Colonialism in Question: Theory, Knowledge, History
In: Memoria y Sociedad, Band 18, Heft 37
ISSN: 2248-6992
Cooper, Frederick. Colonialism in Question: Theory, Knowledge, History. Berkeley: University of California Press, 2005. 327 pp
6673 Ergebnisse
Sortierung:
In: Memoria y Sociedad, Band 18, Heft 37
ISSN: 2248-6992
Cooper, Frederick. Colonialism in Question: Theory, Knowledge, History. Berkeley: University of California Press, 2005. 327 pp
In: Revue française de science politique, Band 59, Heft 4, S. 825-827
ISSN: 0035-2950
In: Journal of colonialism & colonial history, Band 7, Heft 2
ISSN: 1532-5768
In: Revue française de science politique, Band 59, Heft 4, S. 825-826
ISSN: 0035-2950
In: Voprosy filosofii: naučno-teoretičeskij žurnal, Heft 10, S. 5-12
In: Annales: histoire, sciences sociales, Band 63, Heft 3, S. 651-653
ISSN: 1953-8146
In: Revue française de science politique, Band 59, Heft 4, S. IV-IV
ISSN: 1950-6686
In: The journal of politics: JOP, Band 44, Heft 2, S. 394-408
ISSN: 0022-3816
Leo Strauss (What Is Political Philosophy?, Glencoe, Ill: Free Press, 1959) proposes as a criterion for the adequacy of an interpretation of a philosophical text that it understand the "thought of a philosopher exactly as he understood himself." This claim is examined from the perspective of a newly formulated version of historicism. Knowledge cannot be regarded as a timeless entity, but rather as a continuing process within history. Thus, it is not possible either to isolate one moment in a thinker's life at which his thought formed a complete & unified system, or to isolate one's own reading from the accumulation of knowledge since the work read was first written. It is possible to recognize philosophical facts that represent the universal & permanent structure of human existence, but these facts are understood in a way subject to historical change & growth. In On Rules of Philosophic Interpretation: A Critique of Ryn's "Knowledge and History," Eugene F. Miller (U of Georgia, Athens) finds that Ryn does not develop Strauss's approach in a way consistent with what Strauss intended. This approach was intended to teach philosophic humility, & embodied a rejection of the historicist position that past thinkers can be understood better in the present than they understood themselves. Ryn's views do not appear to be historicist; further he does not refute Strauss's proposed rule, & disregards Strauss's own recognition that knowledge is not static or timeless. In Strauss and Knowledge: A Rejoinder, Claes G. Ryn finds that Miller's recommended intellectual humility is implicitly based on the idea that certain great thinkers are free of the tendencies to imprecision & incompleteness that are present in all other thinkers. Strauss's actual ideas contain a number of tensions & inconsistencies that Miller does not succeed in resolving; his repetition of Strauss's position does not establish any new basis from which that position might be defended. W. H. Stoddard.
In: The journal of politics: JOP, Band 44, Heft 2, S. 394-408
ISSN: 1468-2508
In: Politique africaine, Band 105, Heft 1, S. 241-257
In: La politique africaine, Heft 105, S. 241-257
ISSN: 0244-7827
In: The journal of politics: JOP, Band 45, Heft 1, S. 228-228
ISSN: 1468-2508
In: Mirovaja ėkonomika i meždunarodnye otnošenija: MĖMO, Heft 8, S. 76-85
In: Social research: an international quarterly, Band 34, Heft 1, S. 113-161
ISSN: 0037-783X
In: Population. English edition, Band 60, Heft 5, S. 721
ISSN: 1958-9190