Martin Mulsow, Direktor des Forschungszentrums Gotha der Universität Erfurt sowie Ordentliches Mitglied der Sächsischen Akademie der Wissenschaften zu. Martin Mulsow. Prof. Dr. | * OM / GW | Zuwahljahr: Geschichte, Philosophie Professor an der Universität Erfurt und Direktor des Forschungszentrums. Martin Mulsow, Prof. Dr. phil. habil. Professor für Wissenskulturen der europäischen Neuzeit an der Universität Erfurt und; Direktor des Forschungszentrums.
Wohl älteste Münzgeschichte Sachsens von Akademie-Mitglied Martin Mulsow entdecktMartin Mulsow, Direktor des Forschungszentrums Gotha der Universität Erfurt sowie Ordentliches Mitglied der Sächsischen Akademie der Wissenschaften zu. Ausführliche Profilseite von Prof. Dr. Martin Mulsow, Direktor des Forschungszentrums Gotha - Adresse, Kontaktdaten, Lebenslauf. Prof. Dr. Martin Mulsow ist Assoziierter Fellow am Max-Weber-Kolleg der Universität Erfurt.
Martin Mulsow Navigationsmenü Video€1 Million Cash Game at 2018 Triton Poker Super High Roller Series Montenegro Add Social Profiles Facebook, Twitter, etc. Diskussionskultur im Illuminatenorden. Enlightenment Underground more.
Martin Mulsow follows the trail of this precarious knowledge with the aim of re-establishing its significance for the process of the European history of knowledge.
In case studies that are rich in material and encompass the period from the Renaissance to the Enlightenment, he presents the tactics devised by intellectuals to be able to live with these perils, their gestures of retreat, their fears, but also what encouraged them, and their attempts to reclaim lost knowledge.
Precarious knowledge does not deal with the major themes of metaphysics and epistemology, but rather with those marginal zones such as magic and numismatics, interpretations of the Bible, and Orientalism.
It is not only about theories, but also about fear and fascination, not about the major figures in research, but rather about those forgotten, or half-forgotten, scholars.
Written with clarity and great enthusiasm for the subject, it lures the reader into the world of precarious, unfamiliar knowledge, research into which has only just begun.
We had learned that while in France there were radical intellectuals of the Enlightenment, in Germany the boundaries had been different: there, only "moderate" intellectuals stood against orthodox theologians.
They are called "moderate" because they did not write anti-theologically, but rather pursued a policy of well measured reform of the humanities and sciences.
They were neither sceptics nor epicureans, they avoided naturalism and even more so atheism. They were sociable, thus they were appreciated and received a place in our histories of philosophy.
In seven case studies, however, Mulsow corrects this harmonized picture of German intellectual history. He discovers a number of texts that have become rare: letters, articles, printed and manuscript treatises by German authors, whom he labels as "radical thinkers of the early Enlightenment".
He looks for the rebels, the sceptic and the mischievous, the suppressed and the persecuted, early doubters and isolated atheists, who have not been included into the Walhalla of Great Thinkers, because they travelled far from the mainstream.
He calls his method a "philosophical micro history". I call him the Sherlock Holmes of modern history of philosophy. Mulsow goes into detail.
He doesn't talk about Pufendorf or Thomasius, nor about Leibniz. He looks for the hidden scenery, but he doesn't get lost in particulars.
He shows networks; he creates a mosaic out of small pieces; he displays the "personal and intellectual interconnections of the radical early Enlightenment in Germany".
They serve him to apply some "theories of medium scope". In his new book, he draws an overall picture of early radicalisation.
In doing so, he provides a history of critique of religion during the early enlightenment. Admiringly, he connects single disciplines and demonstrates unexpected mutual impact between oriental studies and science, Bible exegesis and history, and above all between jurisprudence and philosophy.
With close conceptual differentiation he opens up a wealth of new material. He is aware of the pragmatic status of utterances; he takes irony and mocking in old texts into account.
He knows about writing under the circumstances of censorship. The process Mulsow describes occurred in Protestant Germany, but freedom of thought was by no means better among Lutherans than it was the case in Rome.
The main protagonists in Germany maintained a lively international intellectual exchange, mainly with England and the Netherlands.
Mulsow follows these connections and takes international research into account. The impact of innovation in late seventeenth century has already been recognized by Paul Hazard, in his famous book on the crisis of the European Mind.
Italian scholars like Tullio Gregory followed him, and today there are a good number of English and American studies.
But the significance of Mulsow's monumental work lies in the fact that he connects several hitherto unconnected currents of research: the history of ideas of Enlightenment philosophy, the archival registration of clandestine texts, and the analysis of communication structures in the European Republic of Letters.
Mulsow does not overemphasize his results: there was a radical Enlightenment in Germany, but it occurred "only as a marginal phenomenon of persecuted thinkers and probably a greater number of extremist students.
A special appeal gets this book through its deciphering of deputizing debates. The period around discussed historical and philological questions, when people in fact wanted to clarify contemporary problems.
Another advantage of this book is its being conscious of the methods that it uses. Methodological reflection always follows the historical information.
Mulsow has written a fresh and learned book. It has all chances to be this year's best German book in intellectual history.
This is a marvelous, detailed, textured study of a large number of minor works and minor figures that developed and transmitted many of the elements of modern philosophy in early modern Germany.
Many of the texts were written in Latin, and only some were published. One should not teach the philosophy of the Enlightenment from Hazard or Cassirer without attention to these figures, whom they did not know.
Now we know where our heroes like Lessing, Hume, and Kant got many of their fundamental ideas. Martin Mulsow ends this book with ten theses.
The first holds that most of the authors discussed were radicalized in a multi-layered process, not simply from the reading of Hobbes, Spinoza, Bayle, or Toland.
For example, one could take the role of an opponent in an academic disputation, and bit by bit begin to believe one's unorthodox role.
Or one could be provoked by ultra-orthodox opponents to explore the opposite of what they believed. Some authors evolved into and out of radical positions over the course of their lives.