Contra Diction

Samuel Taylor Coleridge is chiefly remembered as the Romantic poet who wrote “The Ancient Mariner” and “Kubla Khan”, as Wordsworth’s collaborator on the Lyrical Ballads, as the myriad-minded philosopher who introduced his countrymen to the thought of Kant, as one of the foremost critics of Shakespeare, and as a supremely gifted conversationalist who put a spell on any visitor to his Highgate home. In his own day, however, Coleridge was most notorious for his political “apostasy”. With the Revolution across the Channel, once celebrated as the harbinger of a new age, deteriorating into the terreur and the Pitt ministry desperately trying to contain revolutionary activities on British soil, public intellectuals were compelled to take sides. As it turned out, the choices they made during the 1790s would haunt them well into the 1810s. This first book-length study of Coleridge’s reactions to the French Revolution examines his trajectory from “radical” to “conservative” – and challenges the very notion that these labels can be applied to him. Particular focus is given to the part his friend Robert Southey played in Coleridge’s political coming of age, as well as to William Hazlitt’s role as his relentless prosecutor in later life. As such, the book offers an accessible portrayal of the first-generation Romantics and their political sensibilities.

Published in 1997, this books is an examination of the determination of the concept of enlightenment, and related notions, within modern social relations. The work opens up innovative areas of research into the relationship between philosophy, social relations, and education. It applies Gillian Rose's work on "the broken middle" of Hegelian philosophy to social and educational theorizing. It offers a critique of the idea of enlightenment, and of the identity of the teacher in social theory - Rousseau, Marx and Durkheim - in critical theory - Habermas and Adorno - in "postmodernism" - Foucalt and Nietzsche - and in a variety of educational and pedagogical theories. The book concludes with an original application of Hegelian speculative philosophy to the teacher/student relationship. This work challenges those working in social theory and in education to comprehend the contradictions on their theorising as a shared philosophical consciousness, a shared "broken middle".

It is well known that Hegel departs from tradition in his treatment of contradiction in a way that is scandalous to some. This book explores the question of what Hegel means by contradiction and how it can be made useful for philosophy. For this purpose, the context of Hegel's analysis of contradiction is subjected to a close analysis - the essentialities, namely identity, difference, diversity, and opposition. The contradiction that arises in the analysis of contradiction is resolved, thus opening up a groundbreaking method for a philosophy that proceeds systematically. Bekannt ist, dass Hegel in seiner Behandlung des Widerspruchs in einer für manche skandalösen Art von der Tradition abweicht. Vorliegendes Buch geht der Frage nach, was Hegel unter einem Widerspruch überhaupt versteht und auf welche Weise er für die Philosophie dienstbar gemacht werden kann. Dafür wird der Kontext von Hegels Analyse des Widerspruchs einer genauen Analyse unterzogen - die Wesenheiten, namentlich Identität, Unterschied, Verschiedenheit und Gegensatz. Der bei der Analyse des Gegensatzes auftretende Widerspruch löst sich auf und eröffnet so eine bahnbrechende Methode für eine systematisch verfahrende Philosophie.

"Everything is contradictory," Hegel declares in Science of Logic. In this analysis of one of the most difficult and neglected topics in Hegelian studies, Songsuk Susan Hahn tackles the status of contradiction in Hegel's thought. Properly philosophical thinking in the Hegelian mode recognizes that contradiction pervades all organic forms of life. Contradiction in Motion presents Hegel's doctrine of contradiction, once widely dismissed, as one deserving serious consideration. The book argues that contradiction is not a sign of error or incoherence, but rather plays an important role in the development of Hegel's system. The first part of the book sets up Hegel's logic of organic wholes in such a way as to motivate his claim that everything is contradictory. Hahn explores how Hegel tests his abstract logical and methodological apparatus against the more concrete, unmanageable aspects of empirical nature. The second and third parts of the book examine the extent to which Hegel's organic model informs his aesthetics and ethics. Hahn reveals the privileged role of art forms in expressing our consciousness of organic unity and shows how Hegel's organic-holistic conception of cognition and nature, with its distinctively contradictory stance, can be incorporated coherently into his ethics.

