DOCSLIB.ORG

Kant and the Neglected Alternative

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Kant and the Neglected Alternative Syracuse University SURFACE Dissertations - ALL SURFACE December 2014 Kant and the Neglected Alternative Andrew F. Specht Syracuse University Follow this and additional works at: https://surface.syr.edu/etd Part of the Arts and Humanities Commons Recommended Citation Specht, Andrew F., "Kant and the Neglected Alternative" (2014). Dissertations - ALL. 183. https://surface.syr.edu/etd/183 This Dissertation is brought to you for free and open access by the SURFACE at SURFACE. It has been accepted for inclusion in Dissertations - ALL by an authorized administrator of SURFACE. For more information, please contact [email protected]. Abstract In this work, I conduct a reconstruction and evaluation of the Neglected Alternative objection to Immanuel Kant's philosophy. Kant famously argues in the Transcendental Aesthetic section of the Critique of Pure Reason that space and time are subjective forms of human intuition, and the Neglected Alternative maintains that this argument is a failure. According to the Neglected Alternative, Kant completely overlooks the possibility that space and time are in some way both subjective and objective, and so Kant's conclusions about the nature of space and time are not justified by his arguments. This objection was first formulated very soon after the publication of the Critique of Pure Reason but is still subject to great controversy among Kant scholars. I argue that the Neglected Alternative objection is unsuccessful. To do this, I provide a close analysis of Kant's key technical term “a priori intuition,” and I reconstruct the work of two important critics of Kant: H.A. Pistorius and F.A. Trendelenburg. I then argue that in the Transcendental Aesthetic, Kant is justified in deriving the conclusion that space and time have nothing to do with things in themselves, or objects entirely independent of human cognition. Finally, I look at Kant's works as a whole and consider Kant's arguments that seem to rule out the possibility that things in themselves have a structure that is even similar to space and time. Kant and the Neglected Alternative Andrew F. Specht B.A. Lawrence University 2009 DISSERTATION Submitted in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy in Philosophy Syracuse University December 2014 Copyright © Andrew F. Specht 2014 All Rights Reserved Acknowledgments I am extremely grateful for the assistance of many people in the process of writing this dissertation. Starting from the beginning, I thank Jennifer Keefe and Tom Ryckman for first teaching me how to do philosophy, and I thank Dan, Vitaly, and the other members of the Lawrence University Philosophy Club for good times and great discussions. At Syracuse University, I have had the honor to learn from a number of outstanding professors and graduate students. I am especially indebted to Andre Gallois and Kris McDaniel for providing helpful comments on earlier drafts of multiple parts of this dissertation. Most importantly, I thank Fred Beiser for working with me throughout the entire dissertation process, for reading inumerable chapter drafts, and for his constant patience and support. I also thank the other graduate students at Syracuse, who have informally worked through the difficult Critique with me, in particular Jon Delmendo, Matt Koehler, and James Lee. For comments on an ancestor of chapter one, I thank Dante Dauksz and an audience at the Syraucse Philosophy ABD workshop. For comments on various prior versions of chapter three, I thank Shane Callahan and audiences at the University of South Florida and the Eastern division of the North American Kant Society, as well as the editor and referees for the British Journal for the History of Philosophy. For comments on ancestors to chapter four, I thank Jake Greenblum, Colin McClear, and Nick Stang. I especially appreciate Jake Browning, who read drafts of multiple chapters. For assistance with the German language, I thank Tara Harvey, Karl Solibakke, Karina von Tippelskirch, and the financial assistance of the DAAD. I also thank Robert Clewis for providing research guidance. Finally, I thank my family (Mom, Dad, Mark, and Lizzie) for their constant love and support, Ted and Brian for good times at 301 Fellows, and Adrienne, whose encouragement, love, and sense of humor have enriched every aspect of my life. iv Table of Contents Introduction................................................................................................................... …..1 A Brief History of the Neglected Alternative.................................................... …..6 Overview of Chapters........................................................................................ …19 Chp. 1: The Argument for the Exclusive Mind-Dependence of Space......................... …23 1.1. A First Overview of the Argument.............................................................. …24 1.2. The Mystery of A Priori Intuition............................................................... …34 1.3. What A Priori Intuition Is............................................................................ ...40 1.4. The Aesthetic Reconsidered and the Properties of Space........................... ...55 1.5. Conclusion.................................................................................................. ...62 Chp. 2: H.A. Pistorius and the Origins of the Neglected Alternative............................ ...64 2.1. Pistorius's Conception of Space.................................................................. ...67 2.2. The Leibnizian Neglected Alternative........................................................ ...74 2.3. The Empiricist Neglected Alternative......................................................... ...78 2.4. Conclusion.................................................................................................. ...83 Chp. 3: Trendelenburg and his Third Alternative.......................................................... ...85 3.1. Logische Untersuchungen: First Formulation of the Objection................. ...86 3.2. Kuno Fischer's Counter-Attack................................................................... ...93 3.3. The Possibility of Space, both Subjective and Objective........................... ...97 3.4. Trendelenburg's Interpretation of the Aesthetic.......................................... ..104 3.5. The Origin and Applicability of Space....................................................... ..106 3.6. Conclusion.................................................................................................. ..110 Appendix: Trendelenburg on Necessity............................................................. ..111 Chp. 4: Resolving the Neglected Alternative................................................................ ..118 4.1. Premise Two: A Priori Intuitions and the Mind-Independent..................... ..120 4.2. The Fourth Step and the Source(s) of Space.................................................133 4.3. The Fourth Step: Could there also be a Mind-Independent Space?........... ..143 4.4. The Success of Kant's Argument................................................................ ..155 4.5. Alternative Solutions.................................................................................. ..160 4.6. Conclusion.................................................................................................. ..171 Chp. 5: The Structure of Transcendental Reality........................................................... ..172 5.1. The “Cinnabar” Passage and Similarity...................................................... ..175 5.2. First Practical Argument: God.................................................................... ..179 5.3. Second Practical Argument: Freedom........................................................ ..188 5.4. Theoretical Arguments: Infinite Divisibility and Simples.......................... ..192 5.5. Relations and Incongruence........................................................................ ..205 5.6. Kant's Picture of Transcendental Reality and our Knowledge of It..............209 Conclusion..................................................................................................................... ..216 Bibliography.................................................................................................................. ..220 Vita................................................................................................................................ ..234 v 1 Introduction In just a few pages in the first section of the Critique of Pure Reason, called the “Transcendental Aesthetic,” Kant comes to the bold conclusion that space and time are merely products of our minds and do not in any way reflect the nature of the reality beyond the human mind. The boldness of this conclusion has generated importantly divergent views in the history of philosophy. On one pole is the reaction by Feder and Garve in their Göttingen Review, which dismisses Kant's transcendental idealism as being just another instantiation of implausible Berkelian idealism. But on the other hand, many philosophers were persuaded by Kant's arguments for the ideality of space and time and developed their own systems incorporating this Kantian insight. Such philosophers include Reinhold and Fichte, who constructed their systems not long after the publication of the first Critique, as well as Kuno Fischer and Arthur Schopenhauer, the latter of whom made these gushing remarks about the doctrine of
Load more

Recommended publications
  • 4.1.2 Chronology of False Religions/Heresies of Satan (App.)
