Zur Seitennavigation oder mit Tastenkombination für den accesskey-Taste und Taste 1 
Zum Seiteninhalt oder mit Tastenkombination für den accesskey und Taste 2 

ONLINE: Language, Reason, and Action. Philosophical Discussions in English - Einzelansicht

  • Funktionen:
Grunddaten
Veranstaltungsart Seminar Langtext
Veranstaltungsnummer 186154 Kurztext
Semester SS 2021 SWS 2
Teilnehmer 1. Platzvergabe 25 Max. Teilnehmer 2. Platzvergabe 25
Rhythmus keine Übernahme Studienjahr
Credits für IB und SPZ
E-Learning
Hyperlink
Sprache Deutsch
Belegungsfrist Zur Zeit keine Belegung möglich
Abmeldefristen
Nach Zulassung ist eine Abmeldung nur durch den Dozenten möglich.

Nach Zulassung ist eine Abmeldung auch durch den Teilnehmer möglich.

Nach Zulassung ist eine Abmeldung nur durch den Dozenten möglich.
Termine Gruppe: 0-Gruppe iCalendar Export für Outlook
  Tag Zeit Rhythmus Dauer Raum Lehrperson (Zuständigkeit) Status Bemerkung fällt aus am Max. Teilnehmer 2. Platzvergabe
Einzeltermine anzeigen Di. 10:15 bis 11:45 w. 13.04.2021 bis
13.07.2021
    findet statt  
Gruppe 0-Gruppe:



Zugeordnete Person
Zugeordnete Person Zuständigkeit
Kienzler, Wolfgang, Privatdozent, Dr. phil. habil. verantwortlich
Zuordnung zu Einrichtungen
Institut für Philosophie
Inhalt
Kommentar

INTRODUCTION:

Thema: English Discussions

Uhrzeit: 13.Apr..2021 10:00 AM Amsterdam, Berlin,

 

We will start at 10:15 AM!

 

Zoom-Meeting beitreten

https://uni-jena-de.zoom.us/j/62973182715

 

Meeting-ID: 629 7318 2715

Kenncode: 587792

 

This seminar is intended as a philosophical discussion group in English. We want to discuss shorter texts which are well written and philosophically interesting, and preferably of general interest.  

I suggest that we will read three essays by David Hume: Of the Immortality of the Soul, Of Suicide, and Of the Standard of Taste, and then we will go on to compare these to Wittgenstein's "Lecture on Ethics" - but I am also open for any suggestion you may have. Please tell me!

While the essays will be interesting and worthwhile in themselves for a variety of reasons and arguments, one overarching question will be: How can we find general standards for morals (and aesthetics) if we reject metaphysics and try to stay within the scope of experience? Hume suggests that all arguments in favor of the immortality of the human soul are spurious (including those that insist that the very existence of morality depends on there being some divine retribution after death), that all arguments trying to make suicide criminal are wrong as well (because there cannot be any "violation of our duty towards God), but he does try to find some geneal standard for something being a classical work of art. Along the way, Hume introduces his own standard for morality which he derives from a general human sentiment which approves of actions we then call "good", and which diapprovs of actions which we then call "bad".

Wittgenstein will go on to radicalize Hume's ideas in making ethical thought altogether independent of any facts, even the facts of our sentiments toward human actions. We will discuss whether this falls back into metaphysics, or whether Wittgenstein succeeds in establishing an absolute non-relative point of judging - well: everything.

These texts  are of such a kind that the train of thought, or the argument, is not in all places obvious at the very first glance. So they will be a challenge for you to find out how they work on a linguistic and philosophical level. 

NOTE: As we will not be able to meet and discuss these matters in person in April, we will conduct this seminar mainly in a written format: I will send you questions and some comment to go along with them and invite you to send me your written answers and comments (and questions), and then I will in turn react to your answers. We will, however, have a zoom meeting near the beginning of the semester, just in order to get in touch (and another one, or two, later on). Hopefully, there might be a chance that we meet somewhere in the open, but we will have to wait for things to develop.

Preliminary schedule:

Note: This schedule can be modifies according to the interests of the participants, as well as due to course which our questions and discussions will take. It intends to give you some idea of the things I have in mind as I am preparing things.

One underlying question is: How can we understand „absolute judgments”, and where do we start to judge about matters? And: Are there ways to have absolute, or univesal judgments if we do not accept them from outside but subscribe to a (broadly) empirical view?

 

I Wittgenstein: Lecture on Ethics

1 Ethics must be about absolute, not relative judgments: But absolute judgments do not contan any matters of fact and thus cannot be expressed in meaningful sentences.

2 Examples of absolute statements (like „I feel absolutely safe”) are, on logical analysis, perfectly nonsensical. They are not metaphorical, either, as they cannot be translated into anything meaningful. In this they are of the same kind as equally nonsensical religious sentences (like „I am safe in the hand of God”).

3 This leads to the paradox that factual sentences shoul be able to express something absolute, or even supernatural.

4 And W would refuse any analysis into something which has meaning and sense: The nonsensicality of ethical statements is their very nature.

 

II Hume: Of the immortality of the soul

(An introduction to Hume’s critique of metaphysics, to his moral thought, and to his empiricism:)

5 Metaphysically, the very notion of an immaterial, or immortal, soul-subsance is confused an unitelligible.

6 The notion of an immortal soul seems to have been introduced in order to secure morality through the possibility (and threat) of eternal punishment. But the very notion of eternal punishment is out of all human proportion, and must be called immoral.

7 Physically, everything speaks in favor of the mortality of body and soul alike.

 

III Hume: Of suicide

(Hume’s only attempt at applied philosophy: If we correct our thinking about suicide, we may enable to take away an obstacle to human liberty and happiness.)

8 As the notion that suicide be a crime rests on bad thinking and superstition, philosophy may be able to restore human beings to their original freedom concerning this possibly vital issue.

9 Suicide cannot be a crime against God and providence, as it is granted that everything, including every human action, happens according to the general laws installed by nature, and thus by God.

10 As our duties towards society rest on a mutual contract based on common interests, it is possible to withdraw from that contract if there are no longer any common interests. If we become a burden to society this notion may even constitute, in specific situations, a certain duty to end our own lives.

11 No duty towards ourselves could make it a crime to end our lives in a considerate way once our life has lost all worth for us.

12 (We will contrast Hume’s view with kant’s opposing view that suicide actually constitutes a breach of duty towrds ourselves.)

 

IV Hume: Of the standard of taste

(While in the two previous essays, Hume dismantled all attempts to lay down universal standards, here he tries to find a standard of taste – in an area where nobody would think it possible that one exists.)

13 The great variety of taste seems to prove that there cannot be a universal standard of taste (and the same could be claimed in ethics which is also based on human sentiment).

14 While it seems natural to claim that all tasts are on an equal footing, this is actually not true (as the Don Quixote example about the key and leather-band in the barrel illustrates).

15 If we combine delicate taste with sufficient practice we can develop a level of aesthetic criticism which can be called universal, if not precisely objective.

16 While there are still some innocent sources of deviation in actual tastes among good critics, the real cause which destroys sound judgment is located in the effects of superstition and bigotry.

 

Literatur

You can find Hume's essays at: davidhume.org

They are based on the standard edition by Miller: Hume, Essays, Indianapolis 1987

Wittgenstein's Lecture on Ethics will be supplied. For starters you can find this text easily on the internet.

Strukturbaum
Keine Einordnung ins Vorlesungsverzeichnis vorhanden. Veranstaltung ist aus dem Semester SS 2021 , Aktuelles Semester: SoSe 2024

Impressum | Datenschutzerklärung