The thesis reconstructs Carl Schmitt's 1956 monography on 'Hamlet'. By scanning and unearthing books, essays, think-pieces, articles, personal diaries and private correspondence, this investigation... Show moreThe thesis reconstructs Carl Schmitt's 1956 monography on 'Hamlet'. By scanning and unearthing books, essays, think-pieces, articles, personal diaries and private correspondence, this investigation fully addresses the unwritten philosophy of history -partially developed- in Schmitt's late thought. The question of tragedy, theater, art and myth are also discussed. Show less
In this paper I first set out the role of common notions in the structure of Alexander’s argument in Mixt. V–VI. Furthermore, I argue that a series of topics discussed in Mixt. V–VI, Mant. XIV and... Show moreIn this paper I first set out the role of common notions in the structure of Alexander’s argument in Mixt. V–VI. Furthermore, I argue that a series of topics discussed in Mixt. V–VI, Mant. XIV and Quaest. II.12 concern the initial stages of Stoic as well as Peripatetic blending rather than the resulting blend. The presence of certain types of (filled) pores and changes in density both facilitate mutual division; mutual divi- sion and coextension go hand in hand until a degree of juxtaposition of ingredients is reached which easily allows for the specific interaction that creates the final blend: interaction of qualities for the Peripatetics, tensional dynamics for the Stoics. In addition, I show that a list of stock examples used by Alexander also raises serious questions concerning changes in density and volume, which Aristotle, Alexander and the Stoics had to deal with. I suggest that the role of pores found in Meteorology IV may have been part of the solution for some of Alexander’s contemporaries. Throughout the arguments in the chapters V–VI, indeed throughout the De mixtione, Alexander consistently tries to replace a comprehensive materialist metaphysics of interacting bodies by his own equally comprehensive brand of hylomorphism—even if not every argument is equally convincing. Show less
In this chapter, I have attempted to reconstruct part of the debate on hylomorph- ism in which Alexander of Aphrodisias participated, insofar as it emerges from Alexander’s Quaestiones and Mantissa... Show moreIn this chapter, I have attempted to reconstruct part of the debate on hylomorph- ism in which Alexander of Aphrodisias participated, insofar as it emerges from Alexander’s Quaestiones and Mantissa 5. The debate addresses Physics I-IL1 and the distinctions in the Categories that Aristotle used in that context. Alexander takes away from the debate that he needs to situate his discussion of the relation between soul and body into a general theory of hylomorphism in which form and matter need each other, both for their existence and their definition. It also needs argument that soul is the form and actuality of the body so as to apply the general theory to this paradigm case, and to further apply hylomorphism to the levels and powers of soul. The story culminates in the application of hylomorphism to the development of dispositional intellect, in which Alexander combines Phys. VII.3, De An. II.5, and APo 11.19 with the view of form as completion (teleiotes). The intellect of accomplished knowers comes out as the sum total of knowable things, This is the pinnacle of hylomorphism as a physical, metaphysical, and epistemo- logical theory. As such it is also a perfect example of how Alexander innovatives by connecting Aristotelian dots in unprecedented ways. Show less
Most of us believe that it would be unjust to act with indifference about the plight of future generations. Zipper arguments in intergenerational justice aim to show that we have duties of justice ...Show moreMost of us believe that it would be unjust to act with indifference about the plight of future generations. Zipper arguments in intergenerational justice aim to show that we have duties of justice regarding future generations, regardless of whether we have duties of justice to future generations. By doing so, such arguments circumvent the foundational challenges that come with theorising duties to remote future generations, which result from the non-existence, non-identity and non-contemporaneity of future generations. I argue that zipper arguments face several significant challenges. The ought-implies-can challenge points out that because prior generations determine what later generations can transfer, they determine how much they ought to transfer. In addition, both intentional and non-intentional non-compliance can break the chain of duties towards future generations on which zipper arguments rely. Some versions are surprisingly resilient especially in real-world circumstances. This paper does not show that zipper arguments inevitably fail, but all ways forward come at significant theoretical costs. Unless the challenges posed here are met (or shown as irrelevant), theorists of justice cannot side-track the foundational challenges that come with doing intergenerational justice. Show less
There are two notions of intentionality: the first contains the thesis that our acts of thinking, judging and loving have a content; the second that our mental acts are about something external to... Show moreThere are two notions of intentionality: the first contains the thesis that our acts of thinking, judging and loving have a content; the second that our mental acts are about something external to the act. Brentano uses the term ‘intentionality’ only in relation to the first notion; for him, intentionality does not function as a bridge between the mind and the external world. Is it possible for a phenomenologist like Brentano to give an account of the second notion of intentionality? It is argued that this is possible, but not without introducing the notion of judgement. A comparison with Mill’s distinction between connotation and denotation, and with Frege’s distinction between sense and reference shows how original Brentano’s theory is. Show less
Bitcoin was invented to serve as a digital currency that demands no trust in financial institutions, such as commercial and central banks. This paper discusses metaphysical aspects of bitcoin, in... Show moreBitcoin was invented to serve as a digital currency that demands no trust in financial institutions, such as commercial and central banks. This paper discusses metaphysical aspects of bitcoin, in particular the view that bitcoin is socially constructed, non-concrete, and genuinely exists. If bitcoin is socially constructed, then one may worry that this reintroduces trust in the communities responsible for the social construction. Although we may have to rely on certain communities, I argue that social construction doesn’t imply a demand for trust because the relevant communities don’t take on any relevant commitments. Bitcoin is indeed trust-free. Show less