    The Need for Teaching the Eschatological Gospel of Both Comings of Jesus Christ in the 21st Century . 4.1.2 Chronology of False Religions/Heresies of Satan 0(app. 4,000 BC) 0 (app.) -- The Fall (Original Sin) of Humanity in the Garden of Eden (Gen 3) 75 (app.) -- Cain murders Abel and is cursed (Gen 4:1-16) 475 (app.) -- Lamech (descendent of Cain) murders 2 men & from his two wives (1st polygamist) & 4 kids came “human knowledge” vs. godly knowledge (Gen 4:20-24) 1,000 (3,000 BC) 1500 (app.) -- Angels marry women and procreate giants (Gen 6:1-8) 1656 (2344 BC) -- Flood wipes out sinful man on earth (only Noah & Family survive--Gen 7-8) 1757 (app.) -- Nimrod/Tower of Babel (Gen 11)—Nimrod & wife, Semiramis (from Ham, cursed son of Noah), establish Babylonian Mysteries Cults, Witchcraft/Pantheism (app.) = approximate Chronology of False Religions/Heresies of Satan (cont.) 2000 (2000 BC) 2000 (app.) -- Babylonian Mysteries Cult False Religion begins to spread over the entire earth (Becomes Baal and Ishtar/Ashteroth worship in Canaan) 2600-4400 -- Persians, Indians, Greeks, and Romans worship the god Mithras (1400 BC-400 AD) 2980 (app.) -- Sun god (Ra) and animal worship in Egypt (Egypt descended from Ham) 3,000 (1,000 BC) 3000 (app.) -- Sun worship and Animism established in India/Humanism in China 3278 (722 BC) -- Israel (Samaria) exiled to Assyria (resettled by Assyrian Mysteries cult/Judaism mixed races and religion, became the Samaritans) 3395 (605 BC) -- Beginning of Judah to exile in Babylon 3412 (588 BC) -- Taoism in China/Zoroastrianism
    [Show full text]
  • Presidential Address
    Empowering Philosophy Christia Mercer COLUMBIA UNIVERSITY Presidential Address delivered at the one hundred sixteenth Eastern Division meeting of the American Philosophical Association in Philadelphia, PA, on January 10, 2020. The main goal of my presidential address in January 2020 was to show that philosophy’s past offers a means to empower its present. I hoped to encourage colleagues to make the philosophy we teach and practice more inclusive (both textually and topically) and to adopt a more public- facing engagement with our discipline. As I add these introductory remarks to my January lecture, it is June 2020 and the need to empower philosophy has never seemed more urgent. We’ve witnessed both the tragic death of George Floyd and the popular uprising of a diverse group of Americans in response to the ongoing violence against Black lives. Many white Americans—and many philosophers—have begun to realize that their inattentiveness to matters of diversity and inclusivity must now be seen as more than mere negligence. Recent demonstrations frequently contain signs that make the point succinctly: “Silence is violence.” A central claim of my January lecture was that philosophy’s status quo is no longer tenable. Even before the pandemic slashed university budgets and staff, our employers were cutting philosophy programs, enrollments were shrinking, and jobs were increasingly hard to find. Despite energetic attempts on the part of many of our colleagues to promote a more inclusive approach to our research and teaching, the depressing truth remains:
    [Show full text]
  • CONSPIRACY THEORY in POLITICAL THOUGHT by Atheer A
    CONSPIRACY THEORY IN POLITICAL THOUGHT by Atheer A. Shawai A Thesis Submitted to the Graduate Faculty of George Mason University in Partial Fulfillment of The Requirements for the Degree of Master of Arts Political Science Committee: _______________________________________ Matthew Scherer. Faculty, Chair _______________________________________ Char R. Miller. Faculty _______________________________________ Jesse Kirkpatrick. Faculty _______________________________________ Ming Wan, Program Director _______________________________________ Mark J. Rozell, Dean Date: __________________________________ Fall Semester 2017 George Mason University Fairfax, VA Conspiracy Theory in Political Thought A thesis submitted in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Master of Art in Political Science at George Mason University By Atheer A. Shawai Bachelor of Arts George Mason University, 2015 Director: Matthew Scherer, Professor The Schar School of Policy and Government Fall Semester 2017 George Mason University Fairfax, VA Copyright 2017 Atheer A. Shawai All Rights Reserved ii ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS I would like to thank Professor Matthew Scherer, Professor Char R. Miller, Professor Jesse Kirkpatrick for participating in my thesis committee and their invaluable comments during the research process. Without their support, I would not have been able to write my study in this extend. I reserve special thanks for Professor Andrew Hughes Hallett for his insightful feedback and suggestions which sharpened my arguments and enhanced the logical
    [Show full text]
  • Illuminati Conspiracy Part One: a Precise Exegesis on the Available Evidence
    http://www.conspiracyarchive.com/NWO/Illuminati.htm Illuminati Conspiracy Part One: A Precise Exegesis on the Available Evidence - by Terry Melanson, Aug. 5th, 2005 Illuminati Conspiracy Part Two: Sniffing out Jesuits A Metaprogrammer at the Door of Chapel Perilous In the literature that concerns the Illuminati relentless speculation abounds. No other secret society in recent history - with the exception of Freemasonry - has generated as much legend, hysteria, and disinformation. I first became aware of the the Illuminati about 14 years ago. Shortly thereafter I read a book, written by Robert Anton Wilson, called Cosmic Trigger: Final Secret of the Illuminati. Wilson published it in 1977 but his opening remarks on the subject still ring true today: Briefly, the background of the Bavarian Illuminati puzzle is this. On May 1, 1776, in Bavaria, Dr. Adam Weishaupt, a professor of Canon Law at Ingolstadt University and a former Jesuit, formed a secret society called the Order of the Illuminati within the existing Masonic lodges of Germany. Since Masonry is itself a secret society, the Illuminati was a secret society within a secret society, a mystery inside a mystery, so to say. In 1785 the Illuminati were suppressed by the Bavarian government for allegedly plotting to overthrow all the kings in Europe and the Pope to boot. This much is generally agreed upon by all historians. 1 Everything else is a matter of heated, and sometimes fetid, controversy. It has been claimed that Dr. Weishaupt was an atheist, a Cabalistic magician, a rationalist, a mystic; a democrat, a socialist, an anarchist, a fascist; a Machiavellian amoralist, an alchemist, a totalitarian and an "enthusiastic philanthropist." (The last was the verdict of Thomas Jefferson, by the way.) The Illuminati have also been credited with managing the French and American revolutions behind the scenes, taking over the world, being the brains behind Communism, continuing underground up to the 1970s, secretly worshipping the Devil, and mopery with intent to gawk.
    [Show full text]
  • William Godwin and Frankenstein: the Secularization of Calvinism in Godwin's
    2.B.ç, q \ WILLIAM GODWIN AND FRANKENSTEIN: THE SECULARIZATION OF CALVINISM IN GODWIN'S PHILOSOPHY AND THE SUB-GODWINIAN GOTHIC NOVEL; WITH SOME REMARKS ON THE RELATIONSHIP OF THE GOTHIC TO ROMANTICISM. This thesis was awarded the degree of Master of Arts 1n the Department of English at the University of Adelaide. Submitted by VIVIENNE ANN BELL, B.A. (l'lons) (Ade'l . ) in January 1993. A-..u .-1,..,{ ! ,,',, I + TABLE OF CONTENTS PAGE Summary 111 Statement by Candidate Acknowl edgement vi Introducti on 1 Part One: Pol 'iti cal Justi ce Preface 4 'l 'l Chapte r One : The M i enn i um 5 Chapter Two: Sandemanianism 'l 4 Chapter Three: Other Phi losophical Influences Upon Godwin 37 Chapter Four: Po'l i ti cal Justi ce 49 Part Two: Frankenste'in Preface 93 Chapter One: The Gothic 97 Chapter Two: Calvinism 119 Chapter Three: Frankenstein as Romantic Myth 138 Chapter Four: Rousseau's Inf 'luence 153 Chapter Fi ve: Conf 'l i cti ng Phì I osophì cal V i ewpoi nts 162 Chapter Six: Godwìn's Ph'i losophy and the Monster's Development 221 Chapter Seven: Victor's Idealism and Scepticism 251 Chapter Eight: The Inversion of the Neoplatonic Journey 272 1l Chapter Nine: Romantic Paradox, the Subl ime, and Irony 296 Conc I us'i on 364 Bi bl iography 367 iii SUMMARY The subject matter of thi s thesi s 'is Wi I I i am Godwin's @i-c.e and Mary Shel ley's Frankenstei n. My central argument is that there is a secularization of Ca]vinism in both Godwin's philosophy and the sub-Godwinian Gothic novel.
