Suchergebnisse

Immanuel Kant's influence on modern philosophy can hardly be overestimated. A significant part of modern philosophy may be categorized either as neo-Kantian in a narrow or broad sense, or as developed in dialogue or contrast with Kant's ideas. In this anthology we find examples that fit into all of these different categories. The first of the anthology's two parts deals with Kant's theoretical philosophy, focusing on topics such as language, space and time, subjectivity and agency. The second part contains different articles within practical philosophy: on the relation between Kantian ethics and virtue ethics, between Kantian ethics and medical ethics, aesthetics and ethics, and on moral aspects of war resistance. The anthology is put together in honour of the Norwegian philosopher Truls Wyller, who celebrates his 60th birthday this year, and who has made extensive efforts towards rethinking Kantian ideas and making them relevant to contemporary philosophy. The authors: Geert Keil, Solveig Bøe, Ronny S. Myhre, Thomas Krogh, Dagfinn Dybvig, Erling Skjei, Bengt Molander, Jonathan Knowles, Audun Øfsti, Olav Asheim, Anton Koch, Karen M. Nielsen, Lars Johan Materstvedt, Lars Ursin, Brit Strandhagen, and Olaf Müller

Wenn ausgerechnet Pazifisten bei der Verfechtung ihrer Position aggressiv werden, so finden wir das besonders verstörend – jedenfalls verstörender als bei anderen Spannungen zwischen Theorie und Praxis. Woran liegt das? Meiner Ansicht nach kommen in diesem Fall drei Elemente zusammen, deren Mischung die pazifistische Position von innen bedroht: Während sich der hasserfüllte Pazifist schon beim Diskutieren schnell von negativen Emotionen fortreißen lässt, also alles andere als Willensstärke dokumentiert, verlangt er in seiner Theorie ein Höchstmaß an Willensstärke, und zwar gerade im Umgang mit Emotionen. Dass er das nicht schafft, wirft nicht nur ein negatives Licht auf seine Person, sondern liefert Gründe gegen seine Theorie. Lektion: Der Pazifist ist gut beraten, vorbildlich mit seinen Emotionen umzugehen. ; Sometimes pacifists get full of hatred when arguing for their moral position. This is particularly disturbing–or anyway, more disturbing than in other cases where there occurs a tension between theory and practice. Why is that so? According to my diagnosis, in the case of hateful pacifists there are three elements which (when taken together) threaten pacifism from inside: (i) Hateful pacifists are carried away by negative emotions. (ii) This shows that they lack self-control in political practice, i.e. in contexts which are far easier than war. (iii) In theory, however, they demand that conflicting parties be able to exert a lot of self-control, particularly with respect to aggressive emotions. – As long as they themselves are not capable of doing this, they are not only ruining their nice image; they are also providing strong reasons against their moral theory. Lesson: In political discussions, pacifists are well advised to control their negative emotions. ; Not Reviewed