What do you think?
Rate this book
On Assumptions
Excerpt from Ueber Annahmen
Dabei denke ich naturlich nicht daran, hier in Sachen des Urtheils eine völlig neutrale Stellung einzunehmen. Was ich darzulegen habe, geht zu sehr auf das directe anschauliche Er fassen der durch die innere Wahrnehmung dargebotenen Wirk lichkeit zurück, als dafs es durchführbar wäre, einem Theile des sich da bietenden Thatsachenbildes gegenüber bei einer Unan schaulichkeit stehen zu bleiben, die noch für recht weit auseinander liegende Meinungen über die Natur des Urtheils Raum liefse. Andererseits aber scheinen jene charakteristischen Züge am Urtheil, die mir für das Folgende von entscheidendem Belange sind, doch so naheliegend bis zur Handgreiflichkeit, dafs ich mich der Hoffnung nicht entschlagen kann, in der Anerkennung derselben unvoreingenommene Beobachter mit sonst wie immer gearteten Vormeinungen auf meiner Seite zu haben.
Dabei denke ich naturlich nicht daran, hier in Sachen des Urtheils eine völlig neutrale Stellung einzunehmen. Was ich darzulegen habe, geht zu sehr auf das directe anschauliche Er fassen der durch die innere Wahrnehmung dargebotenen Wirk lichkeit zurück, als dafs es durchführbar wäre, einem Theile des sich da bietenden Thatsachenbildes gegenüber bei einer Unan schaulichkeit stehen zu bleiben, die noch für recht weit auseinander liegende Meinungen über die Natur des Urtheils Raum liefse. Andererseits aber scheinen jene charakteristischen Züge am Urtheil, die mir für das Folgende von entscheidendem Belange sind, doch so naheliegend bis zur Handgreiflichkeit, dafs ich mich der Hoffnung nicht entschlagen kann, in der Anerkennung derselben unvoreingenommene Beobachter mit sonst wie immer gearteten Vormeinungen auf meiner Seite zu haben.
- GenresPhilosophyNonfiction
396 pages, Hardcover
First published April 1, 1983
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 of 1 review
October 23, 2018
Assuming a Round Square
Alexius Meinong is chiefly known in the philosophical world as someone who held a peculiar ontology. He ascribed different modes of being to various objects, which included existence, subsistene and absistence. Thus, if you want to look at what Meinong has to say about his ontology, this is not the book for you.
The book is entitled ‘On Assumptions’, and in essence it talks about the relationship between assumptions and judgments, what hey have in common and what they do not. His ontology is mentioned in chapter V, and it is used more as a basis for the discussion of assumptions rather than providing a defence.
This book is pretty difficult to come by, as it is out of print and quite pricey second hand. That being said, the translation seems natural, and I was intrigued by Meinong’s humble writing style as well as eagerness in breaking new ground. He writes in a clear and engaging way, even though the text was written more than a century ago (in essence yesterday as far as philosophy is concerned).
It must be noted that the translation is from the second edition, published in 1910, and not the first published in 1905, in which Russell wrote a three part review in Mind (1–3). Indeed, Meinong influenced Russell greatly in the early part of his (Russell) career as seen through countless reviews (4–7) and it can be extrapolated that the opposition to Meinong (8) gave rise to what is known as Analytic philosophy.
In conclusion, this book is a specialist one, and it is not recommended as an entry-level book, but rather as a thesis aimed at people who whish to understand Meinong a bit better.
Further Reading:
If you want some basic knowledge about this very interesting and misunderstood philosopher, I suggest you read his theory of objects (9), as well as the entry on the Stanford Encyclopaedia of Philosophy (https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/me...). And also, there are round squares…
References:
1. Russell BAW. Meinong’s Theory of Complexes and Assumptions (I.). Mind. 1904;12(50):204–19.
2. Russell BAW. Meinong’s Theory of Complexes and Assumptions (II.). Mind. 1904;13(51):336–54.
3. Russell BAW. Meinong’s Theory of Complexes and Assumptions (III.). Mind. 1904;12(52):509–24.
4. Russell BAW. Review of “Über die Bedeutung des Weberschen Gesetzes” by Alexius Meinong. Mind. 1899;8(30):251–6.
5. Russell BAW. Review of “Untersuchungen zur Gegenstandstheorie und Psychologie. Mit Unterstutzung des k. k. Ministeriums fur Kultus und Unterricht in Wien Herausgegeben” by Alexius Meinong. Mind. 1905;14(56):530–8.
