Eric v.d. Luft

We asked our readers to answer the question, in 250 words or fewer, "Of all the articles that have been published in Hume Studies over the past 50 years, which one is most noteworthy to you? Why so?" We realized that what is noteworthy to individual scholars will vary by their research interests and many other factors. Here are the responses we received, ordered by the date of the Hume Studies articles chosen, from earliest to most recent.Saul Traiger, "Impressions, Ideas, and Fictions," Hume Studies 13, no. 2 (1987): 381–99Hume argues that various mental states are "fictions" of the imagination. The ancient philosopher's commitment to material substance is a fiction, as are our ascriptions of diachronic identity... Read More.

Edward Pols is no stranger to these pages; indeed, his three most recent articles in The Review of Metaphysics are all versions of chapters in this, his fourth book. Those of us who have followed his philosophical development closely will recognize that The Acts of our Being elaborates and clarifies--but does not presuppose knowledge of--Meditation on a Prisoner. His general aim with regard to human agency and human action is to show that, yes, things really are as they seem, i.e., that our common sense view that we ourselves originate our actions and are responsible for them, a view which more often than not is found to be contrary to scientific dogma, is in fact the correct view. His general strategy is to blaze a via media between the immediate prejudice which favors prima facie rational agency and the authoritative physiology which pretends to dispense with the concept of "agent." Realizing his task to be a tough one, Pols shrewdly substitutes the term "ontic responsibility," i.e., the state of being of such an ontological nature that accountability is appropriate and seemly, for the old bugaboo of a term "free will," thus perhaps facilitating a serious encounter with his more scientifically inclined readers. While acknowledging that reductionist science has been largely successful in shifting the everyday perception of human nature away from the ancient common sense view toward physicalist explanations and toward a broad faith in the eventual accomplishment of an exhaustive "perfected physiology," he takes great pains to demonstrate that it is not this newly popular scientific view, but the prima facie view, which is the philosophical ground of the entire legal structure, and hence, by extension, of social organization and civilization in general. Addressing the intelligent layperson rather than his professional colleague, Pols claims fundamentally that science's current project is to prove to us that we are actually something other than what we seem to ourselves to be. But science ought, instead of cancelling our prima facie knowledge of ourselves, to contribute to a fuller understanding of this prima facie knowledge.

The first meeting of the Schleiermacher Studies and Translations Group was held August 8–11, 1986, at Drew University. The purposes of this “Schleiermacher Summer Camp” were to plan the translations into English of Schleiermacher’s complete corpus, including sermons and letters, as well as some prominent German secondary sources, and to provide an opportunity for the initial participants in this ambitious project to meet each other and learn each other’s methods. presuppositions, interests, and goals. The sessions were extremely valuable toward these ends, and we all felt the satisfaction of a unified spirit of collaboration.

One may well argue that there ought not to be any such thing as an “undergraduate-level introduction to Hegel,” simply because, except perhaps for an especially advanced senior major in philosophy or religious studies, no undergraduate should be allowed to read Hegel. Extreme as it is, this view does have some merit. To read Hegel with even the bare minimum of comprehension requires a sophistication in philosophy, history, art history, and general cultural awareness which is seldom found in undergraduates. It is well-known that a first semester freshman with little or no previous knowledge of philosophy is perfectly able, after only a few introductory lectures, to understand in a basic way the most important and complex sections of Plato’s Republic. Similarly, most intelligent freshmen are able to read Aristotle, Descartes, Hume, and even Kant, with a tolerable degree of comprehension. But with Hegel, on the other hand, whose thought presupposes, contains, interprets, criticizes, and hebt auf all of the thought which has gone before it, to an extent which no other major philosopher has even attempted, such naive reading is impossible. The problem is compounded by Hegel’s prose style, which, though necessary to his intent, and though passable in German, is too often utterly unfathomable in English, even by experts. Of what use, then, is an undergraduate introduction?