scholarly journals Biology and panpsychism: German evolutionists and a philosopher Theodor Ziehen (1862–1950)

2020 ◽  
Vol 36 (2) ◽  
pp. 240-253
Author(s):  
Georgy S. Levit ◽  
◽  
Uwe Hossfeld ◽  
Keyword(s):  
20Th Century ◽  
Evolutionary Theory ◽  
Evolutionary Biology ◽  
History Of Philosophy ◽  
Strong Impact ◽  
Ernst Haeckel ◽  
Quasi Experimental ◽  
History Of ◽  
Biological Systematics ◽  
Modern Evolutionary Synthesis

Theodor Ziehen was a prominent German psychiatrist and psychologist and a marginal philosopher of the first half of the 20th century who developed an exotic subjective-idealistic theory based on quasi-empirical psychological arguments. Although Ziehen was seen by contemporaries (most prominently by Vladimir Lenin) as a representative of the same philosophical current (empirio-criticism) as Mach and Avenarius, he never achieved their prominence in the history of philosophy. At the same time, Ziehen’s philosophy became influential in German biology, first of all, due to his direct and very strong impact on Bernhard Rensch. Rensch, in his turn, was the most significant figure on the international scene of what is known as the Modern Evolutionary Synthesis in biology. Rensch was not the only biologist influenced by Ziehen’s ideas. Ziehen had some communication with the “German Darwin” Ernst Haeckel and played a prominent role in the concept of the founder of biological systematics Willi Hennig. How to explain Ziehen’s prominent place in the history of evolutionary biology, despite his obscurity in the history of philosophy? Our hypothesis is that Ziehen became a visible figure in evolutionary theory because of the monistic bias in German biology. Ziehen’s epistemology appeared to be compatible with evolutionary monism and was developed by a practicing psychiatrist therefore obtaining a character of a quasi-experimental doctrine.

Spiritual Crisis of the Beginning of the 20th Century: From Philosophical to Religious Interpretations

2021 ◽  
pp. 79-88
Author(s):  
Alexander V. Koltsov ◽  
Keyword(s):  
20Th Century ◽  
History Of Philosophy ◽  
The Other ◽  
German Philosophy ◽  
Religious Consciousness ◽  
Religious Context ◽  
Spiritual Crisis ◽  
History Of ◽  
History Of Culture ◽  
The One

The paper is an attempt to narrow down the notion of spiritual crisis which is now widely applied in research on history of culture of the 19th–20th centuries, with respect to history of German philosophy and observation of modern reli­giosity. The shift from the history of philosophy to the religious context is ful­filled through analysis of texts of two religious thinkers, A. Reinach and S. Frank, whose thought clearly demonstrates strong interconnection between the both fields. Analysis of contemporary studies on history of phenomenological philos­ophy (C. Möckel and W. Gleixner) lets firstly observe ways of application of Koselleck’s notion of crisis to investigations in the history of philosophy. Sec­ondly it discovers two possibilities of philosophical contextualization of the con­cept of spiritual crisis – on the one hand, as a constituent rhetorical element of the philosophical statement (Möckel), on the other hand, as a term which de­scribes the uniqueness of an intellectual situation of the beginning of the 20thcentury (Gleixner). Then these aspects of the rhetoric of crisis are applied to reli­gious philosophy of Reinach and Frank, what leads to interpretation of their works as a particular statement discovering the divine (or the holy) as a new cat­egory of religious consciousness.

Developmental biology and human evolution

2011 ◽  
Vol 1 (1) ◽  
pp. e2
Author(s):  
Jeffrey H. Schwartz
Keyword(s):  
Biological Sciences ◽  
Population Genetics ◽  
Evolutionary Biology ◽  
Molecular Change ◽  
Human Fossil ◽  
Evolutionary Studies ◽  
History Of ◽  
Modern Evolutionary Synthesis ◽  
Organismal Development ◽  
Taxic Diversity

