Many prominent scientists have pointed out that philosophy is of no benefit to science. Stephen Hawking asserts: Philosophy is dead! Sciences use conceptions like natural laws, matter, nature, theories, etc. But science is also confronted with questions such as: "What is a natural law?" "What is nature?" "What is matter?" and "What is a scientific theory?" These (metatheoretical) questions exceed the sphere of competence of science – they are items of the philosophy of science. Philosophy of science is a metatheory of science. The Philosophy of science overlaps epistemology, ontology, and metaphysics by exploring whether scientific results are true, or whether entities like quarks or electrons really exist. More detailed investigations bring various questions into consideration such as: "How do we define the boundaries between different scientific disciplines?" "Is there a relation between the beauty and the truth of a scientific theory?" and "How do we distinguish between science and pseudoscience?" Additionally, the philosophy of science is concerned with ethical problems of modern technology, with the methodological questions, with the reconstruction of the structure and the development of scientific theories, and with revealing of any indoctrination of science. The optimistic conclusion of this paper is: Philosophy is still alive – but the philosopher has to participate in round-table discussions with scientists. We just want philosophers talking to scientists!

Many prominent scientists have pointed out that philosophy is of no benefit to science. Stephen Hawking asserts: Philosophy is dead! Sciences use conceptions like natural laws, matter, nature, theories, etc. But science is also confronted with questions such as: "What is a natural law?" "What is nature?" "What is matter?" and "What is a scientific theory?" These (metatheoretical) questions exceed the sphere of competence of science – they are items of the philosophy of science. Philosophy of science is a metatheory of science. The Philosophy of science overlaps epistemology, ontology, and metaphysics by exploring whether scientific results are true, or whether entities like quarks or electrons really exist. More detailed investigations bring various questions into consideration such as: "How do we define the boundaries between different scientific disciplines?" "Is there a relation between the beauty and the truth of a scientific theory?" and "How do we distinguish between science and pseudoscience?" Additionally, the philosophy of science is concerned with ethical problems of modern technology, with the methodological questions, with the reconstruction of the structure and the development of scientific theories, and with revealing of any indoctrination of science. The optimistic conclusion of this paper is: Philosophy is still alive – but the philosopher has to participate in round-table discussions with scientists. We just want philosophers talking to scientists!

Resumo não disponível.

A presente dissertação tem como objeto o prefácio da Fundamentação da Metafísica dos Costumes (FMC). Sua investigação concentra-se na concepção aí contida da disciplina da Metafísica dos Costumes, concepção essa pouca levada em conta para a compreensão da argumentação ulterior da FMC. Inicialmente abordamos (i) o que seria essa disciplina a partir da topologia das disciplinas filosóficas oferecida por Kant. Em seguida, exploramos (ii) o conceito de vontade pura, declaradamente o objeto de uma Metafísica dos Costumes. Na sequência investigamos (iii) o conceito de boa vontade, a fim de localizar o conceito de vontade pura na FMC. Como resultado, uma série de distinções úteis são alcançadas. Em (i), introduzimos a distinção entre os dois níveis da disciplina da Metafísica dos Costumes, na falta de termos melhores, “transcendental” e “humano”, a fim de harmonizar afirmações aparentemente contraditórias de Kant na FMC e na obra Metafísica dos Costumes. Em (ii), distinguimos pelo menos três usos distintos do conceito de vontade pura por parte de Kant, a saber, como (a) capacidade de determinar/motivar a vontade de certa maneira; como (b) a vontade determinada/motivada de certa maneira e como (c) a vontade maximamente determinada/motivada de certa maneira. Já em (iii), rastreamos a distinção entre pelo menos três usos do conceito de boa vontade, a saber, como (a) capacidade universalmente difundida de um agente racional agir moralmente; como (b) o bom caráter esparsamente difundido de quem se compromete firmemente com a lei moral, e como (c) a vontade maximamente boa, universalmente ausente porquanto uma ideia. Por fim, a partir da sobreposição dos três usos de ambos os conceitos, concluimos pela identificação do conceito de vontade pura com aquele de boa vontade. / The subject of the present dissertation is the preface of the Groundwork for the Metaphysics of Morals (Groundwork). Our investigation focused on the conception of the discipline of the Metaphysics of Morals presented in the preface, whose role for the understanding of the ulterior argumentation of the Groundwork is overlooked. Initially we investigate (i) what is this discipline taking as the start point the topology of the philosophical disciplines offered by Kant. Then we explore (ii) the concept of pure will, professedly the object of a Metaphysics of Morals. Finally we investigate (iii) the concept of a good will, in order to locate the concept of a pure will in the Groundwork. As a result, a number of useful distinctions are achieved. In (i), we introduce the distinction between the two levels within the discipline of the Metaphysics of Morals, in the absence of better terms, “transcendental” and “human”, in order to make coherent the apparently contradictory statements of Kant in the Groundwork and in the Metaphysics of Morals. In (ii) we distinguish at least three uses by Kant of the concept of pure will, namely, the pure will (a) as a capacity of determining/motivating the will in a certain way; as (b) a will determined/motivated in a certain way and (c) as a will maximally determined/motivated in a certain way. In (iii) we track the distinction between at least three uses of the concept of good will, namely, the good will (a) as a universally diffused capacity of a rational agent to act morally good; (b) as a sparsely diffused good character of a person steadily commited to the moral law, and (c) as a universally absent maximally good will, since it is an idea. Lastly, we identify both concepts, since their three uses overlap.

