The History of Philosophy as a Problem: Four Fundamental Views in the German Debate and Heidegger’s Hermeneutical Dissolution Resumen: El artículo pretende introducir el problema que supone el estudio de la historia de la filosofía, especialmente hoy cuando esta práctica se ha establecido como elemento indisociable de la formación en la materia. Con el fin de plantear de manera más concreta dicho problema, el artículo trata la legitimidad del enfoque hermenéutico, pues este parece consistir en identificar el estudio histórico de (...) la filosofía con el propio filosofar. Para lograr una evaluación precisa de este enfoque, se lleva a cabo un recorrido por las cuatro posiciones cardinales del debate alemán en torno al sentido, el método y la función de la historia de la filosofía. Mediante la contraposición de la propuesta de Heidegger frente a estas cuatro posiciones cardinales, se espera aclarar cuáles son los fundamentos del pensamiento hermenéutico y sacar a la luz las razones por las que el estudio del pasado filosófico podría ser considerado esencial para la formación en filosofía.: The article aims to introduce the problem that represents the study of the history of philosophy, especially today when this practice has established as the model in the academic formation of the field. In order to raise this problem more specifically, the article focuses on the legitimacy of the hermeneutic approach, as it consists in the affirmation of the necessity of the study of the past for philosophy. The evaluation of this approach is carried out in the light of a description of the four cardinal positions of the German debate about the meaning, method and function of the history of philosophy. By contrasting Heidegger’s proposal with these four cardinal positions, it is hoped to clarify the foundations of hermeneutic thought and to bring to light the reasons because the study of philosophical past can be considered essential for philosophy. Palabras clave: hermenéutica, función de la historia, métodos historiográficos, comprensión, interpretación. Keywords: hermeneutics, function of history, historiographical methods, understanding, interpretation. (shrink)

A murder of an Afro-American detainee by a policeman at the end of May 2020 caused a public outrage in the United States, which led to a campaign against the monuments to historical figures whose reputation, according to the protesters, was marred by racism. Some German publicists, impressed by the campaign, initiated an analogous search for racists among the national thinkers and politicians of the past. Suddenly Kant emerged as a ‘scapegoat’. This statement is an attempt to assess such reactions (...) from the perspective of Russia’s experience. (shrink)

Nikolai Lossky is key to the history of the Husserl-Rezeption in Russia. He was the first to publish a review of the Russian translation of Husserl’s first volume of the Logische Untersuchungen that appeared in 1909. He also published a presentation and criticism of Husserl’s transcendental idealism in 1939. An English translation of both of Lossky’s publications is offered in this volume for the first time. The present paper, which is intended as an introduction to these documents, situates Lossky within (...) the Rezeptionsgeschichte of Husserl in Russia and explains why he is central to it. It also explains what Lossky principally found in Husserl: he saw in the latter’s critique of psychologism support for his own ontology, epistemology, and axiology. Lossky characterizes his ontology as an ideal-realism. According to ideal-realism, both the realm of ideal beings and the realm of real beings are mind-independent. Per his epistemology, which he calls “intuitivism,” real beings are intuited by sensual intuition and ideal beings by intellectual intuition. The realm of ideal beings includes the subrealm of values, which is intuited by axiological intuition. This thoroughly realist conception contrasted sharply with the subjectivist tendencies of the time. So, when Lossky took cognizance of Husserl’s critique of psychologism, he thereupon found an ally in his battle against the various subjectivisms. But, when Husserl took the transcendental idealist turn, Lossky was at the forefront of the backlash against the new direction Husserl wanted to give to phenomenology. (shrink)

Se abordan las tres cuestiones principales que aparecen en la correspondencia entre Tschirnhaus y Spinoza: la libertad; la producción de los cuerpos a partir del atributo extensión; la relación entre los modos del atributo pensamiento y los modos de los demás atributos. Se analizan las dificultades que Tschirnhaus detecta y el valor y alcance de las respuestas de Spinoza.

In 1675, Burchard de Volder (1643–1709) was the first professor to introduce the demonstration of experiment into a university physics course and built the Leiden Physics Theatre to accommodate this new pedagogy. When he requested the funds from the university to build the facility, he claimed that the performance of experiments would demonstrate the “truth and certainty” of the postulates of theoretical physics. Such a claim is interesting given de Volder’s lifelong commitment to Cartesian scientia. This chapter will examine de (...) Volder’s views on experiment and show that they are not Newtonian or inductivist, as is sometimes claimed. While de Volder thinks we need deductive reasoning from first principles to provide evidence of the certainty of the content of our physical theories, he also contends that we need experiment to provide evidence of the certainty of the existence of the particular bodies those theories discuss. This approach to experiment is based on a distinction between rational certainty and the certainty of material bodies in the actual world. While this account is deeply influenced by Descartes, it is importantly different than Descartes’ distinction between absolute and moral certainty. De Volder’s “Cartesian Empiricism” is best understood as a continuation and further development of a long tradition of teaching through observation at Leiden. (shrink)

Es muy defendible afirmar que el volumen dedicado a Spinoza de la obra Historia de la filosofía moderna de Kuno Fischer es la mediación más importante –si bien no la única– para comprender la relación Spinoza-Nietzsche. A partir de la lectura de esta obra en 1881, Nietzsche reconoce a Spinoza como precursor e identifica una tendencia en común entre ambos: «hacer del conocimiento el afecto más potente». Los principales objetivos de este trabajo son destacar la exposición que Fischer lleva a (...) cabo de algunos de los contenidos de la filosofía spinociana para poder valorar mejor su influencia en Nietzsche y resaltar la importancia que tiene tulo 22 de la edición de 1865, titulado «La voluntad humana», donde se interpreta la voluntad como deseo consciente, lo que tendrá sus consecuencias en la recepción de Nietzsche de la filosofía spinociana, además de permitir una discusión respecto del rol no siempre atendido de la voluntad en Spinoza. (shrink)