LEADER 04237nam a22005415i 4500
001 810885
003 TR_AnAIT
005 20260131013229
007 cr nn 008mamaa
008 130403s1961 ne | s |||| 0|eng d
020 |a9789401510295|9978-94-015-1029-5
024 7 |a10.1007/978-94-015-1029-5|2doi
041 |aeng
049 |aTürk Tarih Kurumu Kütüphanesi
050 4|aGN
072 7|aJHM|2bicssc
072 7|aSOC002000|2bisacsh
072 7|aJHM|2thema
082 04|a301|223
090 |aDK/12156
100 1 |aJones, W.T.|eauthor.|4aut|4http://id.loc.gov/vocabulary/relators/aut
245 14|aThe Romantic Syndrome|h[electronic resource] :|bToward a New Method in Cultural Anthropology and History of Ideas /|cby W.T. Jones.
250 |a1st ed. 1961.
264 1|aDordrecht :|bSpringer Netherlands :|bImprint: Springer,|c1961.
300 |aXV, 255 p. 21 illus.|bonline resource.
336 |atext|btxt|2rdacontent
337 |acomputer|bc|2rdamedia
338 |aonline resource|bcr|2rdacarrier
347 |atext file|bPDF|2rda
490 1 |aInternational Scholars Forum ;|v14
505 0 |aI. Introduction -- II. Seven Axes of Bias -- III. Bias in the Arts and the Sciences -- IV. Four Typical Syndromes -- V. The Romantic Syndrome: Poetry -- VI. Contrasts Between the Romantic Syndrome and the Enlightenment Syndrome: Metaphysics -- VII. Contrasts Between the Romantic Syndrome and the Enlightenment Syndrome: Political Theory -- VIII. Some Applications and Some Limitations.
520 |aIn this age of specialism philosophers, like other specialists, tend to take in each other's washing. Here, perhaps imprudently, I attempt to break out of this pattern. Though I am by profes sion a philosopher, I am addressing primarily, not other philo sophers, but cultural anthropologists, sociologists, historians of ideas, and literary and art critics. Thus, while there are chapters in this book on metaphysics and political theory, I do not ask, "Is the doctrine in question true?" - which is the kind of ques tion a philosopher might be expected to raise. Instead I ask, "What can we learn from this doctrine about the personality structure of the individual who framed it and about the charac teristic drives of the society in which he lived?" My reasons for asking and for trying to answer this kind of question, instead of the usual philosophical question, are as follows: Though the material products of culture and the overt behavior patterns of societies have long been objects of scientific study, the most characteristic products of high cultures - artistic productions like poems and paintings and theoretical structures like metaphysical and scientific theory - have not as readily yielded to exact description and analysis. Not, of course, that there is not a very extensive discussion of these matters. But most of it is carried on in terms that are regrettably vague.
532 8 |aAccessibility summary: This PDF is not accessible. It is based on scanned pages and does not support features such as screen reader compatibility or described non-text content (images, graphs etc). However, it likely supports searchable and selectable text based on OCR (Optical Character Recognition). Users with accessibility needs may not be able to use this content effectively. Please contact us at accessibilitysupport@springernature.com if you require assistance or an alternative format.
532 8 |aInaccessible, or known limited accessibility
532 8 |aNo reading system accessibility options actively disabled
532 8 |aPublisher contact for further accessibility information: accessibilitysupport@springernature.com
650 0|aAnthropology.
650 0|aScience|xPhilosophy.
650 14|aAnthropology.
650 24|aPhilosophy of Science.
710 2 |aSpringerLink (Online service)
773 0 |tSpringer Nature eBook
776 08|iPrinted edition:|z9789401504126
776 08|iPrinted edition:|z9789401510301
830 0|aInternational Scholars Forum ;|v14
856 40|uhttps://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-015-1029-5
912 |aZDB-2-SHU
912 |aZDB-2-SXS
912 |aZDB-2-BAE
950 |aHumanities, Social Sciences and Law (SpringerNature-11648)
950 |aSocial Sciences (R0) (SpringerNature-43726)