connoisseur
发表于 2025-3-28 16:47:07
http://reply.papertrans.cn/31/3023/302224/302224_41.png
ADAGE
发表于 2025-3-28 20:05:45
https://doi.org/10.1057/9780230370333distinguished 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
截断
发表于 2025-3-29 02:36:46
http://reply.papertrans.cn/31/3023/302224/302224_43.png
Biofeedback
发表于 2025-3-29 03:40:04
http://reply.papertrans.cn/31/3023/302224/302224_44.png
hegemony
发表于 2025-3-29 07:21:58
http://reply.papertrans.cn/31/3023/302224/302224_45.png
高射炮
发表于 2025-3-29 13:34:55
http://reply.papertrans.cn/31/3023/302224/302224_46.png
竖琴
发表于 2025-3-29 16:08:41
http://reply.papertrans.cn/31/3023/302224/302224_47.png
frozen-shoulder
发表于 2025-3-29 22:35:02
Yvonne Winfildah Takawira-Matwaya14) 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
刺穿
发表于 2025-3-30 03:35:53
David W. Hawman,Thomas E. Morrisonn 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
商品
发表于 2025-3-30 04:02:04
https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-65882-7 with Alexandre Koyré’s interpretation of the scientific revolution—understood in the context of the 1940s-1950s as a genuine epistemological interpretation—they also characterized the Zilsel thesis as a purely sociological thesis that does not contribute much to the epistemological understanding of