    [Show full text]
  • 1 the Radical Enlightenment Freemasonry Illuminati Adam Weishaupt
    The Radical Enlightenment Freemasonry Illuminati Adam Weishaupt (1748-1830) Thomas Paine (1737-1809) Common Sense (1776) The Treatise of the Three Impostors (1719) Julien Offray de la Mettrie (1709-1751) Baron d’Holbach (1723-1789) Today’s lecture concerns the “radical” Enlightenment—that is, that handful of philosophes and philosophies that were part of the Enlightenment but who existed on its more extreme or radical fringe. This includes Freemasons and their more politically-radical offshoot in Bavaria known as the Illuminati; proponents of republican goVernment as opposed to enlightened absolutism or eVen constitutional monarchy; and finally atheists and materialists. The Freemasons were an all-male secret fraternal organization that was dedicated to enlightenment, to ciVic Virtue, social charity, and equality among its members. Indeed, the Masons sought to make abstract Enlightenment ideals like reason, equality, self-goVernance, freedom of conscience, and religious toleration* concrete in their meetings, which were held in Masonic “lodges”. Theoretically, Masons did not discriminate on the bases of social or professional standing. All members were considered equal within the Masonic lodge: from the common man to the wealthy noble; but at the same time the lodges usually only admitted well-to-do artisans and merchants. Members were required to profess belief in a Supreme Being, but their specific theological beliefs were not considered important; that is, the Masons practiced religious toleration within the lodges. Masons were primarily concerned with the moral improVement of their members and of society. They also represent a space in which the Third Estate could participate in civil society. Indeed, through Masonry the bourgeoisie, or middle class, found a way that it could participate in the new enlightened political culture.
    [Show full text]
  • Konrad Paul Liessmann / Violetta L. Waibel ZUM RAUM WIRD HIER DER LEIB
    Konrad Paul Liessmann / Violetta L. Waibel ZUM RAUM WIRD HIER DER LEIB Mythos und Wahrheit vom vergessenen Körper des Philosophen Philosophie findet statt. Philosophy on Stage provoziert durch die Andeutung, dass Philosophie an Orten stattfinden kann, die zumindest unüblich, wenn nicht ungehörig sind: auf der Bühne zu Beispiel. Aber was bedeutet es für die Philosophie, sich auf eine Bühne zu begeben, und was wären die anderen Orte der Philosophie? Man könnte, grob, tatsächlich drei Orte nennen, an denen philosophiert werden kann, ohne dass dies genuine Orte der Philosophie wären. Es sind immer besetzte oder geborgte Orte, die dennoch ihre Wirkungen auf das Denken und seine Haltungen haben. Diese drei Orte sind: Der Marktplatz, das Katheder und die Bühne. Den Marktplatz borgte sich die Philosophie von den Händlern, um überhaupt erst einmal ins Geschäft zu kommen. Da am Markt getauscht und gefeilscht wird, übernimmt die Philosophie diese Bewegungsformen: sie dialogisiert und argumentiert, sie tauscht Argumente. Ihre Körperhaltung und damit ihre Denkweise ist die von Marktteilnehmern: Gehen, sitzen, stehen, reden, gestikulieren, warten, hoffen, täuschen – alles ist möglich. Das Katheder borgt sich die Philosophie, wie die Wissenschaft überhaupt, von der Kirche. Es könnte als die säkularisierte Form der Kanzel gedeutet werden, noch leicht erhoben über die Hörer, ein Pult, das Schutz gewährt, ein Sprechen im Stehen. Nur die Arme sind noch frei, um das zu unterstreichen, was nun nicht angeboten, sondern 1 vorgetragen wird. Und die Bühne stiehlt die Philosophie vom Theater, das Denken will nun ein Drama, also eine Handlung werden. Solch eine Bühne kann weit definiert werden, vom theatrum mundi bis zum Kellertheater reichen die Spielräume der Philosophie.
