• PhilPapers
  • PhilPeople
  • PhilArchive
  • PhilEvents
  • PhilJobs
  • Sign in
PhilPeople
 
  • Sign in
  • News Feed
  • Find Philosophers
  • Departments
  • Radar
  • Help
 
profile-cover
Drag to reposition
profile picture

Yuliya Fadeeva

University of Vienna
  •  Home
  •  Publications
    7
    • Most Recent
    • Most Downloaded
    • Topics
  •  News and Updates
    2

 More details
University of Vienna
Department of Philosophy
PhD, 2019
Areas of Interest
Epistemology
Philosophy of Mind
20th Century Philosophy
  • All publications (7)
  • Sine ira et studio: Disziplinenübergreifende Annäherungen an die zwischenmenschliche Kommunikation (edited book)
  •  31
    Inkommensurabilität von Begriffsschemata: Kritik der Idee einer Verstehensgrenze
    Velbrück. 2019.
    Donald DavidsonLudwig WittgensteinPhilosophy of Language
  •  49
    Haben Tiere ein phänomenales Bewusstsein? Zwei repräsentationalistische Antworten
    Shaker. 2013.
    Phenomenal ConceptsRepresentationalismAnimal Ethics
  • Zu „radikale Interpretation“ – Kommunikation und Großzügigkeit bei Donald Davidson
    In Sine ira et studio: Disziplinenübergreifende Annäherungen an die zwischenmenschliche Kommunikation. pp. 69-94. 2019.
    Donald Davidson
  •  105
    Wittgenstein on Understanding Religious Beliefs: Some Remarks against Incommensurability and Scepticism
    Wittgenstein-Studien 11 (1): 53-78. 2020.
    Wittgenstein’s writings on religious and magical beliefs, especially the “Lectures on Religious Belief” and “Remarks on Frazer’s Golden Bough” are taken to imply semantic incommensurability and inaccessibility by the Wittgensteinian Fideism and, in part, the expressivist interpretation. According to these interpretations, religious and non-religious discourses are self-contained, closed, and not intertranslatable. Wittgenstein is taken to deny mutual understanding between believers and non-belie…Read more
    Wittgenstein’s writings on religious and magical beliefs, especially the “Lectures on Religious Belief” and “Remarks on Frazer’s Golden Bough” are taken to imply semantic incommensurability and inaccessibility by the Wittgensteinian Fideism and, in part, the expressivist interpretation. According to these interpretations, religious and non-religious discourses are self-contained, closed, and not intertranslatable. Wittgenstein is taken to deny mutual understanding between believers and non-believers with respect to religious and magical discourse. I argue against such interpretations and support readings by Kusch, Schroeder, and Tripodi that are optimistic of the possibility of mutual understanding. Nevertheless, there is a danger of scepticism for such optimistic readings when they refer to a special attitude that is needed to understand religious belief and speech. I offer a reply to this problem and suggest to see Wittgenstein’s stance on understanding religious discourse in a greater proximity to his general views about language in his later writings. Then, however, any fideist view of the religious form of life as self-contained and isolated from the non-religious has to be repudiated.
    Ludwig WittgensteinBeliefEpistemology of Religion, MiscFaithReligious StudiesReligious Skepticism
  •  74
    Ben Bramble, Bob Fischer The Moral Complexities of Eating Meat.: Oxford University Press, 2016. ISBN 9780199353903, Hardback, 24,95 $
    Ethical Theory and Moral Practice 19 (5): 1333-1335. 2016.
    Value TheoryVegetarianism
  •  66
    Niklas Forsberg, Mikel Burley and Nora Hämäläinen : Language, Ethics, and Animal Life. Wittgenstein and Beyond: Bloomsbury Academic, London/new Delhi/new York/sydney 2014 , ISBN 9781628922363, 248 pages, £ 19,99
    Ethical Theory and Moral Practice 18 (5): 1111-1113. 2015.
    Value TheoryLudwig WittgensteinValue Theory, Miscellaneous
PhilPeople logo

On this site

  • Find a philosopher
  • Find a department
  • The Radar
  • Index of professional philosophers
  • Index of departments
  • Help
  • Acknowledgments
  • Careers
  • Contact us
  • Terms and conditions

Brought to you by

  • The PhilPapers Foundation
  • The American Philosophical Association
  • Centre for Digital Philosophy, Western University
PhilPeople is currently in Beta Sponsored by the PhilPapers Foundation and the American Philosophical Association
Feedback