383,420 research outputs found

    A Neglected Additament: Peirce on Logic, Cosmology, and the Reality of God

    Get PDF
    Two different versions of the ending of the first additament to C. S. Peirce's 1908 article, "A Neglected Argument for the Reality of God," appear in the Collected Papers but were omitted from The Essential Peirce. In one, he linked the hypothesis of God's Reality to his entire theory of logic as semeiotic, claiming that proving the latter would also prove the former. In the other, he offered a final outline of his cosmology, in which the Reality of God as Ens necessarium is indispensable to both the origin and order of our existing universe of Signs. Exploring these passages, as well as the unpublished manuscript drafts of the article, provides important insights into the key concepts of instinct and continuity within Peirce's comprehensive system of thought

    Kant’s Robust Theory of Grace

    Get PDF
    In this paper I argue against two prevailing views of Kant’s Religion. Against commentators such as Michalson and Quinn, who have argued that Kant’s project in Religion is riddled with inconsistencies and circularities, I show that a proper understanding of Kant’s views on grace reveals these do not exist. And contra commentators that attribute to Kant at best a minimalist conception of grace, I show that Kant’s view of it is remarkably robust. I argue that Kant works with three different conceptions of grace. These are: a) grace and the God within, b) grace and the transformation of the fundamental orientation, and c) grace that can be laid hold of; the first and the last play a significant role in his philosophy of religion

    Immanuel Kant — Text and Contexts

    Get PDF

    Immanuel Kant's Idea of Time vs. Norbert Elias’ Critique on his Conception

    Get PDF
    Abstract: In his Critique of Pure Reason, Kant describes time as the formal condition on which all phenomena are based upon. He considers it as a one-dimensional subject, that is not an empirical perception, which is given a priori and nothing else but the form of an inner sense. Elias contradicts this, as he differentiates between a social time and a physical time. He demands an understanding for the relation between time in ’society' and in ’nature'. Elias states that languages (he specifically mentions German) often don't have a word that would be equivalent to the English term “timing". For Elias ’time' is part of the fifth dimension, the dimension of symbols, of experience, of awareness. Only this makes it possible to find out and know what time really is in a social context, a specific synthesis of occurrences, that has to be learned in higher developed societies that are based on the division of labour. Elias mentions ’time', but he states that it's only a synchronisation of positions in the seriatim of events

    The impossibility of sympathy

    Get PDF
    Copyright © 2010 University of Pennsylvania Press. 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.This article questions the status of sympathy in eighteenth century studies. It argues that sympathy can be seen as an economy of two persistent idealizations: the untouchable—that touches everything. Tracing the genealogy of fellow feeling as a militant Puritan concept of exclusion that is still marked by its theological and political past, the sympathy advocated by Hutcheson, Hume and Smith appears as an idealization confronted by its own impossibility. The eighteenth century is a century in search of an absent and insufficient sympathy, a sympathy that is already preoccupied with its own limitations and excesses: a meta-discourse on sympathy still eludes us

    On Arthur Eddington's Theory of Everything

    Get PDF
    From 1929 to his death in 1944, A. Eddington worked on developing a highly ambitious theory of fundamental physics that covered everything in the physical world, from the tiny electron to the universe at large. His unfinished theory included abstract mathematics and spiritual philosophy in a mix which was peculiar to Eddington but hardly intelligible to other scientists. The constants of nature, which he claimed to be able to deduce purely theoretically, were of particular significance to his project. Although highly original, Eddington's attempt to provide physics with a new foundation had to some extent parallels in the ideas of other British physicists, including P. Dirac and E. A. Milne. Eddington's project was however a grand failure in so far that it was rejected by the large majority of physicists. A major reason was his unorthodox view of quantum mechanics.Comment: 20 pages, 4 figure

    Logic and Existence: Deleuze on the “Conditions of the Real”

