Chakrabarti,Kisor Kumar,Classical Indian Philosophy of Mind. The Nyāaya Dualist Tradition

Indo-Iranian Journal -     

Hegel,Analytic Philosophy’s Pharmakon

In this article I argue that Hegel has become analytic philosophy’s “pharmakon”—both its “poison” and its “cure.” Traditionally, Hegel’s philosophy has been attacked by Anglo-American analytical philosophers for its alleged charlatanism and irrelevance. Yet starting from the 1970s there has been a revival of interest in Hegel’s philosophical work, which, I suggest, may be explained by three developments: (1) the revival of interest in Aristotelianism following Saul Kripke’s and Hilary Putnam’s work on natural kinds, and Elizabeth Anscombe’s, Philippa Foot’s, and Putnam’s opposition to the fact-value distinction; (2) the rehabilitation of Hegel’s theories by various philosophers, including Robert Pippin, Terry Pinkard, Fred Beiser, Robert Stern, and Stephen Houlgate; and (3) the Sellars-inspired philosophy of mind of John McDowell and of Robert Brandom. The first and third of these reasons, I argue, have led several analytic theorists to cast Hegel in a more positive light as the “cure” for analytic philosophy. The combined outcome of these changes, both ironic and fitting, is that the Hegelian principle of internal critique has played a significant role not only in analytic philosophy’s rapprochement with Hegel’s philosophy but also in overcoming the Analytic-Continental philosophical divide.     

Understanding Modern Philosophy through Political Philosophy: The Unity of Ideal Subjects—Political,Epistemological, and Moral

Francis Slade offers a view of modern philosophy through the prism of political philosophy, thereby departing from the more traditional interpretive route of epistemology. For Slade, reason understood as rule proves the key to the unity of the modern project of philosophical idealism. Modernity's political form, the state, is an ideal entity that is constituted by the rule of a pure, disembodied, and sovereign reason, paralleling the same employment of reason that generates the epistemological cogito of Descartes, the moral legislator of Kant, and the “disinterested and benevolent spectator” of Mill. The rule of modern reason effects what Slade calls the political, epistemological, and moral ideal subjects of modernity.     

What is ‘First Philosophy’? Comments on Richard Velkley's Heidegger,Strauss, and the Premises of Philosophy

In a noteworthy new study, Richard Velkley brings together Martin Heidegger and Leo Strauss as part of a reexamination of the foundations and nature of philosophical questioning. In what follows, I critically reflect on this shared search for foundations, and particularly on the role of Plato in Strauss's effort to forge a new path for philosophy which moves away from Heidegger without losing sight of him.     

Philosophy without God? God without Philosophy?: Critical Reflections on Antony Flew's God and Philosophy 1

In this paper it is argued that, while the case that Antony Flew makes against philosophically invalid arguments for the existence of God is generally sound, he fails to comprehend the power and cogency of the ontological argument. Thus, his conception of the grounds of morality, separate from the biblical tradition of theology, is by no means compelling. This paper aims to show that the rational (i.e. the non-reductive) concept of morality that Flew rightly claims to uphold is not only consistent with but also presupposes, paradoxically, the ontological argument for the existence of God. Central ideas of Kant and, above all, of Spinoza are called upon to show that the nexus between morality and theology, between philosophy and God, is that central to the ontological argument. The conclusion of the paper is that, just as philosophy without God is empty, so God without philosophy is blind.     

Narendra K. Wagle and Olle Qvarnström (eds.), Approaches to Jaina Studies: Philosophy,Logic, Ritulas and Symbols

Indo-Iranian Journal -     

The Philosophy of Historiography?

Book reviewed in this article:
Encounters: Philosophy of History After Postmodernism , by Ewa Domanska.     

Alvis,J. David,Jeremy D. Bailey,and F. Flagg Taylor,IV. The Contested Removal Power, 1789–2010.

Abstract

In this article, we use legislative correspondence to determine who gains access to key staffers in a congressional office. To evaluate our theory of the office power hierarchy, we test hypotheses using an original dataset of more than 3,000 correspondence records from the office of former member of Congress James R. Jones. Our empirical analysis is supplemented by an e-mail interview with Representative Jones. We find that key senior staffers are more likely to pay attention to powerful individuals and nonroutine matters. Letters from women and families and those dealing with routine legislation are more likely to be answered by lower-ranked staffers. These results are important because they reveal that even something as simple as constituent correspondence enters a type of power hierarchy within the legislative branch where some individuals are advantaged over others.     

Reading What Is Political Philosophy?

Abstract

Leo Strauss is responsible for the revival of political philosophy as a necessary response to the problem of human life. This essay articulates his own summary account of this necessity, the intellectual underpinning of his division of political philosophy into the classical and the modern approahces, and his preference for the former as the natural path leading to the understanding of man's political situation.     

Historical Archeology,Dialectical Marxism,and “C.F.U.G. Studies”

In studying capitalism in general, Marx declares it his chief aim “to lay bare its law of motion”; and his main way of proceeding is to begin with its present state, and then move backwards into the past by uncovering its necessary preconditions, especially within the mode of production (asking essentially—what had to have happened earlier for the present to appear and function as it does?). After which, he reverses himself, and, starting with where he arrived in the past, he re-examines the same conditions and events—using whatever evidence is available—as they evolved up to the present. Finally, with the help of the contradictory tendencies (often referred to as “laws”) that are brought into view by combining these two steps, Marx projects in broad outline where capitalism seems to be heading. Human beings, divided into social classes, come into this analysis—as both causes and effects—every step along the way. The present article examines what the discipline of archeology can contribute to this project.