Why are we basically and regularly often only informed about the positive aspects of KANT? What about his opinion towards women? What about his scientific contemporary Prof Dr Anton Wilhelm AMO? What did KANT, HUME, et al, think of Afro-americans? What was KANT's, HEGEL's, or ROUSSEAU's opinion towards the Jewish minority? Why are students of law, e.g. in Vienna, be it at the University of Vienna, be it at the Vienna university of Economics and Business Adminstration, still often only "informed" about positive sides, not any shadows of KANT, often called the "master of critical (!) thinking"?
Inhaltsverzeichnis (Table of Contents)
- Introduction
- „Cultural“ studies, „ethics“, and KANT!?
- Introduction with BERNHARD, KEHLMANN, LEVINAS et al?
- Frank STERN, „PINK“, „Advanced Chemistry“?
- Prof Dr Frank STERN, KANT, and Orhan Küçükyılmaz?
- „Tenor(s)“ of the study
- („Holy“?) Bartolomé DE LAS CASAS
- Who was DE LAS CASAS?
- DE LAS CASAS and human rights „development“!?
- Juan LATINO (Juan DE SESA)
- Who was Juan LATINO?
- LATINO: unknown to KANT?!
- Anton Wilhelm AMO
- Who was Anton Wilhelm AMO?
- What to learn from Anton Wilhelm AMO?
- Anton Wilhelm AMO and „universities“ today? .....
- Anton Wilhelm AMO and his emigration?..\li>
- AMO and the „Ding an sich“ (noumenon)?
- NTEP on AMO and implications?
- AMO: unknown to KANT!?
- David HUME
- „Enlightening“ David HUME at „WU WIEN“?
- Gilles DELEUZE on HUME?
- HAYEK and „unser weiser Führer“ David HUME?
- DAIRE and MOLINARI on HUME?
- Gerhard STREMINGER on HUME?
- DER NEUE BROCKHAUS (1959) on HUME?
- Race/“Rasse“; „Rassengesetze“; Racism/“Rassismus“
- Definition of „Rasse“ with BROCKHAUS?
- Definition of „Races of men“ by SHAPIRO/PARSONS?
- Definition of „Rasse“ with BROCKHAUS?
- Definition of „Rassismus“ with BROCKHAUS?
- KANT on „ethics“, „aesthetics“, and „race“.
- KANT on Africo-American people anno 1764 (1766)?
- KANT on „Frauenzimmer“ (women) anno 1766 (1764)?.
- Again: KANT on Afro-americans anno 1766 (1764)?
- KLEIN on KANT’s „scharfe Beobachtungsgabe“?
- Wolbert G. C. SMIDT on KANTs „Erhabenes“?
- Patrick FRIERSON on KANTS „Erhabenes“?
- Monika FIRLA on KANT and „Zeitgeist“ - fiction?
- GRABNER-HAIDER/WEINKE on KANT?
- VOLPI/NIDA-RÜMELIN on KANT?
- PONGS (1976) on KANT?
- KLOPFER (2008) on KANT and „Pietismus“!?
- KANT, Afro-americans and „phlogiston“ anno 1785?
- (Sir) Isaiah BERLIN on KANT?
- BERLIN on KANT’s „scharfer und äußerst klarer Verstand“?
- KANT: „Meister der Architektonik der Vernunft“(GADAMER)?
- WIMMER on KANT and Wilhelm Anton AMO?..
- Helmut FUCHS on KANT?
- Christof MÜLLER on KANT?
- Nikolaus FRANKE on KANT?
- Anna GAMPER on KANT ?
- Fritz SCHEBECK on KANT?
- PERTHOLD/SPITZER/WALLNER on KANT?..
- Thomas OLECHOWSKI on KANT?
- Gerhard LUF on KANT?
- Again: Gerhard LUF on KANT?
- Alexander SOMEK on KANT, HEGEL and ROUSSEAU? .
- RÜPING/JEROUSCHEK on KANT?
- Fritz SCHEBECK on KANT?
- PERTHOLD/SPITZER/WALLNER on KANT?..
- Thomas OLECHOWSKI on KANT?
- Alexander SOMEK on KANT, HEGEL and ROUSSEAU?
- RÜPING/JEROUSCHEK on KANT?
- KANT on „Frauenzimmer“ (women)
- In the wake of a „mir san mir“-mentality?..
- Therese Frey STEFFEN on KANT?
- Again: KANT on „Frauenzimmer“ (women) anno 1766 ?
- Again: Therese Frey STEFFEN on KANT?
- HEGEL
- RÜPING/JEROUSCHEK on HEGEL?
- COOTER/ULEN on HEGEL?
- Franz Martin WIMMER on HEGEL?
- Karl LARENZ and the NS-regime
- Karl LARENZ on KANT?
- RÜPING/JEROUSCHEK on LARENZ?..
- Thomas OLECHOWSKI on LARENZ?
- Thomas HOEREN on „Ur-Vater“ LARENZ? .
- „High quality“? - FAZ, HOEREN, and „Ur-Vater“ LARENZ?
Zielsetzung und Themenschwerpunkte (Objectives and Key Themes)
This work aims to provide a critical analysis of the presentation of white, male philosophers to students in Austria, specifically focusing on the inclusion (or exclusion) of thinkers like KANT, HUME, and HEGEL. It delves into the historical and contemporary context of this pedagogical approach, examining its potential impact on the understanding of ethical and philosophical concepts. Here are some of the key themes explored in this work:- The influence of white, male philosophers on ethical and philosophical discourse in Austria.
- The significance of historical context in understanding the philosophical contributions of various thinkers.
- The need for a more inclusive approach to the study of philosophy, incorporating diverse perspectives and voices.
- The potential impact of an exclusive focus on specific philosophical traditions on students' understanding and critical thinking.
Zusammenfassung der Kapitel (Chapter Summaries)
The chapters in this work explore the representation of various philosophers and thinkers within the context of Austrian education. While delving into the contributions of figures like KANT, HUME, and HEGEL, the work also highlights the exclusion of other important voices, such as those of Bartolomé DE LAS CASAS, Juan LATINO, and Anton Wilhelm AMO. The chapters delve into the philosophical contributions of each figure, their historical context, and their relevance to contemporary discourse. They examine the portrayal of these thinkers in educational settings, analyzing the potential biases and omissions that may arise from an exclusive focus on a limited set of philosophers.Schlüsselwörter (Keywords)
This work focuses on the themes of ethics, philosophy, education, and cultural studies in the context of Austria. It explores the influence of specific philosophers, such as KANT, HUME, and HEGEL, while highlighting the need for a more inclusive approach that incorporates diverse perspectives and voices. Key terms include: historical context, philosophical discourse, critical thinking, pedagogical approaches, representation, inclusion, and exclusion.
Final del extracto de 85 páginas
- subir
- Citar trabajo
- Mag. Georg Schilling (Autor), 2009, (Universal/University) „ethics“ with Kant, Hume, Hegel, Rousseau et al.?, Múnich, GRIN Verlag, https://www.grin.com/document/137703
Leer eBook
