journal: Archiv für Geschichte der Philosophie

Impact Factor: 0.4

Published since January 1, 1888

Archiv für Geschichte der Philosophie

ISSN: 1613-0650

Edited by: Karin de Boer, Anja Jauernig, Katja Vogt

Editorial Board: Peter Scott Adamson, James V. Allen, John Carriero, Edwin M Curley, Eyjólfur Kjalar Emilsson, Juliet Floyd, Eckart Förster, Dorothea Frede, Michael Friedman, Don Garrett, Gerd Grasshoff, Paul Guyer, Terence Irwin, Olli Koistinen, Michelle Kosch, Richard Kraut, Béatrice Longuenesse, Mary McCabe, Robert Pasnau, Dominik Perler, Elizabeth S. Radcliffe, Bernard Reginster, Susan Sauvé Meyer, Alison Simmons, Jens Timmermann, Cecilia Trifogli, Hermann Weidemann, Günter Zöller

About this journal

The journal publishes exceptional articles in all areas of Western philosophy from antiquity up to contemporary philosophy. The Archiv articles are distinguished by precise argumentation and lucid prose.

History

The Archiv für Geschichte der Philosophie has enjoyed a distinguished history since its inception in 1888. Founded by Ludwig Stein, the Archiv was created to provide an international forum for discussion of the history of western philosophy. Insisting on meticulous scholarship and precise argumentation, the journal emphasized the need to understand historical texts in their philosophical and social contexts.

Many of the most prominent names in philosophy at the turn of the century appeared in the Archiv's pages. During his over forty years as editor-in-chief, Stein was assisted by such luminaries as Eduard Zeller, Wilhelm Dilthey, Ernst Cassirer, Alexandre Koyré,and Heinrich Rickert. Contributors included scholars such as Paul Natorp, Charles Adam, Paul Tannery, and Alessandro Chiapelli.

After changing publishers in 1926, the journal, renamed Archiv für Geschichte der Philosophie und Soziologie, began to publish work on the history of sociology as well. This was to be short-lived. When Arthur Stein, Ludwig Stein's son, took over the editorship in 1930, he returned the journal to its original name and mission. Yet when the journal became subject to restrictions under the National Socialist government, Stein decided to suspend publication rather than taint the journal's history and reputation.

After lying dormant for twenty-seven years, the journal was refounded by Paul Wilpert in 1960. Committed to fostering scholarly exchange between Europe and the United States, the new Archiv reserved one editorship for an American. The journal has become the leading international journal in the history of philosophy, publishing papers by renowned scholars.

The Archiv's list of prominent contributors include C.I. Gerhardt, Paul Barth, Carl Stumpf, T. J. De Boer, Camille Bos, Arthur Lovejoy, Wilhelm Max Wundt, Émile Bréhier, C. M. Gillespie, Jean Wahl, Carl Gebhardt, Nicholas Rescher, Martial Gueroult, A.C. Lloyd, Jules Vuillemin, Claude Imbert, Maurice de Gandillac, Jonathan Barnes, Anthony A. Long, Charles H. Kahn, Gisela Striker, Karl Bärthlein, Robert M. Adams, Michael Frede, Margaret Dauler Wilson, John M. Cooper, Yvon Belaval, Gail Fine, Louis E. Loeb, Desmond M. Clarke, Martha Nussbaum, Daniel Garber, Nicholas Jolley, Jean-Marie Beyssade, Rolf-Peter Horstmann, Norman Kretzmann, Kenneth Winkler, and Karl Ameriks..

Abstracting and Indexing

Archiv für Geschichte der Philosophie is covered by the following services:

Baidu Scholar
Base d’information bibliographique en patristique / Bibliographic Information Base in Patristics (BIBP)
BDSL Bibliographie der deutschen Sprach- und Literaturwissenschaft
Brepols: L'Année philologique
CNKI Scholar (China National Knowledge Infrastructure)
CNPIEC - cnpLINKer
Dimensions
EBSCO (relevant databases)
EBSCO Discovery Service
ERIH PLUS (European Reference Index for the Humanities and Social Sciences)
Genamics JournalSeek
Google Scholar
IBR (International Bibliography of Reviews of Scholarly Literature in the Humanities and Social Sciences)
IBZ (International Bibliography of Periodical Literature in the Humanities and Social Sciences)
International Philosophical Bibliography - Répertoire bibliographique de la philosophie
J-Gate
JournalGuide
JournalTOCs
KESLI-NDSL (Korean National Discovery for Science Leaders)
MyScienceWork
Naver Academic
Naviga (Softweco)
Norwegian Register for Scientific Journals, Series and Publishers
Philosopher's Index
PhilPapers
Primo Central (ExLibris)
ProQuest (relevant databases)
Publons
QOAM (Quality Open Access Market)
ReadCube
Scilit
SCImago (SJR)
SCOPUS
Semantic Scholar
Sherpa/RoMEO
Summon (ProQuest)
TDNet
Ulrich's Periodicals Directory/ulrichsweb
WanFang Data
Web of Science - Arts & Humanities Citation Index
Web of Science - Current Contents/Arts & Humanities
WorldCat (OCLC)
X-MOL
Yewno Discover

Supplementary Materials

Topics

Volume 105 Issue 3

September 2023

Publicly Available September 6, 2023

Titelseiten

Page range: I-III

Download PDF

Articles

Publicly Available August 18, 2021

The Puzzle of the Sophist

Justin Vlasits

Page range: 359-387

More Download PDF

Abstract

The many definitions of sophistry at the beginning of Plato’s Sophist have puzzled scholars just as much as they puzzled the dialogue’s main speakers: the Visitor from Elea and Theaetetus. The aim of this paper is to give an account of that puzzlement. This puzzlement, it is argued, stems not from a logical or epistemological problem, but from the metaphysical problem that, given the multiplicity of accounts, the interlocutors do not know what the sophist essentially is. It transpires that, in order to properly account for this puzzle, one must jettison the traditional view of Plato’s method of division, on which divisions must be exclusive and mark out relations of essential predication. It is then shown on independent grounds that, although Platonic division in the Sophist must express predication relations and be transitive, it need not be dichotomous, exclusive, or express relations of essential predication. Once the requirements of exclusivity and essential predication are dropped, it is possible to make sense of the reasons that the Visitor from Elea and Theaetetus are puzzled. Moreover, with this in hand, it is possible to see Plato making an important methodological point in the dialogue: division on its own without any norms does not necessarily lead to the discovery of essences.

September 17, 2021

Mind your Prayers. Aristotle’s Notion of euchê

Pavlos Kontos

Page range: 388-413

Abstract

In Aristotle’s world there is no God to answer our prayers ( euchê ) and yet prayers follow the excellent city of the Politics like a shadow. Nonetheless, as far as I know, people have been content to narrow the focus of investigation to Aristotle’s utopia, its plausibility, structure and infrastructure, leaving prayers out of the picture. The most prayers themselves seem to deserve is a footnote or so. The result is that attention is switched away from the most basic questions: What is the function of practical reason that prayers are meant to perform and why could not, or should not, that function be carried out by deliberate choices, wishes, and action plans? Prayers matter, and matter a lot, so I will argue, for they mirror our understanding of constitutive moral luck. The legislators and the rulers who ignore or overlook this truth are theoretically incompetent and politically perilous.

November 18, 2021

Conceiving Prime Matter in the Middle Ages: Perception, Abstraction and Analogy

Nicola Polloni

Page range: 414-443

Abstract

In its formlessness and potentiality, prime matter is a problematic entity of medieval metaphysics and its ontological limitations drastically affect human possibility of conceiving it. In this article, I analyse three influential strategies elaborated to justify an epistemic access to prime matter. They are incidental perception, negative abstraction, and analogy. Through a systematic and historical analysis of these procedures, the article shows the richness of interpretations and theoretical stakes implied by the conundrum of how prime matter can be known by human beings. In particular, the reasons behind the later medieval acceptance of analogy as the main way to unveil prime matter become clearer by pointing out the correlation between the ontological and epistemological levels of the medieval examination of prime matter.