    Get PDF
    Logique et existenceDeleuze Ă  propos des « conditions du rĂ©el »Pour Deleuze, l’un des problĂšmes fondamentaux d’une thĂ©orie de la pensĂ©e est de savoir comment la pensĂ©e peut quitter la sphĂšre du possible pour penser le rĂ©el, c’est-Ă dire pour penser l’existence elle-mĂȘme. La position du rĂ©el semble ĂȘtre hors du concept. Des prĂ©-kantiens comme Leibniz approchaient ce problĂšme par le biais de la distinction entre vĂ©ritĂ©s d’essence et vĂ©ritĂ©s d’existence, alors que des post-kantiens comme Maimon l’approchaient par la distinction entre les conditions de l’expĂ©rience possible et celles de l’expĂ©rience rĂ©elle. La logique classique dĂ©finit la sphĂšre du possible par trois principes logiques – l’identitĂ©, la non-contradiction et le tiers-exclu – et la prĂ©sente Ă©tude examine les trois grandes trajectoires qui, dans cette histoire de la philosophie, ont tentĂ© d’utiliser l’un de ces trois principes classiques pour pĂ©nĂ©trer l’existence ellemĂȘme : 1) Leibniz cherchait Ă  Ă©tendre le principe de d’identitĂ© Ă l’existence entiĂšre ; 2) Hegel cherchait Ă  Ă©tendre le principe de non-contradiction Ă  la totalitĂ© de l’expĂ©rience ; et 3) le groupe des penseurs appelĂ©s de maniĂšre assez large « existentialistes » cherchait Ă  Ă©tendre le principe du tiers-exclu Ă  la totalitĂ© de l’existence. La conclusion examine les raisons pour lesquelles Deleuze a Ă©tĂ© fascinĂ© par chacune de ces tentatives philosophiques pour « penser l’existence », tout en pensant nĂ©anmoins qu’elles ont toutes Ă©chouĂ© ; et pourquoi aussi il a fini par dĂ©velopper sa propre rĂ©ponse au problĂšme en faisant appel Ă  un principe de diffĂ©rence.Logica e EsistenzaLe ‘Condizioni del reale’ in DeleuzePer Deleuze, uno dei problemi fondamentali per una teoria del pensiero Ăš: come puĂČ il pensiero abbandonare la sfera del possibile per pensare il reale, ossia, pensare l’esistenza stessa? La posizione del reale sembra essere fuori dal concetto. Prekantiani come Leibniz affrontano questo problema in termini di distinzione fra veritĂ  dell’essenza e veritĂ  dell’esistenza, mentre post-kantiani come Maimon affrontano il problema in termini di distinzione fra condizioni dell’esperienza possibile e condizioni dell’esperienza reale. La logica classica ha definito la sfera del possibile secondo tre principi logici – identitĂ , non-contraddizione, terzo escluso – e questo saggio analizza tre grandi ‘parabole’ della storia della filosofia che hanno tentato di usare uno di questi tre principi della logica per penetrare l’esistenza stessa: Leibniz hanno tentato di estendere il principio di identitĂ  a tutta l’esistenza; Hegel hanno tentato di estendere il principio di non-contraddizione a tutta l’esistenza; il gruppo di pensatori chiamati “esistenzialisti” ha tentato di estendere il principio del terzo escluso all’esistenza. La conclusione analizza sia le ragioni per le quali Deleuze era affascinato da ciascuno di questi tentativi filosofici di “pensare l’esistenza” nonostante fosse convinto che essi avessero fallito, sia i motivi per cui egli in conclusione traccia la propria risposta al problema facendo appello al principio della differenz

    The Concept of Experience in Husserl's Phenomenology and James' Radical Empiricism

    Get PDF
    In this paper, I develop a comparison between the philosophies of Husserl and James in relation to their concepts of experience. Whereas various authors have acknowledged the affinity between James’ early psychology and Husserl’s phenomenology, the late development of James’ philosophy is often considered in opposition to Husserl’s transcendental phenomenology. This is because James’ radical empiricism achieves a non-dual dimension of experience that precedes the functional division into subject and object, thus contrasting with the phenomenological analysis of the dual structure of intentionality. However, I argue that the later “genetic” development of phenomenology converges with some central aspects of James’ radical empiricism. This is because genetic phenomenology leads us to conceive of the flow of primal impressions as a fundamental dimension of experience that precedes the subject-object duality and is at the base of the process of co-constitution of the subject and the object in reciprocal dependence. At the same time, Husserl conceives of the impressional core of experience as structured by formal conditions that depend on the concrete constitution of an embodied subject. For this reason, I argue that Husserl’s genetic phenomenology can complement James’ radical empiricism, thus leading to the development of the doctrine of pure experience as a form of empirical and not metaphysical realism
    • 

    corecore