The liberal Hegelianism of Edward Caird: or, how to transcend the social economics of Kant and the romantics

Purpose: The paper establishes that Edward Caird developed a distinctive form of liberal Hegelianism out of his critical responses to Kant, the romantic tradition of Rousseau, Goethe and Wordsworth and indeed Hegel himself. Design/methodology/approach: The paper presents a philosophical reconstruction of Caird's social economics that is based on a close reading of a very wide range of Caird's writings including his recently published lectures on social ethics and political economy. Findings: Caird's theory of historical development underpinned his writings on social economics. One of his greatest debts in this regard was to his interpretation of the romantics, which introduced a rich conception of higher human capacities into his critical analysis of capitalism. When combined with his critique of Kantian formalism, this led Caird towards Hegel. Yet, Caird's concerns regarding corporatism's stultifying tendencies led him to develop a dynamic form of liberal Hegelianism, which placed far greater trust than had Hegel in the ability of free conscientious citizens to restructure and enrich established social categories (classes, professions, gender roles and so on) and the system of nations which those categories helped to constitute. Practical implications: If Caird's liberal Hegelianism were to be adopted today, we could live in much freer, fairer and enriching communities than we do at present. Originality/value: Edward Caird has been wrongly neglected in intellectual histories of Anglo-American political theory, and while his writings on Kant's critical philosophy have received some scholarly attention, his critique of romanticism has never received the attention it deserves. This also draws on manuscripts that have been published only within the past five years, having been edited for the first time by the author of this paper

Mykhailo Hrushevskyi’s Father: Biographical Aspects

The key scholarly issue of contemporary Ukrainian research is not only a return to existing problems and figures but also a search for new figures and the filling of historical and biographical gaps. The present article is dedicated to the biography of Kyiv Theological Academy graduate Serhii Hrushevskyi (1830–1901), a figure who has rarely appeared in research previously. He was a talented teacher and gained credibility and respect among his contemporaries. More attention should be paid to his publications in periodicals, the themes of which varied from pedagogy to linguistics. It is necessary to emphasize the importance of Hrushevskyi in the development of public education of the late 19th century. The education, hard work, and active social activity of Serhii Hrushevskyi had a positive impact on his son, renowned Ukrainian politician and statesman, historian Mykhailo Hrushevskyi (1866–1934), for whom his father was his first and major mentor. Love for “Ukrainians,” learning and writing, selfless work – is the legacy that Serhii Hrushevskyi passed on to Mykhailo, which was always at the core of his life and scholarly activity. The results of the article not only contain new biographical information about Hrushevskyi’s family, but also emphasize the significant role of the biographical component in modern scholarly research

...Brevique Adnotatione Critica...: a preliminary history of the Oxford classical texts

On 3 July 1896, at one of the less regular meetings of the Delegates of Oxford University Press (OUP) held during the Long Vacation, approval was given to publication of the Oxford Classical Texts (OCT) series. This approval was the outcome of discussions and proposals over more than ten years; indeed, it would be possible to take any one of several dates as marking the start of the series. While these earlier discussions need to be reviewed in order to explain why the series developed as it did when it did, this is also a preliminary attempt to look generally at the early history of the Texts, and its focus is the period to 1939, although some later developments in the series will also be mentioned

Come back Marshall, all is forgiven? : Complexity, evolution, mathematics and Marshallian exceptionalism

Marshall was the great synthesiser of neoclassical economics. Yet with his qualified assumption of self-interest, his emphasis on variation in economic evolution and his cautious attitude to the use of mathematics, Marshall differs fundamentally from other leading neoclassical contemporaries. Metaphors inspire more specific analogies and ontological assumptions, and Marshall used the guiding metaphor of Spencerian evolution. But unfortunately, the further development of a Marshallian evolutionary approach was undermined in part by theoretical problems within Spencer's theory. Yet some things can be salvaged from the Marshallian evolutionary vision. They may even be placed in a more viable Darwinian framework.Peer reviewedFinal Accepted Versio

Jamesian Free Will, The Two-stage Model Of William James

Research into two-stage models of “free will” – first “free” random generation of alternative possibilities, followed by “willed” adequately determined decisions consistent with character, values, and desires – suggests that William James was in 1884 the first of a dozen philosophers and scientists to propose such a two-stage model for free will. We review the later work to establish James’s priority. By limiting chance to the generation of alternative possibilities, James was the first to overcome the standard two-part argument against free will, i.e., that the will is either determined or random. James gave it elements of both, to establish freedom but preserve responsibility. We show that James was influenced by Darwin’s model of natural selection, as were most recent thinkers with a two-stage model. In view of James’s famous decision to make his first act of freedom a choice to believe that his will is free, it is most fitting to celebrate James’s priority in the free will debates by naming the two-stage model – first chance, then choice -“Jamesian” free will

Analysis of the Jun Ishiwara's "The universal meaning of the quantum of action"

Here we present an analysis of the paper "Universelle Bedeutung des Wirkungsquantums" (The universal meaning of the quantum of action), published by Jun Ishiwara in German in the "Proceedings of Tokyo Mathematico-Physical Society 8 (1915) 106-116". In his work, Ishiwara, established in the Sendai University, Japan, proposed - simultaneously with Arnold Sommerfeld, William Wilson and Niels Bohr in Europe - the phase-space-integral quantization, a rule that would be incorporated into the old-quantum-theory formalism. The discussions and analysis render this paper fully accessible to undergraduate students of physics with elementary knowledge of quantum mechanics.Comment: 12 page

The Publicity of Thought

An influential tradition holds that thoughts are public: different thinkers share many of their thoughts, and the same applies to a single subject at different times. This ‘publicity principle’ has recently come under attack. Arguments by Mark Crimmins, Richard Heck and Brian Loar seem to show that publicity is inconsistent with the widely accepted principle that someone who is ignorant or mistaken about certain identity facts will have distinct thoughts about the relevant object—for instance, the astronomer who does not know that Hesperus is Phosphorus will have two distinct thoughts Hesperus is bright and Phosphorus is bright. In this paper, I argue that publicity can be defended if we adopt a relational account on which thoughts are individuated by their mutual relations. I then go on to develop a specific relational theory—the ‘linking account’—and contrast it with other relational views

American Progressives and the European Left

Until comparatively recently, historians treated progressivism of the early twentieth century variety as if it were a purely American affair. In 1952, Eric F. Goldman argued that progressivism was ‘as exclusively national a movement as the United States ever knew’. But in the years that followed, a number of works appeared which challenged the validity of this narrowly national interpretation. Arthur Mann, in 1956, suggested that American reformers were much influenced by British social thought. Gertrude Almy Slichter drew attention to the European background of American reform in a 1960 dissertation. A number of essays then showed that progressivism itself could be regarded as part of an international movement. Peter F. Clarke pointed out that there had been a progressive movement in England which, in fact, predated the American equivalent. Kenneth O. Morgan, reviewing the nature of the links between British and American reformers, thought it meaningful to write in terms of ‘ Anglo-American Progressivism’. Other historians, looking at the matter in a more general, European context, were struck by the apparent similarities between American progressives, British Liberals or Labourites, and French and German socialists. George E. Mowry argued that American progressives should be regarded as part of western ‘social democracy’. Arthur A. Ekirch came to much the same conclusion