism 4.4. Heidegger’s Existentialism and the Essence of Technology 4.5. Mumford’s Megamachinism 4.6. Neomarxism 4.6.1. Adorno-Horkheimer 4.6.2. Marcuse 4.6.3. Habermas 5. Recent philosophies of technology 5.1. L. Winner 5.2. A. Feenberg 5.3. EcosophyUNESCO – EOLSS 6. Technology and values 6.1. Shrader-Frechette Claims 6.2. H Jonas 7. Conclusions SAMPLE CHAPTERS Glossary Bibliography Biographical Sketch Summary A philosophy of technology is mainly a critical reflection on technology from the point of view of the main chapters of philosophy, e.g., metaphysics, epistemology and ethics. Technology has had a fast development since the middle of the 20th century , especially ©Encyclopedia of Life Support Systems (EOLSS) HISTORY AND PHILOSOPHY OF SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY – Vol. IV - What Is That Thing Called Philosophy of Technology? - R. -
Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy Copyright C 2020 by the Publisher 2.4 Collective Intentionality and Social Ontology
pdf version of the entry Edith Stein https://plato.stanford.edu/archives/spr2020/entries/stein/ Edith Stein from the Spring 2020 Edition of the First published Wed Mar 18, 2020 Stanford Encyclopedia Edith Stein (1891–1942) was a realist phenomenologist associated with the Göttingen school and later a Christian metaphysician. She was a Jew of Philosophy who converted to Catholicism in 1922 and was ordained a Carmelite nun in 1933. She died in Auschwitz in 1942. She was subsequently declared a Catholic martyr and saint. She campaigned publicly on issues relating to women’s rights and education. Stein is known philosophically primarily for her phenomenological work on empathy and affectivity, her contributions as research assistant to Edmund Husserl, and her Edward N. Zalta Uri Nodelman Colin Allen R. Lanier Anderson philosophical anthropology. She was in discussion with leading Principal Editor Senior Editor Associate Editor Faculty Sponsor philosophers of her day, including Husserl, Scheler, Heidegger, Conrad- Editorial Board https://plato.stanford.edu/board.html Martius, Ingarden, and Maritain. Her work contains original approaches to empathy, embodiment, the emotions, personhood, collective intentionality, Library of Congress Catalog Data and the nature of the state. In her later work, Stein developed an original ISSN: 1095-5054 philosophy of being and essence that integrated Husserlian Notice: This PDF version was distributed by request to mem- phenomenology and Thomist metaphysics. bers of the Friends of the SEP Society and by courtesy to SEP content contributors. It is solely for their fair use. Unauthorized 1. Life and Work distribution is prohibited. To learn how to join the Friends of the 2. -
From Knowledge to Ontological Awakening: Thinking Nature As Relatedness
The Trumpeter ISSN: 0832-6193 Volume 28, Number 1 (2012) From Knowledge to Ontological Awakening: Thinking Nature as Relatedness To Alan, a great mentor, friend and mountain whisperer Introduction Many environmental scholars and activists have suggested the need of a profound shift of consciousness when it comes to our relationships with Nature (Naess 2008, Merchant 2005, Mathews 2005, Eckersley 2003, Goldsmith 1996). In addition of greening our political ideas, institutions and technologies, they suggest that we need to critically engage the paradigms by which we conceive Nature. The task of clarifying what we mean by Nature has however become increasingly difficult due to the supremacy of an epistemology hostile to metaphysical reflections (Hay 2007, Marsh and Furlong 2002), and the spread of a constructivist and relativistic understanding of the many ways in which humans comprehend Nature (Daly 2008, Dingler 2005, Soper 1995, Meyer 2001). Answering what Nature is has become a daring question, not only because of the supremacy of an epistemology increasingly de-anchored from ontology, but also following the various abuses generated by various essentialist interpretations of what Nature ought to be. As a result, many scholars now prudently claim to speak only about the social and political “effects” of evoking “Nature.” Others are ready to discard this notion altogether, assimilating what would be “Nature” into a cultural scheme prone to challenge all forms of dualism as arbitrary exclusion and all forms of monism as forced inclusion (Morton -
Eugen Enyvvari's Road to Göttingen and Back
