No description available.

No description available.

No description available.

Dder Briefwechsel gilt als Tatsache der Kultur seiner Zeit, als die Quelle einer Ganzheitsevolution der Weltanschauung, der Erkenntnis des Zeitalters durch die Persönlichkeit und der Persönlichkeit durch die Ereignisse des Zeitalters. Es ist gerade die derartige kulturhistorische und quellenkundliche Einmaligkeit im Sinn der geschichtlichen Zeit, die den Briefwechsel zwischen den herausragenden Meistern des 20. Jahrhunderts, Reinhold Glier und Boris Lyatoschinski, kennzeichnet, die durch eine mehr als 40-jährigen Freundschaft zwischen Lehrer und Schüler verbunden waren.

Permission from the author to digitize this work is pending. Please contact the ICS library if you would like to view this work. / There are many excellent studies of the life and thought of Reinhold Niebuhr (1892-1971), prominent Christian ethicist, social philosopher, and political activist of the American Century. Most studies focus on his mature works of mid-century, particularly his theological ethics. The following study treats his emergent theory of history between 1927-1934, especially the idea of progress and the narrative of modern capitalist society. During this formative period Niebuhr wrote three major books (Does Civilization Need Religion? [1927], Moral Man and Immoral Society [1932], and Reflections on the End of an Era [1934]) which reflect his intellectual passage from religious liberalism and the politics of persuasion to "Christian-Marxism" and the politics of power. The following thesis will trace the diverse historiographical influences found in these works, from the church-historical perspective of Ernst Troeltsch to the dialectical materialism of Karl Marx. It is common to say that Niebuhr was purely a theologian of history. But following Ricoeur and White, I describe the main ingredients of a philosophy of history that are present in these writings: myth, plot, social processes, patterns of progress and cycle. Moreover, he was a "thinker in time"--these philosophical elements combined to render a plausible and meaningful narrative context for social action. In the early period Niebuhr began his lifelong critique of Enlightenment, capitalism, and the idea of progress. Following Robert Nisbet's analysis of the concept of progress in Western cultural history, I will argue that Niebuhr traverses his own peculiar dialectics of history, moving from the idea of progress-as-freedom (in the twenties) to the idea of progress-as-power (in the thirties); from the form of irony to the form of tragedy; from the concept of the voluntary reform of the excesses of captialism to the concept of the frank use of coercion to implement a socialist alternative to captialism. His philosophy of history in this period thus reflects in Christian idiom aspects of the very antinomies of the Enlightenment regarding personality and power, freedom and fate, which he desires to overcome.

Diss. : Freiburg im Breisgau : 1992. / Bibliogr. p. 277-297.

As principais objeções do Aenesidemus (1792) de Gottlob Ernst Schulze (1761-1833) à filosofia kantiana segundo a Filosofia elementar de Reinhold sinalizam duas tendências. Por um lado, servindo-se de argumentos que recusam a proposição suprema proposta por K. L. Reinhold (1757-1823) apontam para o esgotamento de investigações relativas ao âmbito puramente teórico em filosofia, mais especificamente, o da busca por um primeiro princípio universal em filosofia. Por outro lado, dão ensejo à solução dialética no iminente idealismo alemão, através da leitura que J. G. Fichte (1762-1814) faz das objeções, partindo então para a construção da Doutrina da ciência. É com a dialética, elemento central neste novo período, que Fichte irá propor o que entende ser o primeiro princípio capaz de fundamentar a filosofia como saber do saber. Mais que uma proposição teórica, este princípio será o Eu absoluto. / In its main objections to the Kantian philosophy as presented by K. L. Reinhold\'s Elementary Philosophy, G. E. Schulze\'s (1761-1833) Aenesidemus (1792) brings two different tendencies to the fore. On the one hand, by relying on arguments which refuse the supreme proposition as proposed by Reinhold (1757-1823), they signal the exhaustion of investigations regarding the purely theoretical side of philosophy - more specifically the one concerning the search for a first universal principle. On the other hand, they prepare the context for the dialectic solution by rising German idealism, namely through J. G. Fichte\'s (1762-1814) reading of those objections as he moves on to the construction of his Doctrine of Science. It is with his dialectic, a key element of this new period, that Fichte will propose what he takes to be the first principle capable of grounding philosophy as the \"knowledge of knowledge\". More than a theoretical proposition, this principle will be the absolute I.

No description available.

Thesis (Ph.D.)--Hong Kong Baptist University, 2005. / Thesis submitted to the Dept. of Religion and Philosophy. Includes bibliographical references (leaves 183-201).

Diss., Universität Göteborg, 2007. / CD enth.: Auszüge aus "Aerial" von Heinz-Karl Gruber ; Dromo dance von Helge Iberg ; Vier Stücke gegen den Stillstand von Caspar Johannes Walter.