Archive for the Kant category

Martin Kusch, Psychologism (2)

Kusch, Martin. Psychologism: A Case Study in the Sociology of Philosophical Knowledge. London; New York: Routledge, 1995. See also the Four Appendices to Psychologism (1995). http://www.academia.edu/1078102/Four_Appendices_to_PSYCHOLOGISM_1995_ Husserl was preoccupied with psychology and himself was tarred with the label of psychologism. Descriptive phenomenology “serves to prepare the ground for psychology as an empirical science.” Husserl was […]

Bruce Kuklick’s history of American philosophy (3)

Kuklick, Bruce. A History of Philosophy in America 1720-2000. Oxford: Clarendon Press, 2001. 346 pp. $19.95 (pbk), ISBN 0199260168. Part II: The Age of Pragmatism, 1859-1934 6. The Shape of Revolution 7. The Consensus on Idealism, 1870-1900 8. Pragmatism in Cambridge 9. Pragmatism at Harvard 10. Instrumentalism in Chicago and New York Chapter 8 begins […]

Bruce Kuklick’s history of American philosophy (2)

Kuklick, Bruce. A History of Philosophy in America 1720-2000. Oxford: Clarendon Press, 2001. 346 pp. $19.95 (pbk), ISBN 0199260168. Part II: The Age of Pragmatism, 1859-1934 6. The Shape of Revolution 7. The Consensus on Idealism, 1870-1900 8. Pragmatism in Cambridge 9. Pragmatism at Harvard 10. Instrumentalism in Chicago and New York Post-Civil-War era saw […]

Witold Gombrowicz: Philosophy in 6 1/4 hours (2)

Witold Gombrowicz, A Guide to Philosophy in Six Hours and Fifteen Minutes; translated by Benjamin Ivry. New Haven: Yale University Press, 2004. 109, [1] pp. [8] Existentialism [Heidegger, Husserl, Sartre] (4 May 1969) [9] Existentialism [Kierkegaard, Descartes, Sartre] (5 May 1969) [10] Freedom in Sartre (6 May 1969) [11] The View of Others [Sartre] (7 […]

Witold Gombrowicz: Philosophy in 6 1/4 hours (1)

Witold Gombrowicz, A Guide to Philosophy in Six Hours and Fifteen Minutes; translated by Benjamin Ivry. New Haven: Yale University Press, 2004. 109, [1] pp. Lessons/Sections: [1] First Lesson: Kant 1724-1804 [+ Descartes] (27 April 1969) [2] Second Lesson: Kant: The Categories (28 April 1969) [3] Third Lesson: Kant (30 April 1969) [4] Fourth Lesson: […]

Bruce Kuklick’s history of American philosophy (1)

Kuklick, Bruce. A History of Philosophy in America 1720-2000. Oxford: Clarendon Press, 2001. 346pp, $19.95 (pbk), ISBN 0199260168. Kuklick presents the history of American philosophy in terms of the social and institutional context in which leading figures and tendencies emerged. Not everyone and everything can be covered in such a survey, but naturally we are […]

Review: Brian O’Connor, Adorno’s Negative Dialectic (1)

Adorno’s Negative Dialectic: Philosophy and the Possibility of Critical Rationality Brian O’Connor Cambridge, MA: The MIT Press, 2004. http://www.scribd.com/doc/87513357/Brian-O-Connor-Adorno-s-Negative-Dialectic-Philosophy-and-the-Possibility-of-Critical-Rationality-The-MIT-Press 1 I did a very quick read of this book, which is a preposterous thing to do considering the difficulty of the subject matter. Furthermore, it is not fully comprehensible without a thorough grounding in Kant, […]

Kant & Confucianism: watch where you step

See my entries under the category “Chinese philosophy” on this blog & on my old blog . . . Chinese Philosophy in the West: Globalization Gone Bad . . . to see what I think of Chung-Ying Cheng. And now here’s something I wrote on 17 September 2007: Cheng Chung-Ying. Theoretical Links between Kant and […]

Dascal on controversies

Dascal, Marcelo. Types of polemics and types of polemical moves. In S. Cmejrkova, J. Hoffmannova, O. Mullerova, and J. Svetla, Dialogue Analysis VI (= Proceedings of the 6th Conference, Prague 1996), vol. 1. Tubingen: Max Niemeyer, 15-33, 1998 [Reprinted in H.S. Gill and G. Manetti (eds.), Signs and Signification, vol. II, New Delhi: Bahri Publication, […]

Dascal on disputation & the analytical-continental divide

Dascal, Marcello. How rational can a polemic across the analytic-continental ‘divide’ be?, International Journal of Philosophical Studies 9(3): 313-339, 2001. In order to specify controversy’s position within the large family of polemical dialogues, I propose to distinguish between three members of the subfamily to which controversies belong. I will call them ‘discussion’, ‘dispute’, and ‘controversy’. […]