Studia philosophica et historica – serie

«Concept» is a central notion in modern philosophy that also influences other disciplines like psychology and linguistics. The author compares modern theories to the work of Aristotle as the first philosopher with an extensive corpus and one of the predecessors both of classical theory and of modal theories of «concepts». It is surprising that there is no equivalent term for «concept» in his work. Both pathêma and logos are central to his theory of language and thought. Therefore, this book describes which notion in Aristotle’s writing comes closest to «concept» and whether or not it generates a precise theory.

The main aim of this book is to provide a critical and historical inquiry into Kant’s schematism chapter contained in the Critique of Pure Reason. More specifically, the book argues that Kant’s schematism chapter is a necessary step within the project of the Critique. It deals with a problem of its own, one which is not the object of the previous chapters: How can categories be applied to intuitions? The author shows that the term ‘schema’ has an interesting and long tradition of different philosophical uses that finds in the works of Kant a point of no-return. In the philosophical works written before Kant, the notion of schema did not have a specific and distinctive meaning and function of its own but was rather used in different contexts (from rhetoric to logic to psychology). After Kant, all philosophers who speak of schemata refer in one way or another back to Kant’s distinctive notion, which possesses a specific, epistemic meaning. Moreover, this book aims to provide a contribution to the understanding of the relation between philosophy and the sciences. It is by means of demonstrating the importance of the schematism chapter not only within the Critique but also from a broader perspective, deriving from the fact that Kant’s doctrine of schemata had an impressive influence not only on philosophers but also on psychologists.

Bis heute diskutieren Kant-Forscher:innen äußerst kontrovers darüber, wie die Postulatenlehre und die Lehre vom höchsten Gut aus Kants Kritik der praktischen Vernunft zu interpretieren seien. Auffällig ist, dass neukantianische Autoren in der Debatte eine zentrale Rolle spielen. Die Publikation geht den Fragen nach, wie die Debatte um 1900, der Hochzeit des Neukantianismus, aussah, in welchem Kontext Kants Morallehre gedeutet wurde und welche Akteure sie konkret in Anspruch nahmen. Der Autor eruiert mögliche Antworten auf diese Fragen. Er untersucht den Umgang mit den genannten Segmenten aus Kants zweiter Kritik in den philosophischen Diskussionen um 1900 und ordnet diesen in die wissenschaftlichen und politischen Debatten der Zeit ein. Der Band weist in diesem Kontext nach, dass die bis heute zitierten neukantianischen Deutungen der kantischen Morallehre ein Effekt wirkmächtiger spiritistischer, materialistischer und nationalprotestantischer Diskurse sind.

This book offers a thorough and precise analysis of Aristotle's (384 - 322 B.C.) theory of the virtue of courage. On the one hand the reader will find a meticulous commentary on relevant chapters from the Nicomachean Ethics and from Aristotle's lectures on Rhetoric. In addition, extensive references to Plato's (427 - 346 B.C.) discussion of courage, as put forward in his dialogue Laches, help to clarify Aristotle's position. On the other hand the author fathoms on Aristotelian grounds the still topical problems related to courage in terms of systematic moral philosophy: Which role do rational choice and knowledge play with regard to ethical virtues such as courage? Is there some specific objective attached to courage in particular and to ethical virtues in general? How can one tell apart those who only seem or pretend to be courageous and those who are really so? Is there any special method or strategy for defining ethical concepts?