Fakultät für Philosophie, Wissenschaftstheorie und Religionswissenschaft

Links und Funktionen



Lehrveranstaltungen Wintersemester 2019-2020


Tiere in der Geschichte der Philosophie

Do. 12:00 bis 14:00 c.t. woch 17.10.2019 bis 06.02.2020 Geschw.-Scholl-Pl. 1 (D) - D 209

Diese Vorlesung wird philosophische Themen, die mit nichtmenschlichen Tieren zu tun haben, mit Hinblick auf verschiedene Epochen und Kulturen behandeln: griechische und römische Antike, antikes Indien, traditionelle afrikanische Philosophie, und europäische Philosophie vom Mittelalter bis zur frühen Neuzeit. Wir werden zwei Hauptfragen stellen. Erstens, welche ethischen Theorien wurden in diesen Kulturen entwickelt, um die typische Behandlung von Tieren entweder zu rechtfertigen oder in Frage zu stellen? Zweitens, welche mentalen Kapazitäten wurden Tieren zugeschrieben? Unter den Autoren, und Texten die tiefer behandelt werden, sind Platon, Aristoteles, Porphyrios, die Upanishaden, der buddhistische Kanon, islamische Denker wie Abu Bakr al-Razi und Avicenna, mittelalterliche Scholastiker wie Albertus Magnus, und später in der europäischen Tradition Descartes und Kant.

Mit Nachdruck vorgeschlagen:

Adamson, P. and Edwards, G.F. (eds), Animals: a History. New York: Oxford University Press, 2018.

Andere Literatur:

  • Adamson, P. “The Ethical Treatment of Animals,” in R. C. Taylor and L. X. López-Farjeat (eds.), Routledge Companion to Islamic Philosophy. London: Routledge, 2015, 371–82.
  • N. Balbir and G.-J. Pinault (eds.), Penser, dire et representer l’animal dans le monde indien. Paris: Honoré Champion, 2009
  • Broadie, A., and Pybus, E. M. “Kant’s Treatment of Animals,” Philosophy 49 (1974), 375–83.
  • Chapple, C. K. Nonviolence to Animals, Earth and Self in Asian Traditions. Albany: State University of New York Press 1993.
  • Cottingham, J. “‘A Brute to the Brutes?’ Descartes’ Treatment of Animals,” Philosophy 53 (1978), 551–9.
  • Dalal, N., and Taylor, C. (eds.), Asian Perspectives on Animal Ethics: Rethinking the Nonhuman. New York: Routledge, 2014.
  • Denis, L. “Kant’s Conception of Duties Regarding Animals: Reconstruction and Reconsideration,” History of Philosophy Quarterly 17 (2000), 405–23.
  • Ebert, R. and Roba, A. (eds), Africa and Her Animals: Philosophical and Practical Perspectives. Pretoria: University of South Africa Press, 2018.
  • Edwards, G. F. “The Purpose of Porphyry’s Rational Animals: A Dialectical Attack on the Stoics in On Abstinence from Animal Food,” in R. Sorabji (ed.), Aristotle Re-Interpreted: New Findings on Seven Hundred Years of the Ancient Commentators. London: Bloomsbury, 2016, 263–90.
  • Foltz, R. C. Animals in Islamic tradition and Muslim cultures. Oxford: Oneworld, 2006.
  • Garrett, A. “Animals and Ethics in the History of Modern Philosophy,” T. L. Beauchamp and R. G. Frey (eds.), The Oxford Handbook on Ethics and Animals. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2011, 61–87.
  • Gilhus, I. S. Animals Gods and Humans: Changing Attitudes Towards Animals in Greek, Roman and Early Christian Ideas. London: Routledge, 2006.
  • Horstemke, K. Animals and African Ethics. New York: Macmillan, 2015.
  • Kain, P. “Duties Regarding Animals,” L. Denis (ed.), Kant’s Metaphysics of Morals: A Critical Guide. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2010, 210–33.
  • Kruk, R. “Ibn Sina on Animals: Between the First Teacher and the Physician,” in J. L. Janssens and D. De Smet (eds.), Avicenna and His Heritage. Leuven: Leuven University Press, 2002, 325–41.
  • López-Farjeat, L. X. “Avicenna on Non-Conceptual Content and Self-awareness in Non-Human Animals,” in J. Kaukua and T. Ekenberg (eds.), Medieval and Early Modern Approaches to Cognitive and Moral Psychology. Dordrecht: Springer, 2016, 61–73.
  • McDermott, J. P. “Animals and Humans in Early Buddhism,” Indo-Iranian Journal 32 (1989), 269–80.
  • P. Münch (ed.), Tiere und Menschen: Geschichte eines prekären Verhältnisses. Paderborn: Ferdinand Schöningh, 1998
  • Muratori, C. (ed.), The Animal Soul and the Human Mind: Renaissance Debates. Pisa-Rome: Serra, 2013.
  • Naragon, S. “Kant on Descartes and the Brutes,” Kant-Studien 81 (1990), 1–23.
  • Nelson, L. “Cows, Elephants, Dogs, and Other Lesser Embodiments of Atman: Reflections on Hindu Attitudes toward Nonhuman Animals,” in K. Patton and P. Waldau (eds.), A Communion of Subjects. New York: Columbia University Press, 2009, 179–93.
  • Newmyer, S. T. Animals in Greek and Roman Thought: A Sourcebook. London: Routledge, 2011.
  • Osborne, C. Dumb Beasts and Dead Philosophers: Humanity and the Humane in Ancient Philosophy and Literature. Oxford: Clarendon, 2007.
  • Perler, D. “Why Is the Sheep Afraid of the Wolf? Medieval Debates on Animal Passions,” in M. Pickavé and L. Shapiro (eds.), Emotion and Cognitive Life in Medieval and Early Modern Philosophy. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2012, 32–52.
  • Roberts, A. F. Animals in African Arts: From the Familiar to the Marvelous. Munich: Prestel, 1995.
  • Sorabji, R. Animal Minds and Human Morals: The Origins of the Western Debate. Ithaca: Cornell University Press, 1993.
  • Steiner, G. Anthropocentrism and Its Discontents: The Moral Status of Animals in the History of Western Philosophy. Pittsburgh: University of Pittsburgh Press, 2005.
  • Timmermann, J. “When the Tail Wags the Dog: Animal Welfare and Indirect Duty in Kantian Ethics,” Kantian Review 10 (2005), 128–49.
  • Walters, K., and Portmess, L. Ethical Vegetarianism: From Pythagoras to Peter Singer. Albany: State University of New York Press, 1999.

