Search

Chapter 37 of the book "History of Italian Philosophy," Volume 1, is presented. It discusses the rebirth and decline of Italian idealism. Instead of creating philosophies of nature, the nineteenth century Italian positivism centered on creating true and proper cosmogonies. Hegelians were the mentors of many materialists and positivists in Italy. Roberto Ardig°ò's positivism faced a crisis at the end of the nineteenth century.

Chapter 35 of the book "History of Italian Philosophy," Volume 1, is presented. It highlights the work and philosophy of the Hegelians. Georg Wilhelm Friedrich Hegel was a German philosopher who was already well-known in Italy before 1848. Some of philosophers who followed Hegel were Augusto Vera, Bertrando Spaventa, Antonio Labriola and Francesco De Sanctis.

The article focuses on the influence of philosopher Karl Marx on the twentieth century literary theory and criticism in Europe. Topics discussed include the relevance of his theories on capitalism and human development to art and literature, his development from Hegelian philosophy, and his critical writings on religion, particular to the Jewish emancipation, the society, and economy. It also discusses his collaboration with philosopher Friedrich Engels.

Civic humanism is not a new topic, but it is not a small one either. The term was coined by Hans Baron in 1925, writing in German, as Bürgerhumanismus, and it is elaborated in his chief work, The Crisis of the Early Italian Renaissance (1955, 1966). The “crisis” was the challenge to republican Florence in 1402 from absolutist Milan, which was resolved or at least met by “civic humanism,” a movement of humanist orators, poets, and philosophers, hitherto unpolitical, or if political not thoroughly republican, into “civic” affairs, that is, republican partisanship. Of course the challenge had to be met in politics and on the field of battle by civic Florentines, but a “civic humanist” is, in the usage of historians, always a thinker or a writer who is shaped by, or gives shape to, the civic spirit of the city. Even though Baron tries to draw the closest connections between political or military events and the writers, thus implying that events come first, his interest is in the writers as expressions or interpreters – in those who come second. Baron defines the advent of civic humanism, coming as it does after a crisis, as a “break” between Francesco Petrarch's uncivic humanism of the Trecento and Leonardo Bruni's civic humanism of the Quattrocento. Almost immediately after speaking of a break, Baron refers to a “gradual process of fusion” leading from Coluccio Salutati and Filippo Villani to Bruni, and then immediately recoils from that concession, doubting that there could be fusion between citizens of a republic and aloof scholars or courtiers of a tyrant. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

SOME FACTS The historical facts are not difficult to summarise. Various European countries have seen the control of the law pass through various hands, i.e. those of the judiciary, the legislature, or the schools. This is not to say, of course, that there were periods or countries where one such controlled the law exclusively: there has always been some case law, some legislation and some writing about legal matters. Only the fully feudalised era of say the tenth and eleventh centuries on the continent was almost totally devoid of legislation and legal learning. Certain periods and countries, however, have witnessed so marked a preponderance of one of these groups of people that it could be considered the essential ‘maker of the law’. Thus it is clear that the common law was judge-made, that medieval and modern Roman law (which could be called the neo-Roman law of western Europe) was professor-made and that an enormous mass of French revolutionary law was legislator-made. The reader will notice that there is here a connection with the traditional theory of the ‘sources of the law’. These, as every undergraduate knows, are custom (as fixed and formulated by judgments), legislation and jurisprudence. However, ‘custom’ and ‘case law’, ‘legislation’ and ‘jurisprudence’ will not be treated as abstract intellectual entities, but investigated as the voices of certain groups of people expressing particular social and political forces in society. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The globe as subject With few exceptions, historians of science have paid little attention to a major branch of natural philosophy in the eighteenth century: the science of the system of the earth and its products. Distinguished general surveys, such as those of Dampier, Singer, Hall, Gillispie and Taton, have no connected analysis of the sciences of the terraqueous globe. The volume Natural Philosophy through the Eighteenth Century barely mentions the physical environment. Most historians of science are still writing (sometimes Whiggish) ‘tunnel histories’, tracing the progress of modern scientific disciplines, rather than exploring the cognitive landscapes of the past. And much scholarship in this field remains stubbornly biographical rather than problem-oriented. Why has there been this neglect of the sciences of the physical environment, of the earth as such? It is partly a reflection of the focusing down of science itself, where formerly dominant all-embracing frameworks, like the Great Chain of Being, have splintered into specialties like palaeobotany and seismology. It is partly also a response to persuasive philosophies of science. Ever since the influential classifications of natural knowledge by Comte, J. S. Mill and Jevons, leading philosophers have argued that the ideal science is one of universal categories, amenable to abstraction and quantification. Thus physics rather than the ‘extensive’ environmental sciences becomes their model. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Why read Marx at all? Why take any notice of his biographical circumstances? Why read his works in historical context? Why should it matter reading one edition or translation rather than another? In order to answer these questions we must first address some general issues about reading. The terms that characterize biographical narrative and bibliographical advice are all too familiar, and this is particularly so in the case of Marx, as the story of his life is well established and the list of standard works very well known. Familiarity is no excuse for leaving these terms unexamined, however, and I shall put my own discussion of Marx into perspective. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The article presents the author's reflection on Hegelianism and the Hegelian system followed in England.

The article explores the impossibility of pure disjunction with the help of the Hegelianism. Topics discussed include information on the split between two dialectics into the quality and quantity used for legitimately naming the infinite multiplicities; discussions on the philisopher, Georg Wilhelm Friedrich Hegel's concept of not rejoining the infinity; and the maintaining the continuity of the dialectic.,.