权益分类	功能权益	普通用户	{{item.name}}会员
{{category.name}}	{{benefitItem.name}}

Research on the Philosophy of Nature in German Idealism (particularly F.W.J. Schelling and G.W.F. Hegel)

德国唯心主义自然哲学研究（特别是F.W.J.谢林和G.W.F.黑格尔）

基本信息

批准号：
11610013
负责人：
NAGASHIMA Takashi
金额：
$ 1.73万
依托单位：
Nippon Medical School
依托单位国家：
日本
项目类别：
Grant-in-Aid for Scientific Research (C)
财政年份：
1999
资助国家：
日本
起止时间：
1999 至 2001
项目状态：
已结题

项目摘要

In this third year I have developed my research project in following direction : Firstly the research on the debate around 1800 between Andreas Roschlaub and Christoph Wilhelm Hufeland based on the history of medicine. Secondly the research on F. W. J. Schelling and A. K. Eschenmayer.With regard to the first research I collected materials of Roschlaub in the preceding year, in this year I have collected the materials of Hufeland, particularly his journal. Moreover I have gotten in contact with Japanese researcher on Hufeland. I have been lectured by him on the life of Hufeland, particularly on the relation of Hufeland with Kant and discussed with him.In the research-process I have put materials on Roschlaub in order and investigated issues from the standpoint of Roschlaub's materials. I analyzed Rtfschlaub's papers on Brownianism in his Magazin zur Verkommnung der theoretischen und praktischen Heilkunde and drew up the list of Rdschlaub's literature. As the result of the research I have written a paper on him as researchnote.With regard to the second research I have a paper on this theme. And I reexamined this theme and confirmed that the relation of Eschenmayer with Schelling can be analyzed from their correspondence, and yet that the issue of this relation and their debate to 1806 concentrated on the theme Naturphilosophie and its principle. Third debate is different from two preceding debates on the point that around 1809 the debate with Jacobi, his estimate of Spinozismus and the relation with Boehme grew central theme in the development of Schelling's thinking Therefore we must analyze this third debate in another form as two debates.

在这第三年，我发展了我的研究项目如下方向：首先是1800年左右安德烈亚斯·罗施劳布和克里斯托弗·威廉·胡弗兰之间基于医学史的辩论的研究。其次，对谢林和艾森迈耶的研究。关于第一个研究，我在前一年收集了Roschlaub的资料，今年我收集了Hufeland的资料，特别是他的期刊。此外，我已经与日本的Hufeland研究人员取得了联系。他曾给我讲过胡费兰的生平，特别是胡费兰与康德的关系，并与他进行过讨论。在研究过程中，我对Roschlaub的资料进行了整理，站在Roschlaub资料的角度来研究问题。我分析了拉什劳在他的《理论与实践》杂志上发表的关于布朗主义的论文，并列出了拉什劳的文献清单。作为研究的结果，我写了一篇关于他的论文作为研究笔记。关于第二个研究，我有一篇关于这个主题的论文。我重新审视了这个主题确认了Eschenmayer和Schelling的关系可以从他们的通信中分析出来，但是这种关系的问题和他们1806年的争论集中在自然哲学和它的原则上。第三场辩论不同于之前的两场辩论，在1809年前后，与雅可比的辩论，他对斯宾诺莎谟的评价以及与伯谟的关系成为谢林思想发展的中心主题，因此我们必须以另一种形式分析这第三场辩论，作为两场辩论。