Audio Software icon An illustration of a 3. Software Images icon An illustration of two photographs. Images Donate icon An illustration of a heart shape Donate Ellipses icon An illustration of text ellipses. A pluralistic universe; Item Preview. EMBED for wordpress. Want more? Advanced embedding details, examples, and help! The types of philosophic thinking. Monistic idealism. Hegel and his method. Concerning Fechner. The compounding of consciousness.
Bergson and his critique of intellectualism. The continuity of experience. They mean only absolute independence by accident, so that if relations have to be accidental, these authors can easily understand that it is impossible to connect parts with one each other.
In reverse, assuming that relations can only be essential, they can say that the absolute union of all things is necessary. But, in the end he grew so concerned about avoiding the same pluralist outcomes of his own theory that he tried to recover the Unity of all beings and processes through his analysis of the empirical nature of interaction. Reality — he said — is already coherent and he wonders why we should look for a noumenic identity to fund and explain the phenomenic continuity.
He is now definitively refusing to assume knowledge to be total and complete, as far as to negate everything, which is not positively included in the conceptual knowledge of something. Now Hegel himself, in building up his method of double negation, offers the vividest possible example of this vice of intellectualism.
Every idea of a finite thing is of course a concept of that thing and not a concept of anything else. But Hegel treats this not being a concept of anything else as if it were equivalent to the concept of anything else not being , or in other words as if it were a denial or negation of everything else. Then, as the other things, thus implicitly contradicted by the thing first conceived, also by the same law contradict it , the pulse of dialectic commences to beat and the famous triads begin to grind out the cosmos.
This second principle states that to know one part, it is necessary to know the totality of that part. James was particularly upset by the fact that Hegel did not distinguish the respect under which he used terms.
Here he states that despite their discontinuity about nominalism, both James and Emerson sustained, more or less consciously, forms of pluralism. And, because of this linkage, he just could not easily hold the attention Emerson gave to individuality together with his faith in a divine plan.
The Emersonian meliorism was routed in his realistic thinking of natural and moral law, which he considered to be in fieri. Callaway also points out that with James there is neither the same stress Emerson put on Law, nor the same attention he gave to connections between human individual freedom and our growing skill in understanding Laws.
He also considers how Emerson was less conscious of his own pluralistic outcomes than, of course, James was. In conclusion, it is also important to remember the critical attitude these two thinkers shared towards contemporary forms of political imperialism.
Even if difference is not a good in itself, we can anyway consider it a potentiality to protect: only through difference we can develop and enrich our cultural and political exchanges, hence bringing meliorisms into our society. As Callaway highlights, there is a nominalist tendency first in James and then in Dewey stressing the experiential and individual side in regards to the legal one.
This does not mean democracy can be morally vacant. Instead, it should always be ruled and led from institutions. A democratic society needs laws to guarantee our possibility of living together, but it also needs uniformity and suppression of pluralities to be avoided. If constitution preserves freedom and diversities, it is also useful to control their excesses. Callaway retains constitutional tradition to be a shelter against any possible excess committed by the majority of the Congress.
He considers auto-formation and civil organization — often based on models of religious congregations — to be fundamental. Emerson R. Callaway ed.
Emeron R. Kraushaar O. Author retains copyright and grants the European Journal of Pragmatism and American Philosophy right of first publication with the work simultaneously licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4. Site map — Contact — Website credits — Syndication. Privacy Policy — About Cookies.
Skip to navigation — Site map. European Journal of Pragmatism and American Philosophy. Contents - Previous document. IV-2 Wittgenstein and Pragmatism. Book Review. Michela Bella. Outline Pluralism, Humanism and Nominalism.
0コメント