A presente dissertação tem como objeto o prefácio da Fundamentação da Metafísica dos Costumes (FMC). Sua investigação concentra-se na concepção aí contida da disciplina da Metafísica dos Costumes, concepção essa pouca levada em conta para a compreensão da argumentação ulterior da FMC. Inicialmente abordamos (i) o que seria essa disciplina a partir da topologia das disciplinas filosóficas oferecida por Kant. Em seguida, exploramos (ii) o conceito de vontade pura, declaradamente o objeto de uma Metafísica dos Costumes. Na sequência investigamos (iii) o conceito de boa vontade, a fim de localizar o conceito de vontade pura na FMC. Como resultado, uma série de distinções úteis são alcançadas. Em (i), introduzimos a distinção entre os dois níveis da disciplina da Metafísica dos Costumes, na falta de termos melhores, “transcendental” e “humano”, a fim de harmonizar afirmações aparentemente contraditórias de Kant na FMC e na obra Metafísica dos Costumes. Em (ii), distinguimos pelo menos três usos distintos do conceito de vontade pura por parte de Kant, a saber, como (a) capacidade de determinar/motivar a vontade de certa maneira; como (b) a vontade determinada/motivada de certa maneira e como (c) a vontade maximamente determinada/motivada de certa maneira. Já em (iii), rastreamos a distinção entre pelo menos três usos do conceito de boa vontade, a saber, como (a) capacidade universalmente difundida de um agente racional agir moralmente; como (b) o bom caráter esparsamente difundido de quem se compromete firmemente com a lei moral, e como (c) a vontade maximamente boa, universalmente ausente porquanto uma ideia. Por fim, a partir da sobreposição dos três usos de ambos os conceitos, concluimos pela identificação do conceito de vontade pura com aquele de boa vontade. / The subject of the present dissertation is the preface of the Groundwork for the Metaphysics of Morals (Groundwork). Our investigation focused on the conception of the discipline of the Metaphysics of Morals presented in the preface, whose role for the understanding of the ulterior argumentation of the Groundwork is overlooked. Initially we investigate (i) what is this discipline taking as the start point the topology of the philosophical disciplines offered by Kant. Then we explore (ii) the concept of pure will, professedly the object of a Metaphysics of Morals. Finally we investigate (iii) the concept of a good will, in order to locate the concept of a pure will in the Groundwork. As a result, a number of useful distinctions are achieved. In (i), we introduce the distinction between the two levels within the discipline of the Metaphysics of Morals, in the absence of better terms, “transcendental” and “human”, in order to make coherent the apparently contradictory statements of Kant in the Groundwork and in the Metaphysics of Morals. In (ii) we distinguish at least three uses by Kant of the concept of pure will, namely, the pure will (a) as a capacity of determining/motivating the will in a certain way; as (b) a will determined/motivated in a certain way and (c) as a will maximally determined/motivated in a certain way. In (iii) we track the distinction between at least three uses of the concept of good will, namely, the good will (a) as a universally diffused capacity of a rational agent to act morally good; (b) as a sparsely diffused good character of a person steadily commited to the moral law, and (c) as a universally absent maximally good will, since it is an idea. Lastly, we identify both concepts, since their three uses overlap.

Resumo não disponível.

Resumo não disponível.

