Switch to: References

Add citations

You must login to add citations.
  1. Neurath’s Congestions, Depth of Intention, and Precization: Arne Naess and His Viennese Heritage.Jan Radler - 2013 - Hopos: The Journal of the International Society for the History of Philosophy of Science 3 (1):59-90.
    In recent years, a significant amount of research has investigated the Vienna Circle’s ramifications. Otto Neurath has received much attention as one of the most prominent and energetic adherents, but less conspicuous philosophers now find themselves at the center of historical research. This article’s aim is to investigate Arne Naess’s connection to Logical Empiricism. Two crucial influences on Naess’s work are identified: Otto Neurath and the psychologist Egon Brunswik. This article’s most significant contributions are that, from the perspective of a (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  • Annalisa Coliva on Wittgenstein and Epistemic Relativism.Martin Kusch - 2013 - Philosophia 41 (1):37-49.
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   15 citations  
  • Wittgenstein on Understanding Religious Beliefs: Some Remarks against Incommensurability and Scepticism.Yuliya Fadeeva - 2020 - Wittgenstein-Studien 11 (1):53-78.
    Wittgenstein’s writings on religious and magical beliefs, especially the “Lectures on Religious Belief” and “Remarks on Frazer’s Golden Bough” are taken to imply semantic incommensurability and inaccessibility by the Wittgensteinian Fideism and, in part, the expressivist interpretation. According to these interpretations, religious and non-religious discourses are self-contained, closed, and not intertranslatable. Wittgenstein is taken to deny mutual understanding between believers and non-believers with respect to religious and magical discourse. I argue against such interpretations and support readings by Kusch, Schroeder, and (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark