Titlebook: In Search of a New Humanism; The Philosophy of Ge Rosaria Egidi Book 1999 Springer Science+Business Media B.V. 1999 Immanuel Kant.Ludwig Wi

忘川河

The Logical Connection Argument Againry ago with . by W. Dilthey (1883) (discussion called by K.-O. Apel .).. It finds in ., published by G. H. [Von Wright 1971, its clearest contemporary formulation. An epistemological puzzle with strong metaphysical implications (like the distinction between mind and matter) becomes a problem that ca

entice

–FER

Justice, Cooperation, and the “Golden Rule”somewhat different formulations of this principle (p. 201) which it is not possible to compare here. It will be sufficient for our purpose to refer to the first of those formulations which is also the better known: “Do to others what you want them to do to you, and do not do to others what you do no

Breach

Von Wright on the Mind-Body Problemsted in the mind-body problem. In his “Intellectual Autobiography”, written in 1972–73, for example, von Wright writes — referring to his youthful interest in the mind-body problem and the other fundamental metaphysical questions about the nature of reality — that “strangely enough, this is an aerea

萬神殿

The Conflict between the Static and the Dynamic Theory of Time in Its Relation to von Wright’s Work -sixties, “And Next” (1965), “And Then” (1966) and “Always” (1968), and to a paper that has been widely discussed in Italy, namely “Time, Change and Contradiction” (1969), which seemed to suggest the possibility of a formalization of dialectic logic in a moment in which Marxism held a strong grip on

Affable

W. James’ Defence of Free Will: A Step Toward a Paradigm Shiftiscussion about human freedom from traditional epistemological and ontological approaches. I would like to show here that William James’s defence of free will reflects a similar aspect, notwithstanding the different theoretical and methodological frameworks of his own and von Wright’s thought.

碳水化合物

Is Determinism Impossible?terminism is dealt with not by means of a contrast between causal explanation and teleological explanation, but rather through the examination of modal ideas. This plurality in the approach to determinism permits von Wright to be a point of reference (even if almost always implicit) both for those w

微不足道

舊石器

A Remark about the Principle “Ought Entails Can”: Von Wright and Kant he makes it clear that he is interested in giving his own point of view on the subject, rather than investigating “what Kant meant by it” (. 108). I believe however that von Wright’s point of view is interesting also with respect to giving an insight into Kant’s theory.

痛得哭了

The Decidability of Syllogismmit that he had a good reason for doing so: syllogism, and more generally monadic logic, is decidable whereas polyadic and even dyadic logic is undecidable. As van Heijenoort [10] points out, in that respect Aristotle’s theory of syllogism was a lucky strike because Aristotle hit into a part of logi