Fortgeschrittenenseminar (zus. mit Dr. Hansberger, Rotraud)

al-Razi, Doubts About Galen

Di. 10:00 bis 12:00 c.t. woch 15.10.2019 bis 04.02.2020 in MusaPH (Leopoldstr. 11b, 4. Stock, Raum 433)

In this seminar we will read selections from Doubts About Galen (Shukuk ‘ala Jalinus), on the basis of a recently appeared edition by Pauline Koetschet. This work may at first seem to be a critique of Galen’s medical theories by his fellow doctor, Abu Bakr al-Razi (d.925 CE), it is in fact full of philosophical material on topics ranging from the eternity of the world to epistemology, from the nature of vision to atomism. In our seminar we will read selections of the more philosophically intriguing material; participants will take it in turns to read the Arabic and translate into English, so competence in these languages is a prerequisite for participation.

Primary text:

  • Doutes sur Galien, ed. and trans. P. Koetschet (Berlin: De Gruyter, 2019).

Secondary literature:

  • P. Adamson, “Galen and Abu Bakr al-Razi on Time,” in Medieval Arabic Thought: Essays in Honour of Fritz Zimmermann, ed. R. Hansberger and C. Burnett (London: Warburg Institute, 2012a), 1-14.
  • P. Adamson, “Abu Bakr Al-Razi,” in H. Eichner and M. Perkams (eds), Handbuch der islamischen Philosophie (Darmstadt: 2013), 199-217.
  • A.Z. Iskandar, “Al-Razi al-ṭabib al-ʾikliniki ,” Al-Mashreq (1962), 217–82 ; English trans. by Z. and P.E. Pormann in P.E. Pormann (ed.), Islamic Medical and Scientific Tradition, Critical Concepts in Islamic Studies, 4 vols (London: 2011), vol. 1, 207–53.
  • P. Koetschet, “Galien, al-Razi, et l’éternité du monde. Les fragment du traité Sur la Démonstration IV, dans les Doutes sur Galien,” Arabic Sciences and Philosophy 25 (2015), 167-98.
  • M. Mohaghegh, The Kitab al-Shukuk ‘ala Jalinus of Muhammad ibn Zakariyya al-Razi, in W.B. Hallaq and D.P. Little, Islamic Studies Presented to Charles J. Adams (Leiden: Brill, 1991), 107-116.
  • A.M. Mokhtar, Rhases contra Galenum. Die Galenkritik in den ersten zwanzig Büchern des “Continens” von Ibn [sic] ar-Razi, Bonn PhD, 1969.
  • G. Strohmaier, “Bekannte und unbekannte zitate in den Zwiefeln an Galen des Rhazes,” in K.D. Fischer, D. Nickel and P. Potter (eds), Text and Tradition (Leiden: 1998), 263-89.