Die Dissertation diskutiert die kantische Metaphysik des Geistes anhand der in der Kritik der reinen Vernunft und den aus dem Nachlass veröffentlichten Vorlesungen zur Metaphysik geleisteten Auseinandersetzung mit der rationalen Psychologie seiner Vorgänger, insbesondere Baumgarten und Wolff. Es wird dafür argumentiert, dass Kant die Meinungen seiner Vorgänger nicht uneingeschränkt zurückweist, sondern die Vorstellung der Seele als Substanz in seine Diskussion der Personalität, mentaler Kräfte, der Möglichkeit einer Körper-Seele Interaktion sowie der Willensfreiheit teilweise beibehält. Ein Verdienst dieser Interpretation ist es, die Kontinuität zwischen Kants vorkritischer Position und seiner kritischen Philosophie aufzuzeigen. Darüber hinaus soll aber auch auf eine wichtige Funktion der kantischen Metaphysik des Geistes für seine praktische Philosophie hingewiesen werden. / This dissertation considers Kant’s discussions of the metaphysics of mind in his critical encounter with the rational psychology of Baumgarten, Wolff, and others in the Critique of Pure Reason and his lectures on metaphysics. In contrast with prevailing interpretations, I argue that Kant does not offer a straightforward rejection of his predecessors but that he retains some commitments to the substantial view of the self and modifies others within the framework of transcendental idealism to provide accounts of the nature of personhood, mental powers, the possibility of mind-body interaction, and the possibility of freedom of the will. This interpretation of Kant reveals continuity between Kant’s pre-critical and critical positions on the metaphysics of mind and points forward to a role for aspects of Kant’s metaphysics of mind in his practical philosophy.

Heideggers Philosophie erweist sich als die Suche nach dem Lebenssinn. Es geht ihm darum, wie der Einzelmensch sein eigenes Leben als ein sinnvolles Ganzes gestalten und führen soll. Es kommt dabei darauf an, ob das Individuum sich von der Masse befreien und mit dem eigenen Tod konfrontieren kann bzw. will. Unter diesen Umständen weist Heidegger auf die Vereinzelung der Person und ihre Erfahrung des Nichts hin. Das Dasein kann sich allein in der Erfahrung des Nichts als Seins vom Seienden als Ganzen abkehren. Sich über das Seiende im Ganzen erheben bedeutet Heidegger zufolge die metaphysische Betrachtungsweise. Die Existenz des Menschen ist für Heidegger genau das metaphysische Phänomen, nämlich unsere Bezugnahme auf die Welt als Ganzes. Diese kontemplative Haltung des Individuums hängt wiederum mit seiner Einstellung zur Gottesauffassung zusammen. Das Verständnis Gottes als eines Seienden führt zum unangemessenen Gottesverhältnis. Gott als das Sein ansehen kann das Gottesverhältnis zurechtsetzen. Die Bedeutung des Lebens erschließt sich erst dann, wenn das Individuum sich seiner Endlichkeit vor Gott als dem Sein bewusst ist. / This dissertation argues that the entire Heidegger’s Philosophy amounts to an exploration of the meaning of human life. For him, it is important in life to form and fulfil our own life as an integral whole. It is thus crucial to explore how we can do so, by freeing ourselves, each in our respective individual ways, from the influence of the masses and face resolutely up to our own individual death, by realising each one’s indiviualization and experiencing nothingness. Dasein our inauthentic being-there is dispersed only in the experience of Nothingness as Being per se. For Heidegger, transcendence beyond all entities/beings is the genuine metaphysical way of envisaging them. Human existence is for Heidegger just a metaphysical phenomenon, namely, our point of reference to the world as a whole. This contemlative attitude of the individual is connected further with his views of God. Understanding God as an entity, a mere being, leads to an inappropriate relationship to God, and should be redressed by regarding God as the Being per se. The meaning of life discloses itself only as an individual becomes aware of his/her finiteness before God as the Supreme Being.

Par ce mémoire, nous voulons participer à rétablir un équilibre dans l'interprétation de la philosophie pratique d'Emmanuel Kant, laquelle philosophie fut souvent accusée d'être « sévère », rigoriste voire austère. Nous étudions la définition et l'ensemble des rôles du bonheur dans la morale kantienne. Les ouvrages utilisés sont notamment la deuxième Critique et les Fondements de la métaphysique des mœurs. Nous nous penchons ainsi principalement sur la critique de l'eudémonisme, sur le bonheur comme fin naturelle nécessaire, sur les devoirs direct et indirect de travailler au bonheur et sur le but final et nécessaire de la raison pratique, le souverain Bien. Il est ainsi montré que Kant accorde une très grande importance au bonheur, bien qu'il refuse que son désir soit le principe fondateur et déterminant de la moralité.