    [Show full text]
  • DENOUNCING the ENLIGHTENMENT by MEANS of a CONSPIRACY THESIS Gochhausens Enthullung Der Weltburgerrepublik
    Sisko Haikala DENOUNCING THE ENLIGHTENMENT BY MEANS OF A CONSPIRACY THESIS Gochhausens Enthullung der Weltburgerrepublik I rnst August Anton von Gochhausen's initially anonymous EEnthilllung der Weltburgerrepublik (Exposure of the Cosmopolitan Republic, 1786), with its theses on a "cosmopolitan conspiracy" which threatened the established political and religious order, is a notewor­ thy illustration of the rise of conspiracy thinking in the political cul­ ture of the late Enlightenment. Conspiracy theories generally emerge in times of crisis when scapegoats and monocausal explanations for problems and disasters at hand are searched for. They belong to irra­ tional elements in the history of thought and do not seem to fit into the picture of the 'Age of Reason'. However, signs of a crisis within the Enlightenment and illustrations of a growing awareness of the existence of such a crisis were visible in late eighteenth-century Eu­ rope well before the outbreak of the French Revolution. This crisis followed from conflicts between traditional and novel norms and 96 DENOUNCING THE ENLIGHTENMENT BY MEANS OF A CONSPIRACY THESIS from disappointment at progress in the Enlightenment which was sometimes seen as excessively slow, sometimes as excessively fast, sometimes as going astray. Divisions among the Enlighteners into various radical and moderate groups emerged, and a considerable rise in Counter-Enlightenment thought occurred. Such developments were reflections of accelerating processes of politicization. Unlike stereotypical interpretations of the German Enlightenment as an es­ sentially non-political movement suggest, an ideological polariza­ tion and a connected rivalry for dominance of public opinion was also taking place within German public discourse well before the beginning of the French Revolution.
    [Show full text]
  • 1 Did Goethe and Schelling Endorse Species Evolution?
    Did Goethe and Schelling Endorse Species Evolution? Robert J. Richards University of Chicago Charles Darwin was quite sensitive to the charge that his theory of species transmutation was not original but had been anticipated by earlier authors, most famously by Lamarck and his own grandfather, Erasmus Darwin. The younger Darwin believed, however, his own originality lay in the device he used to explain the change of species over time and in the kind of evidence he brought to bear to demonstrate such change. He was thus ready to concede and recognize predecessors, especially those that caused only modest ripples in the intellectual stream. In the historical introduction that he included in the third edition of the Origin, he acknowledged Johann Wolfgang von Goethe as “an extreme partisan” of the transmutation view. He had been encouraged to embrace Goethe as a fellow transmutationist by Isidore Geoffroy St. Hilaire and Ernst Haeckel.1 Scholars today think that Darwin’s recognition of Goethe was a mistake. They usually deny that the Naturphilosophen, especially Friedrich Joseph Schelling, held anything like a theory of species evolution in the manner of Charles Darwin—that is, a conception of a gradual change of species in the empirical world over long periods of time. Dietrich von Engelhardt, for instance, in commenting on an enticing passage from Schelling’s Erster Entwurf eines Systems der Naturphilosophie (First sketch of a system of nature philosophy,1799), declares “Schelling is no forerunner of Darwin.” Schelling, 1 Darwin mentions in his historical introduction to the Origin that Geoffroy St. Hilaire had recognized Goethe as a transmutationist.
