Riccardo Martinelli

This essay focuses on the relation between man and the world in Kant’s anthropology. Within Baumgarten’s Metaphysica, used as a manual by Kant for his lessons, empirical psychology is situated between cosmology and rational psychology. However, this view is untenable for Kant, at least after the first Critique. Consequently, whereas Baumgarten explains, for instance, obscure ideas referring to the bodily position in the world, Kant’s pragmatic approach excludes this. Yet, the concept of «Welt» retains paramount importance within Kant’s Anthropology. The two parts of the work are thus harmonically linked: the first offers an account of a largely pathological human psychology; the second a way out of the pathology through the construction of a social and historical human world. Accordingly, anthropology responds to the «Weltbegriff» of philosophy and helps to correct the deviations from the final rational destination of mankind.

L’opera filosofica di Novalis, inedita e frammentaria per ragioni biografiche, è stata a lungo trascurata. Gli studi fichtiani e l’interesse per la scienza sono alla base della sua «Enciclopedistica», nella quale la filosofia della musica ha un posto rilevante. Novalis conosce la scienza acustica del suo tempo e riconduce i rapporti tra suoni e figure a una forza formatrice presente nella natura fin dal livello inorganico. La medesima forza si presenta poi nell’uomo tramite la voce, espressione più autentica della libertà assoluta dell’Io. Lungi da ogni «sentimentalismo» l’identità di uomo e natura si manifesta in una rarefatta estetica simbolica condensata da Novalis nell’immagine dell’«arpa eolia».

In a renowned essay, Odo Marquard’s set a cornerstone in defining anthropology from a history of concepts point of view. In the light of more recent researches, some of his conclusions are here reconsidered and criticised. The concept of anthropology, as developed by Herder, Kant, Wilhelm von Humboldt, romantic philosophers and physicians, and finally by Hegel and some of his followers, offers no evidence for Marquard’s alleged opposition between anthropology and philosophy of history. On the one side, in Kant’s or Hegel’s work anthropology is not as peripheral as Marquard argued; on the other side, romantic anthropologists developed a deep interest towards historical perspectives. Rather, anthropology was quite often considered as a nonmetaphysical alternative to psychology. These results also suggest a revision as to the role of anthropology on a broader historical scale

Can music express the world-view of a certain composer, or of a certain historical era – and how? In 19th Century, the wide-ranging philosophical implications of this question raised an intriguing quarrel between the formalists’ scepticism as to this point and their various opponents. Starting from the case study of the German psychologist and philosopher of music Georg Anschütz, it is argued that allowing for a systematic link of music and the world-views easily turns into the far more demanding claim that music is the best and perhaps the only way to express them properly. In turn, this attitude sits well with the tendency to think of music hearing as a disembodied process, hinting at the deep dimension of synesthesia rather than to that of music as a cultural phenomenon, in Erich Hornbostel’s sense.

This essay addresses the interrelations between philosophy and experimental sciences that lie at the heart of Carl Stumpf’s epistemology. Following a biographical exposé demonstrating how Stumpf succeeded in acquiring a dual competence in both philosophical and scientific fields, we examine the vast array of academic disciplines encompassed by his research. Such a biographical treatment aims, indeed, to better promote the thrust of Stumpf’s assertion that philosophical enquiries should always be carried out in close connection with scientific practices, and underlines how philosophico-scientific interactions established his work as a central pillar in the history of late nineteenth- and early twentieth-century German thought.

Allievo di Brentano e Lotze, maestro di Husserl e Halle e dei Gestaltisti a Berlino dove fu voluto da Dilthey, Carl Stumpf fu per oltre mezzo secolo un protagonista della filosofia accademica tedesca. Ciò nonostante, il suo ruolo nella storia della filosofia tra Ottocento e Novecento è ancora sottovalutato dalla critica. Il saggio ricostruisce le linee generali del pensiero di Stumpf sottolinenandone il costante impegno in favore di una «Rinascita della filosofia» – come recita il titolo della sua prolusione rettorale del 1907, che può avvenire solamente grazie alla proficua ma critica interazione con le scienze naturali. In ciò Stumpf sviluppa originalmente il pensiero di Brentano ma in una direzione diversa da quella di Husserl, Marty o Meinong.

La percezione musicale ha avuto un ruolo significativo nella storia della psicologia della Gestalt. Muovendo dalle critiche di Mach ed Ehrenfels alla dottrina elaborata da Helmholtz e dall’elaborazione teorica di Stumpf, destinata a fungere da ponte concettuale, il lavoro analizza la riflessione svoltasi in seno alla psicologia della Gestalt. Sorprendentemente, Köhler non si concentra sulle Gestalten musicali complesse, ma sulle qualità tonali più elementari, mostrandone la totale irriducibilità a fattori fisico-fisiologici. Sulla stessa linea è anche Hornbostel, il quale amplia tuttavia il discorso mediante il richiamo al complesso antropologico dei vissuti umani, musicali ed extramusicali, che rimandano a un determinato contesto culturale, saldando così il nesso tra psicologia della Gestalt e ricerca nel campo etnomusicologico.