Final submitted version, published as Varga, Peter Andras: “Eugen Enyvvari’s Road to Göttingen and Back: A Case Study in the Transleithanian Participation in Early Phenomenology (with an Appendix of Edmund Husserl’s Two Unpublished Letters to Enyvvari).” Studies in East European Thought 69, no. 1 (2017): 57–78 [publication date: March 2017]. © All rights reserved by Springer Science+Business Media Dordrecht. Deposited in the Open Access repository of the Hungarian Academy of Sciences (http://real.mtak.hu/) under obligation imposed by the employer, in accordance with the Copyright Transfer Statement. Unauthorized copying is forbidden. Please quote the final published version! “The final publication is available at Springer via http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s11212-017-9272-2”. Eugen Enyvvari’s Road to Göttingen and Back: A Case Study in the Transleithanian Participation in Early Phenomenology Abstract: Despite attending Husserl’s classes, his participation in the discussions of the Göttingen phenomenological circle, and his prolific writings on phenomenology, Eugen Enyvvari (1884-1959) seems to have been virtually ignored by phenomenological scholarship. I use an array of unpublished sources and a survey of his juvenilia to reconstruct Enyvvari’s biography and intellectual formation, including his confrontation with Melchior Palagyi’s critique of Husserl and Bolzano. Based on both his reports and records from the Göttingen University Archives, I attempt to establish the influences to which he could have been exposed in Göttingen. I rely on a careful micro-analysis of the development of Husserl’s notion of noematical meaning around Enyvvari’s stay in Göttingen in order to asses Enyvvari’s specific contribution to phenomenology and his significance from the point of view of the general historiography of phenomenology. -
Forthcoming in T. Szanto & H. Landweer (Eds
Forthcoming in T. Szanto & H. Landweer (eds.). Routledge Handbook of Phenomenology of Emotion. London/New York: Routledge, 2019. Dietrich von Hildebrand Jean Moritz Müller It is sometimes alleged that the study of emotion and the study of value are currently pursued as relatively autonomous disciplines. As Kevin Mulligan notes, “[t]he philosophy and psychology of emotions pays little attention to the philosophy of value and the latter pays only a little more attention to the former.” (2010b, 475). Arguably, the last decade has seen more of a rapprochement between these two domains than used to be the norm (cf. e.g. Roeser & Todd 2014). But there still seems to be considerable potential for exchange and dialogue if the situation is compared with their intimate relationship in central strands of early realist phenomenology. The philosopher perhaps most representative of this ecumenical approach is Husserl’s early student Dietrich von Hildebrand (1889-1977). From the very early stages of his philosophical career, Hildebrand has developed one of the most original, comprehensive and nuanced accounts of emotions at whose core is a detailed examination of their connection to value. While his central concern with the ethical significance of our affective life is in many ways continuous with Scheler’s work1 and draws crucially on Reinach’s philosophy of mind, Hildebrand’s own reflections considerably expand on and substantially modify the picture of the ontology and normative role of emotions defended by these authors. In the following, I reconstruct Hildebrand’s view of emotions with a particular focus on those aspects which represent his most distinctive contribution to this subject.2 1. -
The Conceptions of Self-Evidence in the Finnis Reconstruction of Natural Law
St. Mary's Law Journal Volume 51 Number 2 Article 4 4-2020 The Conceptions of Self-Evidence in the Finnis Reconstruction of Natural Law Kevin P. Lee Campbell University School of Law Follow this and additional works at: https://commons.stmarytx.edu/thestmaryslawjournal Part of the Catholic Studies Commons, Jurisprudence Commons, Law and Philosophy Commons, Legal History Commons, Logic and Foundations of Mathematics Commons, Natural Law Commons, Other Philosophy Commons, and the Religious Thought, Theology and Philosophy of Religion Commons Recommended Citation Kevin P. Lee, The Conceptions of Self-Evidence in the Finnis Reconstruction of Natural Law, 51 ST. MARY'S L.J. 413 (2020). Available at: https://commons.stmarytx.edu/thestmaryslawjournal/vol51/iss2/4 This Article is brought to you for free and open access by the St. Mary's Law Journals at Digital Commons at St. Mary's University. It has been accepted for inclusion in St. Mary's Law Journal by an authorized editor of Digital Commons at St. Mary's University. For more information, please contact [email protected]. Lee: Self-Evidence in the Finnis Reconstruction of Natural Law ESSAY THE CONCEPTIONS OF SELF-EVIDENCE IN THE FINNIS RECONSTRUCTION OF NATURAL LAW KEVIN P. LEE* I. Introduction ........................................................................................... 414 A. Locating Finnis’ Claim to Self-Evidence .................................... 416 1. The Separation of Fact and Value ........................................ 416 2. The First Principles of Practical Reason ............................. 419 a. Basic Goods are the First Principles of Practical Reason ................................................................................ 421 b. Basic Goods are Dispositions ........................................ 421 c. Basic Goods are Apodictic ............................................. 422 II. Two Conceptions of Self-Evidence ................................................... 426 A. Finnis and Leonine Thomism ..................................................... -
Introduction