    [Show full text]
  • PHILOSOPHICAL (PRE)OCCUPATIONS and the PROBLEM of IDEALISM: from Ideology to Marx’S Critique of Mental Labor
    PHILOSOPHICAL (PRE)OCCUPATIONS AND THE PROBLEM OF IDEALISM: From Ideology to Marx’s Critique of Mental Labor by Ariane Fischer Magister, 1999, Freie Universität Berlin M.A., 2001, The Ohio State University M.Phil., 2005, The George Washington University A Dissertation submitted to The Faculty of Columbian College of Arts and Sciences of The George Washington University in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy January 31, 2010 Dissertation directed by Andrew Zimmerman Associate Professor of History The Columbian College of The George Washington University certifies that Ariane Fischer has passed the Final Examination for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy as of August 25, 2009. This is the final and approved form of the dissertation. PHILOSOPHICAL (PRE)OCCUPATIONS AND THE PROBLEM OF IDEALISM: From Ideology to Marx’s Critique of Mental Labor Ariane Fischer Dissertation Research Committee: Andrew Zimmerman, Associate Professor of History, Dissertation Director Peter Caws, University Professor of Philosophy, Committee Member Gail Weiss, Professor of Philosophy, Committee Member ii © Copyright 2010 by Ariane Fischer All rights reserved iii Acknowledgments The author wishes to thank her dissertation advisor Andrew Zimmerman, who has been a continuous source of support and encouragement. His enthusiastic yet demanding guidance has been invaluable. Both his superior knowledge of history and theory as well as his diligence in reviewing drafts have been crucial in the successful completion of the research and writing process. Further, many thanks are extended to Gail Weiss and Peter Caws for joining the dissertation committee, and to Dan Moschenberg and Paul Smith for agreeing to be readers.
    [Show full text]
  • Download (1155Kb)
    Original citation: Vanzo, Alberto. (2016) Empiricism and rationalism in nineteenth-century histories of philosophy. Journal of the History of Ideas, 77 (2). pp. 253-282. Permanent WRAP URL: http://wrap.warwick.ac.uk/78420 Copyright and reuse: The Warwick Research Archive Portal (WRAP) makes this work by researchers of the University of Warwick available open access under the following conditions. Copyright © and all moral rights to the version of the paper presented here belong to the individual author(s) and/or other copyright owners. To the extent reasonable and practicable the material made available in WRAP has been checked for eligibility before being made available. Copies of full items can be used for personal research or study, educational, or not-for-profit purposes without prior permission or charge. Provided that the authors, title and full bibliographic details are credited, a hyperlink and/or URL is given for the original metadata page and the content is not changed in any way. Publisher’s statement: All rights reserved. Except for brief quotations used for purposes of scholarly citation, none of this work may be reproduced in any form by any means without written permission from the publisher. For information address the University of Pennsylvania Press, 3905 Spruce Street, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania 19104-4112. A note on versions: The version presented in WRAP is the published version or, version of record, and may be cited as it appears here. For more information, please contact the WRAP Team at: [email protected] warwick.ac.uk/lib-publications
    [Show full text]
  • Nikolay Andreev in Germany (1900-1905): a Student and a Social Democrat
    Working Papers WP 2019-06 Centre for German and European Studies (CGES) Mikhail Sinyutin Nikolay Andreev in Germany (1900-1905): A Student and a Social Democrat WP 2019-06 2019 Bielefeld / St. Petersburg № 6 Working Papers WP 2019-06 Centre for German and European Studies Bielefeld University St. Petersburg University Centre for German and European Studies (CGES) CGES Working Papers series includes publication of materials prepared within different activities of the Centre for German and European Studies both in St. Petersburg and in Germany. The CGES supports educational programmes, research and scientific dialogues. In accordance with the CGES mission, the Working Papers are dedicated to the interdisciplinary studies of different aspects of German and European societies. This paper focuses on the short period in an early life of the Russian sociologist Nikolay Andreev (1874- 1956). The paper has been written on the basis of a research stay conducted at several archives in Germany, France, and the Netherlands. The research trip was supported by the Centre for German and European Studies, St. Petersburg. Mikhail Sinyutin, Doctor of Sociology, Professor of Economic Sociology Department, Faculty of Sociology, St. Petersburg University. Contact: [email protected] ISSN 1860-5680 © Centre for German and European Studies, 2019 2 Working Papers WP 2019-06 Centre for German and European Studies Table of Contents Abstract. ................................................................................................................................
    [Show full text]