In his recent book Willensfreiheit Geert Keil defends a version of libertarianism. Yet he criticizes a flagship argument for incompatibilism. Van Inwagen's consequence argument, Keil thinks, relies on an irrelevant premise when it claims that agents have no choice about the remote past. I argue that Keil's charge rests on a misunderstanding. I then sketch why discussions of the consequence argument should focus on the question whether or not a certain version of rule Beta is valid.

Kant is by no means the pure rationalist that Husserl and others represented him as being. To the contrary I claim that Kant is an ethical intuitionist when it comes to our recognition of the validity of the moral law. Interpreting Kant’s famous thesis about the “fact of reason”, I will first argue for three interpretative theses: 1. The factum theory explains our insight into the binding character of the moral law; it is a theory of justification. 2. In our (...) consciousness of the categorical imperative, the moral law is immediately given in its unconditional and binding validity. 3. The unconditional validity of the CI is given in the feeling of respect. Drawing on basic thoughts of Reformed Epistemology, I will then sketch a way to defend Kant’s theory. (shrink)

The article distinguishes two models of self-realization. The independence model claims that self-realization is compatible with leading a non-moral life, whereas the dependence model argues the converse. Hegel′s influential version of the dependence model aims at showing why and how self-realization must be embedded in a complex structure of reasonable social relations. I argue that Hegel′s dependence model abrogates the „Recht der Besonderheit, sich befriedigt zu finden” and is thus not convincing. What I call Hegel′s “inofficial theory”, however, concedes an (...) infusible conflict between modernity and self-realization; philosophy has to reconcile the individual with the impossibility of being a „ganzer Mensch” in modern societies. After an interlude with Michael Theunissen′s indpendence model, I turn to T. H. Green′s theory of self-realization. Green provides a richer explanatory story than Hegel as to why other-regarding acts contribute to self-realization; however, this story leaves not enough conceptual room for interpersonal conflict and is vulnerable to similar objections to Hegel′s account. (shrink)

The first part of the essay tries to show that Davidson's explanation of irrationality in terms of a fragmentation of the mind is not compatible with interpretationist premises of his own theory. Instead of adopting the conception of two semi-autonomous departments of the mind, I argue for an explanation of strong forms of irrationality based on two kinds of contentful mental states: functionally individuated representational states and states whose content depends on a rationalizing interpretation. Akrasia – as a form of (...) irrationality caused by mental states that are not propositionally transparent – seems to fit neatly into that picture. (shrink)

The favourable social conditions Fechner met at Leipzig with its university and its book industry as well as the close ties to the citizenship of that town were of outstanding importance for G.Th. Fechner (1801–1887), his scientific achievements as natural scientist and philosopher, as the founder of psychophysics and of experimental aesthetics. Since 1825 Fechner had been integrated into its social, scientific and art life in many different ways. His political and theoretical social ideas were obviously influenced by ist bourgeois (...) liberal circles. (shrink)

The paper examines Davidson′s discussion of Frege on the problem of predication. Simple declarative sentences are unities that are true or false; how do predicates contribute to this kind of semantic unity? According to Davidson, the problem cannot be solved by assigning referents to predicates, since this leads to an infinite regress. Frege famously contributes the idea that predicates are “incomplete” or “unsaturated” functional expressions, mapping objects to truth-values. However, he takes predicates to refer to concepts and thus is exposed (...) to Davidson′s argument. I will show that Davidson is only right with regards to “Frege′s semantics”. Yet Frege′s logical doctrine of the decomposition of a sentence – I shall argue – allows for a resolution of this problem. (shrink)

Anhand dreier paradigmatischer Positionen des bioethischen Diskurses wird dargestellt, inwiefern diese von ihren Leitbegriffen abhängig sind. Dabei darf eine Ansicht nicht vom bioethischen Diskurs exkludiert werden, nur weil sie metaphysische Begründungsweisen impliziert. Vielmehr ist auf einer moralphilosophischen Ebene jede Position zunächst allein theorieimmanent danach zu beurteilen, ob sie ihre Kriterien konsistent aus den rational zu begründenden Leitbegriffen entwickelt. Dann können die Ansichten in ein Gespräch miteinander gebracht werden, das mögliche Einseitigkeiten zutage treten lässt. Erst in einem zweiten Schritt geht es (...) um eine rechtsethische Engführung, wobei eine moralphilosophische Korrektur nach ethischen Kriterien angebracht ist, wenn es bei rechtsethischer Betrachtung nicht möglich ist, der Instrumentalisierungsgefahr hinreichend vorzubeugen; dann kann es Aufgabe sein, religiöse Bedeutungspotentiale, die säkularistischen Ansichten verborgen bleiben müssten, in eine öffentliche Sprache zu übersetzen. Jedenfalls sollte eine Rechtsethik ihre Ergebnisse anhand moralphilosophisch relevanter Intuitionen überdenken, sodass ein Ansatz, der vorwiegend an Interessen orientiert ist, hinterfragt werden kann. (shrink)

La question de savoir si l’Europe est en train de construire une identité politique, ou si au contraire elle demeure une communauté de second ordre, déterminera le chemin de l’intégration européenne. La condition déterminante de l’identité politique est le public européen afin que les citoyens soient capables d’accepter les décisions du système politique européen en participant aux débats pertinents. Trois concepts du public serviront à la perception du public européen comme interconnexion d’une communauté reliée par des réseaux. L’enrichissement de la (...) « sphère publique » par un « discours public » reflète la tentative de dépasser les idées nationales : on ne parle pas d’un public européen, mais d’un réseau de publics nationaux partiels, émanant des événements significatifs pour l’Europe. De cette façon, l’identité européenne peut être créée en focalisant les intérêts politiques des citoyens sur des sujets communs. (shrink)