The central claim of this comparative study of Kant and Kierkegaard is that the aesthetic experience of the sublime is both autonomous and formative for extra-aesthetic ends. Aesthetic autonomy is thus inseparable from aesthetic heteronomy. In Part I, through an examination of Kant’s Critique of Judgement and his essays on the French Revolution, the Kantian sublime is shown to conflict with our existing cognitive, moral and political frames of meaning, at the same time that the engagement of the aesthetic judge (Chapter 1) or the enthusiastic spectator (Chapter 2) with this conflict furthers our pursuit of cognitive, moral and political ends. The Kantian sublime is built on the autonomy of aesthetic judgement, which nevertheless has non-aesthetic value. Part II argues that certain aesthetic and ethical-religious figures in Kierkegaard’s work can be shown to be transfigurations of the Kantian sublime, despite the absence of the term. Antigone and the silhouettes from Either/Or embody what I coin the tragic sublime and sublime grief. The God-man in Practice in Christianity is interpreted as a sublime image of contradiction. The figures are submitted to aesthetic representation, while their contradictory interior lives are unrepresentable. The Kierkegaardian sublime is built on a radical critique of aesthetic autonomy, whose failure serves the end of ethico-religious self-formation.

This book explores and expounds upon questions of paradox and contradiction in theology with an emphasis on recent contributions from analytic philosophical theology. It addresses questions such as: What is the place of paradox in theology? Where might different systems of logic (e.g., paraconsistent ones) find a place in theological discourse (e.g., Christology)? What are proper responses to the presence of contradiction(s) in one’s theological theories? Are appeals to analogical language enough to make sense of paradox? Bringing together an impressive line-up of theologians and philosophers, the volume offers a range of fresh perspectives on a central topic. It is valuable reading for scholars of theology and philosophy of religion.

This book presents a comprehensive debate about the Law of Non-Contradiction (LNC), from discussions as to how the law is to be understood, to reasons for accepting or re-thinking the law, and to issues that raise challenges to the law, such as the Liar Paradox, and a 'dialetheic' resolution of that paradox.

Conze’s monograph The Principle of Contradiction: On the Theory of Dialectical Materialism is his most important philosophical work and the foundation for his later publications as a Buddhist scholar and translator. The openly Marxist work was published under considerable risk to both printer and author alike in December 1932 in Hamburg, Germany. Only months later, in May 1933, almost all of the five hundred copies of the first edition were destroyed during the Nazi book burning campaign. It is only now, more than eighty years later, that Conze’s key philosophical work is made available to a broad audience in this English translation. In the work, Conze sets out to develop a detailed account of the historical and material conditions that support the emergence, production, and transmission of theoretical knowledge—as exemplified by the principle of contradiction—and, furthermore, to show that under different social and historical conditions the allegedly necessary truth and indubitable content of the principle would dissolve and be replaced by a radically different understanding of the principle of contradiction—a dialectic understanding of the principle that would compel a rejection of the Aristotelian dogma. From a Marxist perspective, the analysis and critique of the principle of contradiction is a crucial and necessary step towards a dialectical understanding of philosophical (and political) theory and practice. Conze’s monograph, which attempts to clear the ground for a deeper understanding of the very foundation of classical Marxist thought, may very well be the most comprehensive Marxist critique of the Aristotelian principle of contradiction available to this day. However, Conze’s pioneering 1932 monograph goes well beyond the constraints of an orthodox Marxist analysis. His erudite and scholarly account of the history and evolution of the principle of contradiction illuminates the thought of Aristotle, Marx, and Buddha, and provides the groundwork for a new cross-cultural and interdisciplinary approach to philosophical theory and practice.