The Evolutionary or Modern Evolutionary Synthesis (here identified as the Synthesis) has been portrayed as providing the foundation for uniting a supposed disarray of biological disciplines through the lens of Darwinism fused with population genetics. Rarely acknowledged is that the Synthesis’s success was also largely due to its architects’ effectiveness in submerging British and German attempts at a synthesis by uniting the biological sciences through shared evolutionary concerns. Dobzhansky and Mayr imposed their bias toward population genetics, population (as supposedly opposed to typological) thinking, and Morgan’s conception of specific genes for specific features (here abbreviated as genes for) on human evolutionary studies. Dobzhansky declared that culture buffered humans from the whims of selection. Mayr argued that as variable as humans are now, their extinct relatives were even more variable; thus the human fossil did not present taxic diversity and all known fossils could be assembled into a gradually changing lineage of time-successive species. When Washburn centralized these biases in the new physical anthropology the fate of paleoanthropology as a non-contributor to evolutionary theory was sealed. Molecular anthropology followed suit in embracing Zuckerkandl and Pauling’s assumption that molecular change was gradual and perhaps more importantly continual. Lost in translation was and still is an appreciation of organismal development. Here I will summarize the history of these ideas and their alternatives in order to demonstrate assumptions that still need to be addressed before human evolutionary studies can more fully participate in what is a paradigm shift-in-the-making in evolutionary biology.

scholarly journals “Zurück zu Kant”

DoisPontos ◽  
2005 ◽  
Vol 2 (2) ◽  
Author(s):  
Mario Ariel González Porta
Keyword(s):  
20Th Century ◽  
19Th Century ◽  
History Of Philosophy ◽  
Contemporary Philosophy ◽  
Historical Root ◽  
History Of ◽  
The 19Th Century

A filosofia alemã do século XIX posterior a Hegel está bastante estudada em três direções. A primeira, que surge da luta entre hegelianos de esquerda e direita, acaba por conduzir ao materialismo e ao marxismo; a segunda, que se expressa na vertente irracionalista e anti-sistemática, passa por Schopenhauer, Kierkegaard e Nietzsche; a terceira é constituída pelo neo-kantismo e suas derivações, cuja versão oficial teria suas raízes fincadas pelo famoso discurso inaugural de Zeller e pelo livro de Otto Liebmann, que deram o impulso ao movimento “Zurück zu Kant”. Em tal visão de conjunto, o grande ausente é um movimento contínuo, ainda quando irregular e multifacetado, que terminará conduzindo à filosofia contemporânea. Este movimento tem em Trendelenburg uma figura chave. É com suas “Investigações Lógicas” que se inicia a reformulação das relações entre filosofia e ciência e, neste sentido, o verdadeiro retorno a Kant. O fato de sua obra principal ter exatamente o mesmo nome que a coleção de ensaios temáticos de Frege, a obra de ruptura de Husserl e as dissertações de doutorado de Cohen, Dilthey e Brentano significa algo mais que curiosas coincidências. “Zurück zu Kant” (Adolf Trendelenburg the overcoming of idealism and the roots of contemporary philosophy) Abstract Considering history of philosophy as a whole, the two main traditions of thought from the 20th century (analytic and phenomenological-hermeneutic) can be regarded as being variants of one same fundamental turn. This systematic relation is connected to a common historical root. To highlight it implies to review the ideas that are deeply in the basis of the historiography of the German thought in the 19th century. Beyond names, problems and theses that may appear to have at first sight no relationship whatsoever, we can notice a continuous unitary development that has not yet received all the attention it deserves. In this movement, Adolf Trendelenburg stands out, once the beginners of both the abovementioned traditions and of neokantianism (Frege, Brentano, Dilthey and Cohen) received a decisive impulse from his reflections.