Copyrighted Material • Introduction I Although the term pragmatism is frequently used to characterize some or other highly specific thesis or program, pragmatism is not and never was a school of thought unified around a distinctive doctrine. In fact, the first pragmatists— Charles Peirce, William James, and John Dewey—were divided over what, precisely, pragmatism is. Peirce first proposed the “pragmatic maxim” as a tool for dispensing with metaphysical nonsense; for him, pragmatism was strictly a “method of ascer- taining the meanings of hard words and abstract concepts” (CP5.464).1 The core of this method is the idea that, To develop [a thought’s] meaning, we have simply to determine what habits it produces, for what a thing means is simply what habits it involves. (CP5.400) Hence the pragmatic maxim: Consider what effects, that might conceivably have practical bearings, we conceive the object of our conception to have. Then our conception of these effects is the whole of our conception of the object. (CP5.402) For Peirce, pragmatism was a way to clear away philosophical error and start upon the path of properly conducted philosophy. Peirce thought that by analyzing words and statements in terms of “what is tangible and conceivably practical” (CP5.400), one could “dismiss make-believes” (CP5.416) and free philosophy of “senseless jar- gon” (CP5.401). Although pragmatism is the beginning of Peirce’s philosophy, it is not the whole of Peirce’s philosophy. As is well known, Peirce went on to develop original (some might say idiosyncratic) views concerning topics ranging from philosophy of mathematics, logic, and science to phenomenology, semiotics, and aesthetics. -
Kelvin Knight Aristotelianism Versus Communitarianism
Analyse & Kritik 27/2005 ( c Lucius & Lucius, Stuttgart) p. 259{273 Kelvin Knight Aristotelianism versus Communitarianism Abstract: Alasdair MacIntyre is an Aristotelian critic of communitarianism, which he understands to be committed to the politics of the capitalist and bureaucratic nation- state. The politics he proposes instead is based in the resistance to managerial insti- tutions of what he calls `practices', because these are schools of virtue. This shares little with the communitarianism of a Taylor or the Aristotelianism of a Gadamer. Although practices require formal institutions. MacIntyre opposes such conservative politics. Conventional accounts of a `liberal-communitarian debate' in political phi- losophy face the dilemma that Alasdair MacIntyre, often identified as a paradigmatic communitarian, has consistently and emphatically repudiated this characterization. Although neo-Aristotelianism is sometimes seen as a philosophical warrant for commu- nitarian politics, MacIntyre's Aristotelianism is opposed to communitarianism. This paper explores the rationale of that opposition. 1. Communitarianisms The term \communitarianism" was used by imaginative polemicists in the 1980s, and has been used by unimaginative textbook writers since then, to signify the criticism by a variety of Anglophone political philosophers of John Rawls' A Theory of Justice for resting upon overly individualist premisses. Despite the synthesizing efforts of Amitai Etzioni, it does not represent a coherent philo- sophical position. Nor can it do so unless some one theorist is chosen as its representative. Perhaps the best Anglophone candidate for such a position is Charles Taylor, yet Taylor considers the liberal-communitarian debate to have been conducted at `cross-purposes', with regard both to `ontological' issues of social theory and to moral or `advocacy' issues (Taylor 1989). -
Women in the History of Philosophy and Sciences
Women in the History of Philosophy and Sciences Volume 8 Series Editors Ruth Edith Hagengruber, Department of Humanities, Center for the History of Women Philosophers, Paderborn University, Paderborn, Germany Mary Ellen Waithe, Professor Emerita, Department of Philosophy and Comparative Religion, Cleveland State University, Cleveland, OH, USA Gianni Paganini, Department of Humanities, University of Piedmont, Vercelli, Italy As the historical records prove, women have long been creating original contributions to philosophy. We have valuable writings from female philosophers from Antiquity and the Middle Ages, and a continuous tradition from the Renaissance to today. The history of women philosophers thus stretches back as far as the history of philosophy itself. The presence as well as the absence of women philosophers throughout the course of history parallels the history of philosophy as a whole. Edith Stein, Hannah Arendt and Simone de Beauvoir, the most famous represen- tatives of this tradition in the twentieth century, did not appear form nowhere. They stand, so to speak, on the shoulders of the female titans who came before them. The series Women Philosophers and Scientists published by Springer will be of interest not only to the international philosophy community, but also for scholars in history of science and mathematics, the history of ideas, and in women’s studies. More information about this series at https://www.springer.com/series/15896 Ronny Miron Hedwig Conrad-Martius The Phenomenological Gateway to Reality Ronny Miron Interdisciplinary Studies Bar-Ilan University Ramat Gan, Israel ISSN 2523-8760 ISSN 2523-8779 (electronic) Women in the History of Philosophy and Sciences ISBN 978-3-030-68782-3 ISBN 978-3-030-68783-0 (eBook) https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-68783-0 © The Editor(s) (if applicable) and The Author(s), under exclusive license to Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2021 This work is subject to copyright. -