September 17, 2021

Spinoza’s Monism II: A Proposal

Kristin Primus

Page range: 444-469

Abstract

An old question in Spinoza scholarship is how finite, non-eternal things transitively caused by other finite, non-eternal things (i. e., the entities described in propositions like E 1p28) are caused by the infinite, eternal substance, given that what follows either directly or indirectly from the divine nature is infinite and eternal ( E 1p21–23). In “Spinoza’s Monism I,”<fnote>“Spinoza’s Monism I,” in the previous issue of this journal.</fnote> I pointed out that most commentators answer this question by invoking entities that are indefinite and sempiternal, but argued that perhaps we should not be so quick to assume that in Spinoza’s system, an infinite and eternal substance could cause such indefinite, sempiternal entities. But if such eternal-durational causation is denied, then it seems harder to see how Spinoza’s system could be coherent: if Spinoza holds that the infinite, eternal substance cannot cause anything that is not infinite and not eternal, then how can he also hold that all things are modes immanently caused by substance ( E 1p15, E 1p18, E 1p25)? In this essay, I explain how Spinoza’s system could be understood in light of a denial of eternal-durational causation. On the interpretation I offer, God is the cause of all things and all things are modes because the essences of all things follow from the divine nature and all essences enjoy infinite, eternal reality as modes immanently caused by the infinite, eternal substance. The same non-substantial essences can also be conceived as enjoying non-infinite, non-eternal reality, but so conceived, they are enduring, finite (or sempiternal, indefinite) entities that cannot be conceived as modes caused by and inhering in the one infinite, eternal substance. I conclude by pointing out that if we take this interpretive route, we do have to understand Spinoza as committed to acosmism, or a denial of the reality of the world – at least the world of enduring, finite things.

September 16, 2021

Aesthetics Naturalised: Schlick on the Evolution of Beauty and Art

Andreas Vrahimis

Page range: 470-498

Abstract

In his earliest philosophical work, Moritz Schlick developed a proposal for rendering aesthetics into a field of empirical science. His 1908 book Lebensweisheit developed an evolutionary account of the emergence of both scientific knowledge and aesthetic feelings from play. This constitutes the framework of Schlick’s evolutionary psychological methodology for examining the origins of the aesthetic feeling of the beautiful he proposed in 1909. He defends his methodology by objecting to both experimental psychological and Darwinian reductionist accounts of aesthetics. Having countered these approaches, Schlick applies Külpe’s psychological distinction between stimulus-feelings and idea-feelings to collapse the traditional philosophical opposition between the agreeable and the beautiful. Both types of feeling, Schlick argues, result from humans’ adaptation to their environment. Because of this adaptation, feelings that were once only stimuli for action can come to be enjoyed for their own sake. This thesis underlies Schlick’s 1908 argument that art, qua mimesis, is necessarily inferior to aesthetic feelings directed towards the environment. Part of Schlick’s justification for this view is that humans are, through a long evolutionary process, better adapted to their environment than to artworks. Schlick nevertheless concedes that mimetic art can involve ways of abstracting from the objects it copies to produce idealised regularities that are not found in the original. Schlick thus concludes that art teaches its audience how to perceive the world in this abstract and idealised manner. This type of environmental aesthetics constitutes a means for reaching Schlick’s utopian ecological vision of a future in which culture will become harmonised with nature.

Book Reviews

Open Access June 17, 2023

Johansen, Thomas Kjeller (ed.). Productive Knowledge in Ancient Philosophy: The Concept of Technê. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press 2021, xiv + 316 pp.

Marilù Papandreou

Page range: 499-503

Download PDF

Open Access April 27, 2023

Moser, Aloisia, Kant, Wittgenstein, and the Performativity of Thought. Cham: Palgrave Macmillan 2021, xv + 158 pp.

Jan Podacker

Page range: 503-507

Download PDF

Ahead of Print / Just Accepted

Ahead of Print / Just Accepted

Volume 105 (2023)

Volume 104 (2022)

Volume 103 (2021)

Volume 102 (2020)

Volume 101 (2019)

Volume 100 (2018)

Volume 99 (2017)

Volume 98 (2016)

Volume 97 (2015)

Volume 96 (2014)

Volume 95 (2013)

Volume 94 (2012)

Volume 93 (2011)

Volume 92 (2010)

Volume 91 (2009)

Volume 90 (2008)

Volume 89 (2007)

Volume 88 (2006)

Volume 87 (2005)

Volume 86 (2004)

