The polemic between Leonard Nelson and Ernst Cassirer on the critical method in the philosophy



Abstract

The subject of the paper is a polemic between Leonard Nelson and Ernst Cassirer mainly concerning the understanding of the critical method in philosophy. Nelson refutes the accusation of psychologism and attacks the core of the philosophy of the Marburg School of New-Kantianism. In response to those allegations, Cassirer feels obliged to defend the position of his masters and performs this task brilliantly. The present paper considers similarities and differences in the positions of both sides in this polemic. I try to evaluate the arguments of both sides. I argue that both sides took basically the same positions and existing discrepancies did not justify such an intense polemic. If the disputing sides had approached the discussions in a less emotional way, it could have led to substantive and interesting conclusions.


Aster, E., Geschichte der Philosophie, Aufl. 2. Stuttgart 1935;

Biagioli, F., Introduzione, in: Ernst Cassirer - Leonard Nelson. Una controversia sul metodo critico, ed. F. Biagioli, Morcelliana 2011;

Cassirer, E., Das Erkenntnisproblem in der Philosophie und Wissenschaft der neueren Zeit, in: Das Erkenntnisproblem in der Philosophie und Wissenschaft der neueren Zeit, Gesammelte Werke, vol. 2, Hamburger Ausgabe, Darmstadt 2004;

Cassirer, E., Der kritische Idealismus und die Philosophie des »gesunden Menschenverstandes« (1906), in: Aufsätze und kleine Schriften (1902-1921), Gesammelte Werke, vol. 9, Hamburger Ausgabe, Darmstadt 2004;

Cassirer, E., Neo-Kantianism, in: Encyclopedia Britannica. A New Survey of Universal Knowledge, vol. 16. Mushroom to Ozonides. Chicago–London–Toronto 1946;

Cohen, H., Kants Theorie der Erfahrung, 2nd ed., Berlin 1885;

Cohen, H., System der Philosophie. Theil 1: Logik der reinen Erkenntnis, Berlin 1902;

Gadacz, T., Historia filozofii XX wieku: nurty. Neokantyzm, filozofia egzystencji, filozofia dialogu, vol. 2. Kraków 2009;

Holzhey, H. (ed.), Natorp an Görland, in: Cohen und Natorp. Der Marburger Neukantianismus in Quellen. Zeugnisse kritischer Lektüre, Briefe der Marburger, Dokumente zur Philosophiepolitik der Schule, vol. 2, Basel/Stuttgart 1986;

Holzhey, H., Einleitung, in: H. Cohen, Werke, vol. 6, Hildesheim/Zürich/New York 2005;

Kononowicz, T./ Waszczenko, P., Wstęp, in: L. Nelson: O sztuce filozofowania, Kraków 1994;

Nelson, L., Die kritische Methode und das Verhältnis der Psychologie zur Philosophie: Ein Kapitel aus der Methodenlehre, Sonderdruck aus den „Abhandlungen der Fries”chen Schule“, Göttingen 1904;

Nelson, L., Die kritische Methode und das Verhältnis der Psychologie zur Philosophie: Ein Kapitel aus der Methodenlehre, in: Gesammelte Schriften in neun Bänden: Die Schule der kritischen Philosophie und ihre Methode, vol. 1, Hamburg 1970;

Nelson, L., Die Unmöglichkeit der Erkenntnistheorie. Vortrag gehalten am 11. April 1911 auf dem 4. internationalen Kongress für Philosophie in Bologna, „Abhandlungen der Fries’schen Schule. Neue Folge” (3) 1912;

Nelson, L., Hermann Cohen: System der Philosophie. 1. Teil: Logik der reinen Erkenntnis, „Göttingische gelehrte Anzeigen” (167) no 8 1905;

Nelson, L., Jakob Friedrich Fries und seine jüngsten Kritiker, Göttingen 1905;

Nelson, L., Rezension von Hermann Cohen: System der Philosophie. 1. Teil: Logik der reinen Erkenntnis, in: Gesammelte Schriften in neun Bänden: Geschichte und Kritik der Erkenntnistheorie, vol. 2, 1973;

Nelson, L., Untersuchungen zur Entwicklungsgeschichte der Kantischen Erkenntnistheorie, „Abhandlungen der Fries’schen Schule. Neue Folge” (3) no 1 1912;

Nelson, L., Untersuchungen zur Entwicklungsgeschichte der Kantischen Erkenntnistheorie, in: Gesammelte Schriften in neun Bänden: Geschichte und Kritik der Erkenntnistheorie, vol. 2, 1973;

Noras, A.J., Historia neokantyzmu, Katowice 2012;

Oberer, H., Transzendentalsphäre und konkrete Subjektivität. Ein zentrales Thema der neueren Transzendentalphilosophie, in: Materialien zur Neukantianismus-Diskusion, ed. H.-L. Ollig, Darmstadt 1987;

Österreich, T.K. (ed.), Friedrich Überwegs »Grundriss der Geschichte der Philosophie«. Bd. 4. Die deutsche Philosophie des 19. Jahrhunderts und der Gegenwart, ed. 12., Berlin 1923;

Download

Published : 2016-04-19


KubalicaT. (2016). The polemic between Leonard Nelson and Ernst Cassirer on the critical method in the philosophy. Folia Philosophica, 35. Retrieved from https://journals.us.edu.pl/index.php/FOLIA/article/view/4346

Tomasz Kubalica  tomasz.kubalica@us.edu.pl
Uniwersytet Śląski Wydział Nauk Społecznych  Poland



The Copyright Owners of the submitted texts grant the Reader the right to use the pdf documents under the provisions of the Creative Commons 4.0 International License: Attribution-Share-Alike (CC BY-SA). The user can copy and redistribute the material in any medium or format and remix, transform, and build upon the material for any purpose.

1. License

The University of Silesia Press provides immediate open access to journal’s content under the Creative Commons BY-SA 4.0 license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0/). Authors who publish with this journal retain all copyrights and agree to the terms of the above-mentioned CC BY-SA 4.0 license.

2. Author’s Warranties

The author warrants that the article is original, written by stated author/s, has not been published before, contains no unlawful statements, does not infringe the rights of others, is subject to copyright that is vested exclusively in the author and free of any third party rights, and that any necessary written permissions to quote from other sources have been obtained by the author/s.

If the article contains illustrative material (drawings, photos, graphs, maps), the author declares that the said works are of his authorship, they do not infringe the rights of the third party (including personal rights, i.a. the authorization to reproduce physical likeness) and the author holds exclusive proprietary copyrights. The author publishes the above works as part of the article under the licence "Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 International".

ATTENTION! When the legal situation of the illustrative material has not been determined and the necessary consent has not been granted by the proprietary copyrights holders, the submitted material will not be accepted for editorial process. At the same time the author takes full responsibility for providing false data (this also regards covering the costs incurred by the University of Silesia Press and financial claims of the third party).

3. User Rights

Under the CC BY-SA 4.0 license, the users are free to share (copy, distribute and transmit the contribution) and adapt (remix, transform, and build upon the material) the article for any purpose, provided they attribute the contribution in the manner specified by the author or licensor.

4. Co-Authorship

If the article was prepared jointly with other authors, the signatory of this form warrants that he/she has been authorized by all co-authors to sign this agreement on their behalf, and agrees to inform his/her co-authors of the terms of this agreement.

I hereby declare that in the event of withdrawal of the text from the publishing process or submitting it to another publisher without agreement from the editorial office, I agree to cover all costs incurred by the University of Silesia in connection with my application.