No open-access location is known for this record yet.
No open-access location is known for this record yet.
“All is Leaf”: Difference, Metamorphosis, and Goethe’s Phenomenology of Knowledge Thomas Pfau (bio) Thomas Pfau Duke University Thomas Pfau Thomas Pfau is a Professor of English and of German at Duke University. Besides translating and editing two volumes of theoretical writings by Hölderlin and Schelling, he has also edited two essay collections on English Romanticism, two special issues of English Romantic Review (forthcoming in 2010), and a special issue of Modernist Cultures (2005). To date, he is the author of two monographs: Wordsworth’s Profession (Stanford UP, 1997) and Romantic Moods: Paranoia, Trauma, and Melancholy, 1794–1840 (Johns Hopkins UP, 2005). He has published some thirty essays in numerous essay collections and scholarly journals on a wide range of writers, including Rousseau, Kant, Wordsworth, Wollstonecraft, Coleridge, Goethe, Beethoven, Eichendorff, Schleiermacher, Thomas Mann, et al. During the 2010–11 academic year he will be at the National Humanities Center to complete a book-length study on key concepts of Modernity. Footnotes 1. See Ockham’s Quodlibetal Questions, trans. Alfred J. Freddoso and Francis E. Kelley (New Haven: Yale UP, 1991), esp. 1: 13 (on the singularity of cognition); 2: 19 (on the body as contingent on referentiality); 3:12 (on the conceptual status of all thought); 4: 23–25 (on the contingency of substance on determinate quantity and quality). On the origins of modem scientific thought in the Nominalist (Franciscan) critique of Aristotelian and Thomistic “substantial form,” especially in the work of Ockham, see Louis Dupre, Passage to Modernity (New Haven: Yale UP, 1993) 15–90; Charles Taylor, A Secular Age (Cambridge, MA: Harvard UP, 2007) 90–99; Michael Buckley, Denying and Disclosing God: the Ambiguous Progress of Modern Atheism (New Haven: Yale UP, 2004) 25–47; Hans Blumenberg, Legitimacy of the Modern Age, trans. Robert M. Wallace (Cambridge, MA: MIT P, 1983) 126–79; and Michael A. Gillespie, The Theological Origins of Modernity (Chicago: U of Chicago P, 2007) 19–43 and 170–246. On eighteenth-century Empiricism and the particularization of knowledge, see Louis Dupre, The Enlightenment and the Intellectual Foundations of Modern Culture (New Haven: Yale UP, 2004) 18–44; Ernst Cassirer, Philosophy of the Enlightenment, trans. Fritz C. A. Koelln and James P. Pettegrove (Princeton, NJ: Princeton UP. 1951) 37–92; Theodor Adorno and Max Horkheimer, Dialectic of Enlightenment, trans. John Cumming (New York: Continuum, 1972) 3–42, esp. 22–23. 2. On Aquinas’ conception of form, see Summa Theologiae, trans. Fathers of the English Dominican Province (Scotts Valley, CA: NovAntiqua, 2008) la Q 45 A 8: “the form of a natural body is not subsisting, but is that by which a thing is.…it does not belong to forms to be made or to be created, but to be concreated [Non enim considerabant quod forma naturalis corporis non est subsistens, sed quo aliquid est…fonuarum non est fieri neque creari, sed concreata esse].” On form in Aquinas, see Herbert McCabe, On Aquinas (New York: Continuum, 2008) 41–50; on its rejection, see Louis Dupré, Passage 167–89; on Aquinas’ “ ‘non-subject-centered’ approach to human experience…as the actualization of intellectual capacities by potentially significant objects, according to the axiom ‘intellectus in actu est intelligibile in actu [our intellectual capacities actualized are the world’s intelligibility realized],” see Fergus Kerr, After Aquinas: Versions of Thomism (Oxford: Blackwell, 2002) 26–33 and 46–51 (27). 3. On the emergence of modern subjectivity, see Louis Dupré, Passage 65–92; and Thomas Pfau, “The Philosophy of Shipwreck: Gnosticism, Skepticism, and Coleridge’s Catastrophic Modernity,” MLN, Comparative Literature Issue 122.5 (2007): 949–1004. 4. On the emergence and consolidation of the older, eighteenth-century “life-sciences” into various branches of modern biology, anatomy, etc., see Lynn K. Nyhart, Biology Takes Form: Animal Morphology and the German Universities, 1800–1900 (Chicago: U of Chicago P, 1995) 1–64, who offers an excellent discussion of morphology and formalist biology between 1800 and 1850; on the institutionalization of the natural sciences, see David Cahan, ed., From Natural Philosophy to the Sciences (Chicago: U of Chicago P, 2003) 291–328 and Robert Richards’ essay on biology (in Cahan, ed., 16–48). The process of disciplinary specialization, as well as...
Loading…
Stored only when both papers are in the corpus — 24 citations exist upstream.
Papers that cite the same references — the relational fallback while embeddings are still backfilling.
Imported from OpenAlex (CC0) — nothing here is generated.