Full-text resources of CEJSH and other databases are now available in the new Library of Science.
Visit https://bibliotekanauki.pl

Results found: 4

first rewind previous Page / 1 next fast forward last

Search results

Search:
in the keywords:  Cohen
help Sort By:

help Limit search:
first rewind previous Page / 1 next fast forward last
1
Content available remote

Cohen – Rosenzweig – Heidegger. O zmianie frontu w Davos

100%
Serafin A.
Estetyka i Krytyka
|
2012
|
issue 4(26)
161-171
XX
In 1929 Franz Rosenzweig, completely paralyzed, wrote his last text, a review of Cohen’s Religion of reason. The review has been published after his death, in 1930, under the title Vertauschte Fronten. This text is worth attention since Rosenzweig not only reviews the most important, as he says, book of his friend and teacher (moreover claiming that it is a radical break with the philosophy Cohen has hitherto represented); not only he inscribes it within the current that he proposes to call “the new thinking”, whose new name could just as well have been, as he suggest in a different place using a Schellingian phrase, “absolute empiricism”; but most of all he proposes to perform the act of “reversing the fronts”, and thereby he interprets in an astounding manner the recent Davos debate between Heidegger and Cassirer, presenting the situation, in the spirit of the new thinking, completely a rebours, since Heidegger, according to this last will of Rosenzweig, paradoxically turns out to be the inheritor of Cohenian thought and also Rosenzweigian, unlike Cohen’s direct successor, the philosophically misguided Cassirer. Thereby the philosophical lineage of “the new thinking” demarked by Rosenzweig looks as follows: “Cohen – Rosenzweig – Heidegger”. And this is what the Rosenzweig’s reversal of fronts is supposed to mean: an anointment of Heidegger as his proper successor.
2
Publication available in full text mode
Content available

H. Cohens Ethik und ihre Rezeption in der russischen Philosophie des Rechts

88%
Belov V.
IDEA. Studia nad strukturą i rozwojem pojęć filozoficznych
|
2015
|
vol. 27
373-381
EN
The article draws attention to one remarkable feature in the perception of the Hermann Cohen doctrine in Russia, namely special attention on the part of Russian philosophers of the twentieth century to the turn of the ethical theories of the founder of the Marburg school of neo-Kantianism. In Russia, the most representative approach to the analysis of Cohen’s ethical theories is one conducted from the perspective of the philosophy of law. Ethical theories of the Marburg philosopher were in the center of scientific debate of the most famous Russian theorists of law – P.I. Novgorodtsev, B.A. Kistyakovsky, E.V. Spektorsky. The appeal rights of Russian theorists to analyze ethical problems Cohen highlighted the relation of law and morality. The central theme of the arguments in this respect was the theme of ethics orientation of the Marburg philosopher on jurisprudence. Of particular importance in view of the historicist and positivist tendencies that prevailed at the end of the 19th century in legal science in Russia, was rehabilitation of Cohen’s and his followers’ the concept of “natural law”. The main drawback of the criticism coming from Russian theorists of law in relation to Cohen is that their approach to the ideas of this great German thinker is not systematic enough, attempting to consider their ethical views independently from other parts of their philosophical constructions.
3
Content available remote

Judaizm wobec ducha natury ludzkiej. Hermanna Cohena ujęcie kultury w perspektywie etyki i antropologii

75%
Musioł A.
Studia Philosophica Wratislaviensia
|
2019
|
vol. 14
|
issue 3
59-67
EN
In the paper, I argue for Hermann Cohen’s philosophy of Judaism by verifying the thesis, according to Cohen, being an apologist of the distinguished religion system, which perceives the spirit of Judaism in terms of the spirit of the human nature in general. Cohen regrets the fact that the ties between religion and culture have been broken. Asking about the unity of Culture, he openly proclaims the view that one of the most well-known conflicts occurs between science about man and religion/theology as a science about God. This conflict has the status of a dispute pending in the broadly defined area of Culture.
4
Publication available in full text mode
Content available

Miejsce krytycznej filozofii Immanuela Kanta i neokantyzmu Hermanna Cohena w refleksji Stanisława Leopolda Brzozowskiego

71%
Musioł A. A.
Folia Philosophica
|
2018
|
vol. 40
EN
In the article, I want to describe the place of Immanuel Kant and Hermann Cohen’s Neo-Kantianism in the thought of Stanisław L. Brzozowski philosophy. So the critical image of philosophy is showing the project of Kant, so the concept of Cohen is - how Brzozowski thinks - with an expression of truly independent reflection. In the system of Cohen, author Legenda Młodej Polski…, a tendency to intellectual initiative free from positivist and modernist restrictions notices. How the history of philosophy is showing, both favored German classics of transcendental method, freedoms treat the criticism as a contemporary concept and innovative original thought. Meanwhile, for Brzozowski, criticism is an opportunity for including the philosophy of Kant into the form of the summons to the creative bravery, and it all at the same time is also Marburg doctrine, in accordance which is an existence missing apart from becoming eternal and ceaseless (eternal fieri).
PL
W artykule dokonuję próby wskazania miejsca jakie w filozofii Stanisława L. Brzozowskiego zajmuje myśl Immanuela Kanta oraz neokantowski system Hermanna Cohena. O ile krytyczny obraz filozofii przedstawia, wedle polskiego myśliciela, projekt Kanta, o tyle koncepcja Cohena jest wyrazem w pełni samodzielnej i niezależnej refleksji. W systemie Cohena, autor Legendy Młodej Polski. Studiów o strukturze duszy kulturalnej, dostrzega skłonność do intelektualnej inicjatywy wolnej od pozytywistyczno-modernistycznych ograniczeń. Jak pokazuje historia filozofii, obydwaj wyróżnieni niemieccy klasycy metody transcendentalnej, traktują krytycyzm jako współczesną koncepcję wolności i odkrywczej, nieszablonowej myśli. Tymczasem dla Brzozowskiego krytycyzm jest sposobnością do ujęcia filozofii Kanta w formę wezwania do twórczego męstwa, a zarazem jest także marburskim postulatem, w myśl którego nie ma bytu poza wiecznym i nieustannym stawaniem się.
first rewind previous Page / 1 next fast forward last
JavaScript is turned off in your web browser. Turn it on to take full advantage of this site, then refresh the page.