Th. Dobzhansky and the development of evolutionary biology in the USSR

2019 ◽  
Vol 57 (3) ◽  
pp. 346-371
Author(s):  
Mikhail B. Konashev
Keyword(s):  
Soviet Union ◽  
Evolutionary Theory ◽  
Evolutionary Biology ◽  
Special Role ◽  
Synthetic Theory ◽  
Theory Of Evolution ◽  
The Soviet Union ◽  
History Of

Th. Dobzhansky played a special role in the reception and development of the “synthetic theory of evolution,” as well as in the establishment of scientific connections between Soviet and U.S. evolutionists, and first and foremost, geneticists. These connections greatly influenced the development of Soviet genetics, of evolutionary theory and evolutionary biology as a whole, and in particular the restoration of Soviet genetics in the late 1960s. A discussion of Dobzhansky’s correspondence and collaboration with colleagues in his native country, moreover, allows for an improved understanding of the complex and dramatic history of Soviet genetics and evolutionary theory. It also provides novel insights into the interactions between scientists and authorities in the Soviet Union (USSR).

scholarly journals Den billedlige vending

2012 ◽  
Vol 27 (68) ◽  
Author(s):  
W.J.T. Mitchell
Keyword(s):  
20Th Century ◽  
History Of Philosophy ◽  
Linguistic Turn ◽  
Modern Thought ◽  
Turn Taking ◽  
History Of ◽  
Point Of Departure ◽  
The Way

W.J.T. Mitchell: "Den billedlige vending"AbstractW.J.T. Mitchell: “The Pictorial Turn”Taking as a point of departure Richard Rorty’s idea of the history of philosophy as a series of “turns”, Mitchell’s essay from 1992 argues that the so-called ‘linguistic turn’, predominant in the 20th century, has been superseded by a ‘pictorial turn’. The essay thus, in Mitchells own words, “looks at the way modern thought has reoriented itself around visual paradigms that seem to threathen and overwhelm any possibility of discursive mastery.” Analysing theories by e.g. Panofsky and Althusser, the essay “looks at pictures ‘in theory’ – and at theory in itself as a form ofpicturing”.

scholarly journals 2017 | «arqueología filosófica y hermenéutica. apuntes sobre la interpretación de la historia de la filosofía en kant» ('revista de estudios kantianos' 2.1/2017)

2017 ◽  
Author(s):  
josé m. garcía gómez del valle
Keyword(s):  
20Th Century ◽  
History Of Philosophy ◽  
Philosophical Hermeneutics ◽  
History Of ◽  
Siglo Xx

arqueología filosófica y hermenéutica. apuntes sobre la interpretación de la historia de la filosofía en kantpor: josé m. garcía gómez del valleen: revista de estudios kantianos vol. 2, núm. 1, 2017, pp. 29-47.DOI 10.7203/REK.2.1.8811*** resumeneste escrito quiere presentar una aproximación a una posible "hermenéutica de la historia de la filosofía" en kant, para ello contextualiza la recepción del pensamiento kantiano en la hermenéutica filosófica del siglo xx y expone un conjunto de pautas kantianas para la interpretación del pasado filosófico.palabras clave: hermenéutica, historia de la filosofía.philosophical archaeology and hermeneutics. remarks on kant's interpretation of the history of philosophy / josé maría garcía gómez del valle / revista de estudios kantianos vol. 2, núm. 1, 2017, pp. 29-47. / DOI 10.7203/REK.2.1.8811 / *** abstract / the aim of this paper is to provide an aproximation to a possible "hermeneutics of the history of philosophy" in kant, situating the discussion in the context of the reception of kant's thought by the philosophical hermeneutics of the 20th century and presenting a set of kantian principles for the interpretation of past philosophies. / keywords: hermeneutics, history of philosophy.

The Deleuze-Lucretius Encounter

2017 ◽  
Author(s):  
Ryan J. Johnson
Keyword(s):  
20Th Century ◽  
Gilles Deleuze ◽  
Ancient Philosophy ◽  
History Of Philosophy ◽  
History Of ◽  
Way Of Thinking

This book explores how Deleuze's thought was shaped by Lucretian atomism — a formative but often-ignored influence from ancient philosophy. More than any other 20th-century philosopher, Gilles Deleuze considers himself an apprentice to the history of philosophy. But scholarship has ignored one of the more formative influences on Deleuze: Lucretian atomism. Deleuze's encounter with Lucretius sparked a way of thinking that resonates throughout all his writings: from immanent ontology to affirmative ethics, from dynamic materialism to the generation of thought itself. Filling a significant gap in Deleuze Studies, this book tells the story of the Deleuze-Lucretius encounter that begins and ends with a powerful claim: Lucretian atomism produced Deleuzianism.

