Max Gottschlich

Zusammenfassung Das Leitthema Gesundheit und Lebensstil wurde aus unterschiedlichen Blickwinkeln diskutiert. Hierbei wurde darauf hingewiesen, daß die Non-Kommunikation der Bereiche Leid und Tod nicht allein für die Erklärung bestimmter Lebensstile ausreichend sei, sondern daß sich Lebensstile auch durch Lebenschancen bzw. soziale Verhältnisse, die ungleich sind und Leid fördern, determinieren. Aus dieser Perspektive würden Medien eher verstärkend in Richtung individueller Isolation wirken, die durch Sprachlosigkeit gekennzeichnet sei. Differenziert man im Bereich Gesundheitsinformation nach Primär- und Sekundärprävention, seien gerade in Fragen der Primärprävention die Medien gefordert, diesbezüglich Informationen zu übermitteln, um entsprechende Lebensstile zu fördern. Hierbei sei die mediale Massenkommunikation alleine jedoch nicht ausreichend, sondern es bedürfe zusätzlich einer personalen Kommunikation/beratung.

Summary The election of Kurt Waldheim as Austrian Federal President in June 1986 as well as Austrian public reaction to western criticism, have made one thing clear: More than 40 years after the catastrophe of National Socialism, the mechanisms of forgetting and ignoring are still in full swing in Austria. Guilty for the collective inability to remember, the inability to realize Austria’s culpable involvement in the Nazi dictatorship and thus for the current neurosis, the growing anti-Semitism and anti-Americanism, are the silent Church, and particularly the political parties and the Austrian media. In the second year after Waldheim’s election - if one analyzes the structures of public communication in Austria - there is less talk than ever of dealing with history, enlightenment, or even “sad work”. Public opinion emphasizes chauvinism of the Alpine republic, hatred of Jews, and hostility toward the United States. In addition, basic media difficulties can be seen in handling the past, particularly the difficulty to make historical processes visible in the abundance of shots of current events, and the focusing of the media on what is going on here and now.

Stephen Houlgate is one of the leading Hegel scholars of the English-speaking world. In this interview he explains how he became a “Hegelian” while studying in Cambridge, and he offers a fundamental profile of his account of Hegel. The interview addresses the following questions: Why does Houlgate consider Hegel’s philosophy to be the “consummate critical philosophy”? What are the main barriers to a proper access to Hegel’s thought? Why is logic as dialectical logic still indispensable for philosophical thought? And finally, what can both analytical and “continental” philosophers learn from Hegel?

RESUMEN Largamente desatendida o malinterpretada, la noción de caos en la filosofía de Nietzsche es una pieza constitutiva de la particular concepción del ser que este autor habría dejado apenas esbozada. El artículo se propone elaborar este concepto en la obra nietzscheana, siguiendo algunas de las metáforas que lo iluminan. Desde allí se busca plantear los rasgos centrales de una ontologia del caos, de sesgo no metafísico, que, al afirmar el carácter acontecimental de la realidad, puede verse como precursora de la ontología hermenéutica contemporánea. ABSTRACT The notion of chaos, which has long been neglected or misinterpreted, is a constitutive element of a peculiar conception of being that the philosopher only had time to outline. The objective of this article is to elaborate on this concept in Nietzschean philosophy, guided by some of the metaphors that shed light on it. This serves as the basis to set forth the main characteristics of a non-metaphysical ontology of chaos that asserts the eventful nature of reality and can thus be seen as a precursor of contemporary hermeneutic ontology.

In what sense is logic relevant for self-knowledge? This question shall be addressed by virtue of an integrative concept of logic which contains formal, transcendental, and dialectical logic as necessary forms of self-interpretation of thought (I). This will disclose a teleological horizon which grounds both man's theoretical and practical self-interpretation (II). Finally, this will be fleshed out in further detail with regard to formal logic (III). /// Welche Relevanz hat Logik für die Selbsterkenntnis? In Beantwortung dieser Frage wird ein integrativer Begriff von Logik herausgestellt, der formale, transzendentale und dialektische Logik als notwendige Formen der Selbstinterpretation des Denkens fasst (I). Dabei eröffnet sich ein von der Teleologie her zu fassender Horizont, innerhalb dessen sich die theoretische wie praktische Selbst- und Weltinterpretation des Menschen bewegt (II). Dies wird in Bezug auf die formale Logik konkretisiert (III).

