微生物
发表于 2025-3-25 07:14:07
http://reply.papertrans.cn/31/3023/302224/302224_21.png
万神殿
发表于 2025-3-25 09:41:05
http://reply.papertrans.cn/31/3023/302224/302224_22.png
协迫
发表于 2025-3-25 14:34:09
Edgar Zilsel: The Excellent Qualifications of an Awkward Mandistinguished place in the field of history and sociology of science – after their rediscovery. This chapter describes and analyzes in detail Zilsel’s American years, his contacts with refugee help organizations, philanthropic foundations and fellow refugee scholars. It is argued that Zilsel lacked
侧面左右
发表于 2025-3-25 19:02:29
http://reply.papertrans.cn/31/3023/302224/302224_24.png
两种语言
发表于 2025-3-25 23:57:53
http://reply.papertrans.cn/31/3023/302224/302224_25.png
ungainly
发表于 2025-3-26 03:38:56
http://reply.papertrans.cn/31/3023/302224/302224_26.png
Immunoglobulin
发表于 2025-3-26 06:11:45
Laws, Causality, and Retribution – Hans Kelsen and Edgar Zilsel. A Marginal Note sociological perspective. Kelsen focused on the difference and the mutual relations between two forms of connecting events: The earlier instrument of Imputation meaning the linking of events by a normative proposition, originally the principle of retribution, and – stemming from this – the instrume
漂浮
发表于 2025-3-26 11:08:39
http://reply.papertrans.cn/31/3023/302224/302224_28.png
HEAVY
发表于 2025-3-26 16:33:39
Insufficient Recognition: Comparing Julian Hirsch’s and Edgar Zilsel’s Analyses of the Glorification14) and . (1918), they responded to the wide-spread glorification of exceptional personalities in European literary, biographical and academic culture, especially in the humanities. Both considered the negative socio-political effects, like anti-Semitic and racist tendencies, that the cult of person
葡萄糖
发表于 2025-3-26 18:19:53
The Religion of Genius Taken Seriously. Edgar Zilsel’s , (1918) Reviewed as a Critical Philosophicaln of Genius”. For this purpose, I suggest a rereading of . (1918) in connection with and in analogy to its philosophical roots and contexts in the historical Enlightenment discourse. I try to point out that Zilsel not only considers the “Religion of Genius” as a rather dubious socio-cultural phenome