6. Russell BAW. Review of "Ueber die Erfahrungsgrundlagen Unseres Wissens: by Alexius Meinong. Mind. 1906;15(59):412–5.
7. Russell BAW. Review of “Uber die Stellung der Gegenstandstheorie im System der Wissenschaften” by Alexius Meinong. Mind. 1907;16(63):436–9.
8. Russell BAW. On Denoting. Mind. 1905;14(56):479–93.
9. Meinong A. The Theory of Objects [1904]. In: Chisholm RM, editor. Realism And The Background Of Phenomenology. 1st ed. Glecone, IL: Free Press; 1960. p. 76–117.
Alexius Meinong is chiefly known in the philosophical world as someone who held a peculiar ontology. He ascribed different modes of being to various objects, which included existence, subsistene and absistence. Thus, if you want to look at what Meinong has to say about his ontology, this is not the book for you.
The book is entitled ‘On Assumptions’, and in essence it talks about the relationship between assumptions and judgments, what hey have in common and what they do not. His ontology is mentioned in chapter V, and it is used more as a basis for the discussion of assumptions rather than providing a defence.
This book is pretty difficult to come by, as it is out of print and quite pricey second hand. That being said, the translation seems natural, and I was intrigued by Meinong’s humble writing style as well as eagerness in breaking new ground. He writes in a clear and engaging way, even though the text was written more than a century ago (in essence yesterday as far as philosophy is concerned).
It must be noted that the translation is from the second edition, published in 1910, and not the first published in 1905, in which Russell wrote a three part review in Mind (1–3). Indeed, Meinong influenced Russell greatly in the early part of his (Russell) career as seen through countless reviews (4–7) and it can be extrapolated that the opposition to Meinong (8) gave rise to what is known as Analytic philosophy.
In conclusion, this book is a specialist one, and it is not recommended as an entry-level book, but rather as a thesis aimed at people who whish to understand Meinong a bit better.
Further Reading:
If you want some basic knowledge about this very interesting and misunderstood philosopher, I suggest you read his theory of objects (9), as well as the entry on the Stanford Encyclopaedia of Philosophy (https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/me...). And also, there are round squares…
References:
1. Russell BAW. Meinong’s Theory of Complexes and Assumptions (I.). Mind. 1904;12(50):204–19.
2. Russell BAW. Meinong’s Theory of Complexes and Assumptions (II.). Mind. 1904;13(51):336–54.
3. Russell BAW. Meinong’s Theory of Complexes and Assumptions (III.). Mind. 1904;12(52):509–24.
4. Russell BAW. Review of “Über die Bedeutung des Weberschen Gesetzes” by Alexius Meinong. Mind. 1899;8(30):251–6.
5. Russell BAW. Review of “Untersuchungen zur Gegenstandstheorie und Psychologie. Mit Unterstutzung des k. k. Ministeriums fur Kultus und Unterricht in Wien Herausgegeben” by Alexius Meinong. Mind. 1905;14(56):530–8.
6. Russell BAW. Review of "Ueber die Erfahrungsgrundlagen Unseres Wissens: by Alexius Meinong. Mind. 1906;15(59):412–5.
7. Russell BAW. Review of “Uber die Stellung der Gegenstandstheorie im System der Wissenschaften” by Alexius Meinong. Mind. 1907;16(63):436–9.
8. Russell BAW. On Denoting. Mind. 1905;14(56):479–93.
9. Meinong A. The Theory of Objects [1904]. In: Chisholm RM, editor. Realism And The Background Of Phenomenology. 1st ed. Glecone, IL: Free Press; 1960. p. 76–117.
Displaying 1 of 1 review