Search

According to Aristotle's homonymy principle, when we use a common name to refer to wholes and parts that lack the capacity to carry out the function (ergon) signified by the name, we are using the name in a homonymous way. For example, pictures and statues of a man, or a dead eye, are called "man" and "eye" only homonymously because they cannot carry out their proper function, i.e., to live and to see. This principle serves well Aristotle's purposes in natural philosophy, for it avoids a reduction of the essence of living bodies and their parts to their material composition and shape. This principle, however, leaves unexplained why we still use those names in common language, despite their homonymy. Using Aristotle's own comments on homonymy, I will examine the role played by external figure (schêma), for it explains why such homonyms are not accidental. In fact, they are correct forms of linguistic usage in non-philosophical contexts. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Kant suggests that moral metaphysics can be shown to be politically applicable by thinking of the analogically similar applicability of the principles of speculative reason to the external world of sense experience. Just as the categories of understanding, e.g., causality, substance, and so on must be schematized, i.e., given a temporal representation in order to be made applicable to the forms of sensuous intuitions, so also the principles of morality--most especially the idea of the autonomous will--must be schematized to be made politically applicable. The paper shows how Kant employs his schematism in metaphysics to make the principles of morality applicable to political experience and concludes with observations on the moral and political implications of a politics that pays homage to Kantian morality. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This article considers the significance of Kant's schematized categories in the Critique of Pure Reason for contemporary metaphysics. I present Kant's understanding of the schematism and how it functions within his critique of the limits of pure reason. Then I argue that, although the true role of the schemata is a relativcly late development in Kant's thought, it is nevertheless a core notion, and the central task of the first Critique can be suf- ficiently articulated in the language of the schematism. A surprising result of Kant's doctrine of the schematism is that a limited form of metaphysics is possible even within the parameters set out in the first Critique. To show this, I offer contrasting examples of legitimate and illegitimate forays into metaphysics in light of the condition of the schematized categories. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Gadamer's hermeneutic project is an effort to rejoin what he called the ‘unbroken tradition of rhetorical and humanist culture’ to its own thought. My focus here is on the distinctive hermeneutic schematism of persons and culture in conjunction with the Renaissance doctrine of prudence. The complex hermeneutic understanding of human community requires a balancing act that privileges the agency of language and culture by denying the dominion of the sovereign self. Further, it employs a reflux or interanimation that refuses to diminish the dignity of the person. Classical and Christian humanism already had something of this complex notion of agency that served as a seedbed for the hermeneutic achievement. By reading that earlier conception through the lens of his own time, Gadamer's complex voicing of personhood expresses the dispersion and unity of human being as a unique balance of classical and modern insight. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]