Il volume presenta una storia della filosofia della musica. A partire dalle idee sulla musica dei filosofi antichi, attraverso le concezioni medievali e rinascimentali, il volume considera l'impatto della rivoluzione scientifica, la stagione illuminista e gli sviluppi ottocenteschi, per giungere infine al ricco dibattito contemporaneo. Tra i principali autori trattati: i pitagorici, Platone, Aristotele, Aristosseno, Boezio, Agostino, Tomaso d'Aquino, Ficino, Galileo, Mersenne, Cartesio, Leibniz, Rousseau, Kant, Novalis, Schelling, Wackenroder, Hoffmann, Schopenhauer, Kierkegaard, Hegel, Hanslick, Helmholtz, Nietzsche, Bloch, Adorno, Jankélévitch, Wittgenstein, Langer, Kivy, Levinson, Scruton.

In his first two Critiques, Kant makes a distinction between the empirical and the intelligible character. Yet, in his Pragmatic anthropology Kant adds the human beings’ “natural aptitude” to the customary dichotomy of “way of sensing” and “way of thinking”. In this paper, I investigate Kant’s concept of natural aptitude in his Pragmatic anthropology and in his Lectures on anthropology. Most probably, Kant’s sources lie in the Scholastic doctrine of the “character of scholars”. The “good mind” that Kant associates with the human beings’ natural aptitude – in sharp contrast with the autonomy implied by moral character – nevertheless reveals its significance in compensating for the human species’ “pragmatic predisposition”. To some extent, then, natural aptitude contributes to the pursuit of nature’s providential goals.

Peirce’ s intellectual debt to Kant’ s transcendentalism has been long recognized. In this essay I investigate Kant’ s thoughts on “what is pragmatic” as a source of inspiration for him. Peirce was well acquainted with this often neglected facet of Kant’ s philosophy, that influenced both the core idea and the lexical coinage of his pragmatism. Both thinkers drew attention to the consequences of cognition for human actions. Pointing at the definition of the meaning of a defined notion, however, Peirce narrows remarkably the domain of Kant’ s “pragmatic horizon”. Accordingly, Kant cannot be truly considered a forerunner of Peirce’ s pragmatism.

Stumpf’s doctrine of the categories is of great importance for our understanding of his philosophy. This theme had been widely discussed among German thinkers after Kant; Brentano himself had repeatedly dealt with it since his early works. However, Stumpf considerably diverges from Brentano on this crucial philosophical topic. Although a systematic discussion can be found only in Stumpf’s posthumous Erkenntnislehre, his core ideas on the categories can be traced to his early work on space of 1873. In fact, Stumpf claims that the peculiar relationship between extension and color is analogous to the relationship that holds between substance and accidents. Thus, like any other category, substance empirically stems from perception. Sensory experience, for Stumpf, is made up of perceptual wholes, whose attributes are typically bound to each other, rather than separately given in bundles, as Hume and other associationists used to assume. Thus, the achievements of Stumpf’s holist psychology effectively contributes a solution to this classic metaphysical problem.

Together with other influential psychologists of the time, Wundt considers internal data as absolute evidence, grounding psychology on this assumption. In opposition to his former mentor, Külpe aims at rehabilitating Kant’s transcendental aesthetics. Yet, he is far from embracing transcendentalism and rejects Kant’s skepticism as to the possibility of a scientific psychology. Nevertheless, Külpe believes that Kant is right in considering internal data as unreliable for scientific purposes: accordingly, psychology should share the same scientific methodology of any other science.

Ehrenfels, Höfler and Witasek competently contributed to a musical aesthetics based upon the principles of the Graz school. In spite of a shared general psychological framework, they deeply differ in applying it to the aesthetics of music. A double tendency can be pointed out. Ehrenfels and Höfler enthusiastically supported Richard Wagner and vindicated the aesthetic value of his music. Accordingly, they made large use of analogies between musical and organic Gestalten. In a platonic vein, Höfler also thinks of melodies as timeless objects, which are discovered rather than created by great artists. On the contrary, Witasek’s approach is quite rationalistic. Avoiding any intrusion of metaphysics, he describes the intellectual and emotional processes involved in hearing a piece of music. Wholly independently of Wagnerism, Witasek explains the complexity of musical experience in the general terms of Meinongian psychology.

The paper compares the ideas developed by Bozzi and Stumpf with regard to unity, identity, and causality. Although Bozzi’s formulation is independent from the one made by Stumpf in his Erkenntnislehre, these two positions share the same innovative importance granted to perceptual experience and to the problem of the origin of categories. Thus, despite different levels of awareness and formalization, in both authors we see the features of what we can call – analogous- ly to Bozzi’s naïve physics – a “naïve metaphysics”, at whose core lie the refusal of intellectualism, and the determination of the origin of categories in the concrete stream of perception.