Plethon, On the Difference Between Plato and Aristotle

Do. 10:00 bis 12:00 c.t. woch 17.10.2019 bis 06.02.2020 in MusaPH (Leopoldstr. 11b, 4. Stock, Raum 433)

In this seminar we will read a notorious work by the most notorious thinker of the Byzantine philosophical tradition, George Gemithos, also known as Plethon. Often thought to have diverged from Christian belief in order to embrace Neoplatonic paganism, Plethon also caused outrage (and provoked a refutation from his contemporary Scholarios) by attacking the great Aristotle and accusing him of unjustified and disloyal departure from the teachings of his own master, Plato. Topics highlighted in the work include the question of whether God is a creator of the world, as Plato believed, or simply an intellective mover, as Aristotle taught, and whether Aristotle was right to reject Plato’s theory of Forms. The work is important not only for an understanding of Neoplatonism and its reception in late Byzantium but also as a forerunner of developments of the Italian Renaissance, notably the similar dispute between Plethon’s student Bessarion and a critic of Plato, George Trapezuntius. We will read the work in English translation but with reference to the Greek text, so facility in both languages is recommended for participants.

Primary text:

• B. Bydén, “George Gemistos (Plethon), On Aristotle’s Departures from Plato 0-19,” in B. Bydén and C.T. Thörnqvist (eds), The Aristotelian Tradition: Aristotle’s Works on Logic and Metaphysics and Their Reception in the Middle Ages (Toronto: 2017), 267-344

Secondary literature:

• V. Hladký, The Philosophy of Gemistos Plethon: Platonism in Late Byzantium, between Hellenism and Orthodoxy (Ashgate: 2014).

• G. Karamanolis, “Plethon and Scholarios on Aristotle,” in K. Ierodiakonou (ed.), Byzantine Philosophy and Its Ancient Sources (Oxford: 2002), 253-82.

• F. Masai, Pléthon et le Platonisme de Mistra (Paris: 1956).

• N. Siniossoglou, Radical Platonism in Byzantium: Illumination and Utopia in Gemistos Plethon (Cambridge: 2011).

• B. Tambrun, Pléthon: Le retour de Platon (Paris: 2006).

• C.M. Woodhouse, George Gemistos Plethon: the Last of the Hellenes (Oxford: 1986).

Oberseminar (zus. mit Prof. Dr. Oliver Primavesi und Dr. Philipp Brüllmann)

Ancient Philosophy: Research Seminar

Di. 12:00 bis 14:00 c.t. woch 15.10.2019 bis 04.02.2020 in MusaPH (Leopoldstr. 11b, 4. Stock, Raum 433)

This semester the research seminar on ancient Greek philosophy will look at the fragments of the Presocratic philosopher Empedocles. Participants will take it in turn to present selections from the fragments, in each case discussing the context in which these fragments are transmitted, which will mean looking at the way Aristotle and later ancient thinkers reacted to and understood Empedocles.

Primary texts

• G.S. Kirk, J.E. Raven and M. Schofield (eds), The Presocratic Philosophers: A Critical History with a Selection of Texts (1983).

• A. Laks and G. Most, Early Greek Philosophy, 9 vols (Cambridge MA: 2016).

• O. Primavesi and J. Mansfeld, Die Vorsokratiker: griechisch - deutsch (Stuttgart: 2011).

Secondary literature

• P. Curd, “A New Empedocles? Implications of the Strasburg Fragments for Presocratic Philosophy,” Proceedings of the Boston Area Colloquium in Ancient Philosophy 17 (2001), 27-50.

• X. Gheerbrant, Empédocle: une poétique philosphique (Paris: 2017).

• D.W. Graham, “Symmetry in the Empedoclean Cycle,” Classical Quarterly 38 (1988), 297-312.

• B. Inwood, The Poem of Empedocles (Toronto: 1992).

• A. Martin and O. Primavesi, L'Empédocle de Strasbourg (Berlin: 1999).

• D. O’Brien, Empedocles’ Cosmic Cycle (Cambridge: 1969).

• D. O’Brien, “Empedocles Revisited,” Ancient Philosophy 15 (1995), 403–470.

• O. Primavesi, “The Structure of Empedocles’ Cosmic Cycle: Aristotle and the Byzantine Anonymous,” in A.L. Pierris (ed.), The Empedoclean Kosmos: Structure, Process and the Question of Cyclicity (Patras: Institute for Philosophical Research, 2005), 245-64.

• M.R. Wright, Empedocles: the Extant Fragments (New Haven: 1981)



Do. 14:00 bis 16:00 c.t. woch 17.10.2019 bis 06.02.2020 in MusaPH (Leopoldstr. 11b, 4. Stock, Raum 433)