Czy może istnieć edukacja bez filozofii?

2017 ◽  
pp. 123-0 ◽  
Author(s):  
Urszula Zbrzeźniak
Keyword(s):  
Economic Growth ◽  
Cultural Identity ◽  
20Th Century ◽  
Economic Model ◽  
Classical Model ◽  
Philosophy Of Education ◽  
History Of Philosophy ◽  
Professional Life ◽  
Liberal Democracies ◽  
History Of

The aim of this paper is to compare two models of education. The first is the instrumental model which perceives education as a process of preparing students for future professional life. The second one perceives education as a way to build our individuality. The instrumental and economical model became very popular in the second half of the 20th century and still strengthens its position. The second model sees itself as a continuation of long European history of philosophy of education and serves as the counterbalance to the instrumental model. In the paper it will be argued that the second (classical) model of education is more useful for the development of Western liberal democracies while the first one perceives an individual to a client and replases the development of a culture to an economic growth. It will be argued that the economic model omits the nature of our cultural identity and misinterprets integral goals of the process of education.

scholarly journals Endosymbiosis and its implications for evolutionary theory

2015 ◽  
Vol 112 (33) ◽  
pp. 10270-10277 ◽  
Author(s):  
Maureen A. O’Malley
Keyword(s):  
Population Genetics ◽  
Evolutionary Theory ◽  
Population Genetic ◽  
Evolutionary Biology ◽  
Evolutionary Explanation ◽  
Genetic Theory ◽  
Genetic Lineages ◽  
Explanatory Account ◽  
Lynn Margulis ◽  
History Of

Historically, conceptualizations of symbiosis and endosymbiosis have been pitted against Darwinian or neo-Darwinian evolutionary theory. In more recent times, Lynn Margulis has argued vigorously along these lines. However, there are only shallow grounds for finding Darwinian concepts or population genetic theory incompatible with endosymbiosis. But is population genetics sufficiently explanatory of endosymbiosis and its role in evolution? Population genetics “follows” genes, is replication-centric, and is concerned with vertically consistent genetic lineages. It may also have explanatory limitations with regard to macroevolution. Even so, asking whether population genetics explains endosymbiosis may have the question the wrong way around. We should instead be asking how explanatory of evolution endosymbiosis is, and exactly which features of evolution it might be explaining. This paper will discuss how metabolic innovations associated with endosymbioses can drive evolution and thus provide an explanatory account of important episodes in the history of life. Metabolic explanations are both proximate and ultimate, in the same way genetic explanations are. Endosymbioses, therefore, point evolutionary biology toward an important dimension of evolutionary explanation.

scholarly journals The Philosopher as a Reader: A. Sverdiolas Reads G. Deleuze

Problemos ◽  
2020 ◽  
pp. 69-80
Author(s):  
Nijolė Keršytė
Keyword(s):  
20Th Century ◽  
History Of Philosophy ◽  
Abstract Thinking ◽  
Philosophy Of Culture ◽  
History Of

Arūnas Sverdiolas’s way of reading Deleuze raises questions about the compatibility of two traditions: how and to what extent can a philosopher of Culture understand a philosopher of Nature and Life? Deleuze, formed in the rationalist tradition, resists the philosophy of Consciousness and Meaning, in which universality is held higher than empirical particularity. Abstract thinking – a cause of allergy for a Frenchman – is on the contrary an aspiration for a Lithuanian. Sverdiolas’s formation has its roots in resistance against Marxist-materialist thinking, with the help of philosophy of culture. He considers the whole philosophy of the 20th century as an anthropological philosophy of Culture. This does not facilitate understanding Deleuze’s thought. His vitalist philosophy is deemed paramaterialist and considered to be reductionist. Hence a contradiction: Deleuze is recognized as a gifted historian of philosophy, but his own thinking is viewed with scepticism, without seeing its roots in the history of philosophy. The reason why Deleuze’s philosophy rejects the anthropocentric perspective – that of the ego and of consciousness – is not considered.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document