Constructive Empiricism in the Social Sciences
Constructive empiricism in the social sciences Abstract ‘What problems face the aspirant empiricist today?’ is the question Bas C. van Fraassen asks in his seminal work The Scientific Image (1980). In this thesis, I interpret this question as a challenge to develop constructive empiricism [CE] in a field of scientific inquiry other than the context of physics in which it was conceived. The first part of the thesis expounds CE with reference to classical empiricism, discloses some of its fundamental assumptions, and spells out in detail its account of science. In the second part of the thesis, CE is extended to social science. Since CE was developed in the context of natural science, I take an articulation of the alleged fundamental differences between natural and social science as indicating challenges a CE-outlook on social science must address. I also provide a brief history of the gap between the sciences. Then, in the bulk of this thesis, I argue that CE’s model view accommodates social science, that description, prediction and explanation in the light of CE are proper fruits of inquiry in social science, and that CE is able to make sense of the differences in the concepts used in natural and social science. In the discussion of the feasibility of CE for social science, I show concurrently that contemporary articulations of the differences between the natural and the social sciences pose no insuperable problems for the constructive empiricist. Bram van Dijk | 3691454 History & Philosophy of Science | Utrecht University Daily supervisors | dr. Guido Bacciagaluppi & dr. Ruud Abma Third examiner | dr. -
Aristotle's Theory of Powers
Aristotle’s Theory of Powers by Umer Shaikh A dissertation submitted in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy (Philosophy) in the University of Michigan 2019 Doctoral Committee: Professor Victor Caston, chair Professor Sara Abhel-Rappe Professor David Manley Professor Tad Schmaltz Umer Shaikh [email protected] ORCID iD: 0000-0002-8062-7932 © Umer Shaikh 2019 TABLE OF CONTENTS Abstract ....................................... v Chapter 1 Introduction ................................... 1 1.1 The Question ............................... 1 1.2 Powers and Dispositions ......................... 2 1.3 Remark on Translation and Texts .................... 3 1.4 Preliminary Answers ........................... 3 1.4.1 Powers are Efficient Causes ................... 4 1.4.2 Powers and Change ....................... 5 1.4.3 Being in Potentiality and Possibility .............. 6 1.4.4 The Foundation of Modality .................. 8 1.4.5 Possibilities from Powers .................... 9 1.4.6 Conclusion ............................ 11 1.5 Remarks About Scope of Discussion and About the Development of the δύναμις Concept ........................... 12 1.5.1 Scope ............................... 12 1.5.2 Δύναμις in Various Texts .................... 12 1.5.3 Previous Attempts to Find Consistency ............ 18 1.5.3.1 Kenny .......................... 18 1.5.3.2 Hintikka ......................... 21 1.5.4 Drawing Some Morals ..................... 22 2 Powers and Efficient Causation ......................... 24 2.1 -
Select Bibliography
Select Bibliography 1 Pre-Modern Works Ael. Nat.anim. Aelian. De Natura Animalium libri xvii, varia Historia, Epistolae, Fragmenta. Ed. R. Hercher. Leipzig 1864. Alb. Phys. Albertus Magnus. Physica. Pars I, Libri 1–4. Crit. ed. P. Hossfeld. Westphalia 1987. Amb. Hymn. Ambrose of Milan. Hymnes. Crit. ed. with tr. and comm. J.-L. Charlet, S. Deléani, Y.-M. Duval, J. Fontaine, et al. Paris 1992. Amm. R.gest. Ammianus Marcellinus. Ammianus Marcellinus, volume I. Ed. with tr. J.C. Rolfe. London 1950. Anon. C.Phil. Anonymous. Anonymi Contra Philosophos. (CCSL 58.a.) Crit. ed. D. Aschoff. Turnhout 1975. Aq. S.Th. Thomas Aquinas. Summa Theologiae. Pars Prima et Prima Secundae. Ed. P. Caramello. Turin 1952. Ar. Rhyth. Aristoxenus. Elementa Rhythmica. The Fragment of Book II and the Additional Evidence for Aristoxenan Rhythmic Theory. Ed. L. Pearson. Oxford 1990. Arist. Anim. Aristotle. On the Soul. On Parva Naturalia. On Breath. Ed. with tr. W.S. Hett. London 1957. Arist. Aud. Aristotle. “On Things Heard (De Audibilibus).” Aristotle. Minor Works. Ed. with tr. W.S. Hett. London 1963. Arist. Cat. Aristotle. “The Categories.” Aristotle. The Organon. Ed. with tr. H.P. Cooke and H. Tredennick. London 1955. Arist. Gen.corr. Aristotle. On Sophistical Refutations. On Coming-to-Be and Passing- Away. Ed. with tr. E.S. Forster and D.J. Furley. London 1955. Arist. Mem. Aristotle. “On Memory and Recollection.” On the Soul. Parva Naturalia. On Breath. Ed. with tr. W.S. Hett. London 1957. Arist. Met. Aristotle. Metaphysics, books I–IX. Ed. with tr. H. Tredennick. London 1933. Arist. Phys.