Facing the challenge that evolutionary ideology an its ontological implications give to philosophy, the article develops systematically the notion of the organic being in its relation towards the anorganic being within three steps, beginning with the metaphysical (Platon, Aristoteles, Leibniz) towards the transcendental (Kant) and finally the dialectic (Hegel) notion of this relation. It is shown thereby that the living as causation of itself never can be thought as derivation of the anorganic, rather has to be understood from the spirit as existing freedom and self-determination.

Philosophisch relevante Auseinandersetzungen mit Musik, die aufzuschließen vermögen, wie und unter welchen Voraussetzungen das Element der Empfindung schönheitsfähig ist, finden sich kaum. Ernest Ansermets Die Grundlagen der Musik im menschlichen Bewusstsein (1961) ist zweifellos eine solche. Ansermets zentrales Anliegen ist Begründung der Tonalität. Worin gründet die „natürlich“ erscheinende – und zugleich im 20. Jahrhundert als überholt angesehene – tonale Syntax? Wodurch unterscheidet sich diese von nachtonalen Formen? Ansermet unternimmt angesichts der musikalischen Entwicklungen des 20. Jahrhunderts eine großangelegte Apologie der Tonalität. In dieser soll aufgezeigt werden, dass die tonale Form des musikalischen Materials im „menschlichen Bewusstsein“ fundiert ist. Dabei gelangt er letztlich zu der Auffassung, dass die tonale Form der Tonhöhen- und Tondauergestaltung als Selbstvergegenständlichung des Menschen zu fassen sei. Die vorliegende Untersuchung unternimmt es, Ansermets Grundansatz und dessen Voraussetzungen sowie auch die – durchaus disparaten – Durchführungsbestimmungen in der Weise eines kritischen Kommentars zu bedenken. Der Autor Dr. Max Gottschlich ist Assistent für Philosophie am Institut für Kunstwissenschaft und Philosophie an der Katholisch-Theologischen Privatuniversität Linz.

Engaging with Kant’s transcendental logic seems to be a question of mere scholarly historical interest today. It is most commonly regarded a mixture between logic and psychology or epistemology, and by that, not a serious form of logic. Transcendental logic seems to be of no systematical impact on the concept of logic. My paper aims to disclose a different account on the endeavour of Kant’s transcendental logic in particular and of the “Critique of Pure Reason” (CPR) in general. Kant’s fundamental question is in a revolutionary way aiming to ground the character of necessity of knowledge, which means to justify the claim that thinking in accordance with the forms and principles of formal logic does not lead to sheer tautologies or an unsolved contradiction, but to knowledge that is objectively valid. In a first part, I shall demonstrate the necessity and the significance of this new fundamental question of the CPR with respect to its genesis out of pre-Kantian metaphysics. A brief outline of Kant’s answer to this question, with special emphasis on his revolutionary new comprehension of logical form, will be given as well. A second part shall open up a perspective that lies beyond Kant’s standpoint with reference to Nietzsche and eventually to Hegel. I will answer the question: What knowledge do we achieve about being or actuality by means of formal logic? I will argue that Kant shows that formal logic is the logic of all technical-practical conduct but also, at least indirectly, the limitation of the technical-practical knowledge and its legitimate sphere of application.

This article engages with Plato’s justification of art and its core category, the concept of μίμησις. It will be shown that there is a sound systematic difference between two basic meanings of μίμησις in Plato. The proper understanding of this difference has considerable bearing both on the understanding of Plato and on the philosophy of art, since it enables us to bridge two gaps: First, the gap between the standpoint of the early and middle Plato with its famous criticism of art, on the one hand, and the affirmative re-evaluation of art in the late period, on the other hand. Second, the gap between the two principal pre-modern paradigms employed in justifying art: the ontological paradigm of art as (re)presentation on the one side, and the modern paradigm of art as expression on the other side.