Volume 85 (2003)

Volume 84 (2002)

Volume 83 (2001)

Volume 82 (2000)

Volume 81 (1999)

Volume 80 (1998)

Volume 79 (1997)

Volume 78 (1996)

Volume 77 (1995)

Volume 76 (1994)

Volume 75 (1993)

Volume 74 (1992)

Volume 73 (1991)

Volume 72 (1990)

Volume 71 (1989)

Volume 70 (1988)

Volume 69 (1987)

Volume 68 (1986)

Volume 67 (1985)

Volume 66 (1984)

Volume 65 (1983)

Volume 64 (1982)

Volume 63 (1981)

Volume 62 (1980)

Volume 61 (1979)

Volume 60 (1978)

Volume 59 (1977)

Volume 58 (1976)

Volume 57 (1975)

Volume 56 (1974)

Volume 55 (1973)

Volume 54 (1972)

Volume 53 (1971)

Volume 52 (1970)

Volume 51 (1969)

Volume 50 (1968)

Volume 49 (1967)

Volume 48 (1966)

Issue 1-3

Volume 47 (1965)

Issue 1-3

Volume 46 (1964)

Volume 45 (1963)

Volume 44 (1962)

Volume 43 (1961)

Volume 42 (1960)

Volume 41 (1933)

Volume 40 (1931)

Volume 39 (1930)

Issue 1-4

Volume 38 (1928)

Issue 1-4

Volume 37 (1926)

Volume 36 (1924)

Issue 1-2

Volume 35 (1923)

Issue 1-2

Volume 34 (1922)

Volume 33 (1921)

Volume 32 (1920)

Volume 31 (1918)

Issue 1-4

Volume 30 (1917)

Issue 1-4

Volume 29 (1916)

Volume 28 (1915)

Issue 1-4

Volume 27 (1914)

Volume 26 (1913)

Volume 25 (1912)

Volume 24 (1911)

Volume 23 (1910)

Issue 1-4

Volume 22 (1909)

Volume 21 (1908)

Volume 20 (1907)

Volume 19 (1906)

Volume 18 (1905)

Volume 17 (1904)

Volume 16 (1903)

Volume 15 (1902)

Volume 14 (1901)

Volume 13 (1900)

Volume 12 (1899)

Volume 11 (1898)

Volume 10 (1897)

Issue 1-4

Volume 9 (1896)

Volume 8 (1895)

Volume 7 (1894)

Volume 6 (1893)

Volume 5 (1892)

Volume 4 (1891)

Volume 3 (1890)

Volume 2 (1889)

Volume 1 (1888)

Journal Impact Factor	0.4	2022, Journal Citation Reports (Clarivate, 2023)
5-year Journal Impact Factor	0.4	2022, Journal Citation Reports (Clarivate, 2023)
Journal Citation Indicator	0.49	2022, Journal Citation Reports (Clarivate, 2023)
CiteScore	0.6	2022, Scopus (Elsevier B.V., 2023)
SCImago Journal Rank	0.234	2022, SJR (Scimago Lab, 2023; Data Source: Scopus)
Source Normalized Impact per Paper	0.888	2022, CWTS Journal Indicators (CWTS B.V., 2023; Data Source: Scopus)

More information about journal rankings

Submit

Manuscripts can be submitted online at: https://mc.manuscriptcentral.com/agph

The Archiv does not accept unsolicited book reviews. For all other queries on book reviews, please contact agp.reviews@degruyter.com

Instructions for authors

Stylesheet

Editorial

Editors

Karin de Boer, KU Leuven
Anja Jauernig, New York University
Katja Vogt, Columbia University

Book Review Editors

Julia Borcherding, University of Cambridge, agp.reviews@degruyter.com
Anna Schriefl, Heinrich-Heine-University Düsseldorf, agp.reviews@degruyter.com

Managing Editor

Carlo DaVia, agp@degruyter.com

(Deutsch)

Online ISSN: 1613-0650
Print ISSN: 0003-9101
Type: Journal
Languages: English, German, French
Publisher: De Gruyter
First published: January 1, 1888
Publication Frequency: 4 Issues per Year
Audience: Academics and Students of Philosophy, Libraries, Institutes
Keywords: Global History of Philosophy