Who was Anton Wilhelm AMO? What can we learn from him today? What should universities - with respect to so called "knowledge management", so called "divergent thinking", and anti-discriminatory measures learn from Amo, Levinas, Latino (De Sesa) et al ?
These questions are raised as are questions with respect to rarely ever mentioned texts of KANT, HUME, HEGEL, ROUSSEAU and others, focussing on *anti-semitic, racist, misogyn(ist), uncritical, pseudo-scientific nonsense*, which is hardly ever mentioned in so called "biographies" about some of these men often presented as ethical "role models".
Table of Contents
1 Introduction
1.1 Introduction with BERNHARD, KEHLMANN, LEVINAS et al?
1.2 „Tenor(s)“ of the study
2 („Holy“?) Bartolomé DE LAS CASAS
2.1 Who was DE LAS CASAS?
2.2 DE LAS CASAS and human rights „development“!?
3 Juan LATINO (Juan DE SESA)
3.1 Who was Juan LATINO ?
3.2 LATINO: unknown to KANT?!
4 Anton Wilhelm AMO
4.1 Who was Anton Wilhelm AMO?
4.2 What to learn from Anton Wilhelm AMO?
4.3 Anton Wilhelm AMO and „universities“ today?
4.4 Anton Wilhelm AMO and his emigration?
4.5 AMO and the „Ding an sich“ (noumenon)?
4.6 NTEP on AMO and implications?
4.7 AMO: unknown to KANT!?
5 David HUME
5.1 „Enlightening“ David HUME at „WU WIEN“?
5.2 Gilles DELEUZE on HUME?
5.3 HAYEK and „unser weiser Führer“ David HUME?
5.4 DAIRE and MOLINARI on HUME?
5.5 Gerhard STREMINGER on HUME?
5.6 DER NEUE BROCKHAUS (1959) on HUME?
6 Race/“Rasse“; „Rassengesetze“; Racism/“Rassismus“
6.1 Definition of „Rasse“ with BROCKHAUS?
6.2 Definition of „Races of men“ by SHAPIRO/PARSONS?
6.3 Definition of „Rasse“ with BROCKHAUS?
6.4 Definition of „Rassismus“ with BROCKHAUS?
7 Immanuel KANT
7.1 KANT on Africo-American people anno 1764 (1766)?
7.2 KANT on „Frauenzimmer“ (women) anno 1766 (1764)?
7.3 Again: KANT on Afro-americans anno 1766 (1764)?
7.4 KLEIN on KANT’s „scharfe Beobachtungsgabe“?
7.5 Wolbert G. C. SMIDT on KANTs „Erhabenes“?
7.6 Patrick FRIERSON on KANTs „Erhabenes“?
7.7 Monika FIRLA on KANT and ‚Zeitgeist‘-fiction?
7.8 GRABNER-HAIDER/WEINKE on KANT?
7.9 VOLPI/NIDA-RÜMELIN on KANT?
7.10 PONGS (1976) on KANT?
7.11 KLOPFER (2008) on KANT and „Pietismus“!?
7.12 KANT, Afro-americans and „phlogiston“ anno 1785?
7.13 (Sir) Isaiah BERLIN on KANT?
7.14 BERLIN on KANT‘s „scharfer und äußerst klarer Verstand“?
7.15 KANT: „Meister der Architektonik der Vernunft“(GADAMER)?
7.16 WIMMER on KANT and Wilhelm Anton AMO?
7.17 Helmut FUCHS on KANT?
7.18 Christof MÜLLER on KANT?
7.19 Nikolaus FRANKE on KANT?
7.20 Anna GAMPER on KANT ?
7.21 Fritz SCHEBECK on KANT?
7.22 PERTHOLD/SPITZER/WALLNER on KANT?
7.23 Thomas OLECHOWSKI on KANT?
7.24 Gerhard LUF on KANT?
7.25 Again: Gerhard LUF on KANT?
7.26 Alexander SOMEK on KANT, HEGEL and ROUSSEAU?
7.27 RÜPING/JEROUSCHEK on KANT?
7.28 Fritz SCHEBECK on KANT?
7.29 PERTHOLD/SPITZER/WALLNER on KANT?
7.30 Thomas OLECHOWSKI on KANT?
7.31 Alexander SOMEK on KANT, HEGEL and ROUSSEAU?
7.32 RÜPING/JEROUSCHEK on KANT?
8 HEGEL
8.1 RÜPING/JEROUSCHEK on HEGEL?
8.2 COOTER/ULEN on HEGEL?
8.3 Franz Martin WIMMER on HEGEL?
9 Karl LARENZ and the NS-regime
9.1 Karl LARENZ on KANT?
9.2 RÜPING/JEROUSCHEK on LARENZ?
9.3 Thomas OLECHOWSKI on LARENZ?
9.4 Thomas HOEREN on „Ur-Vater“ LARENZ?
9.5 „High quality“ ? - FAZ, HOEREN, and „Ur-Vater“ LARENZ?
10 Conclusion and „Outlook“?
Objectives and Topics
This work provides a critical and fact-based analysis of the philosophical reception of thinkers like Immanuel Kant, G.W.F. Hegel, and David Hume. It investigates how academic and institutional discourses often obscure the racist, sexist, and exclusionary aspects of these figures, while advocating for a more comprehensive and critical approach to university education and history of philosophy.
- Critique of the canonization and "divinization" of European philosophers.
- Examination of the racist and xenophobic writings of Kant, Hegel, and Hume.
- Highlighting the historical contributions of African and Afro-American thinkers such as Anton Wilhelm Amo and Juan Latino.
- Analysis of the institutional "whitewashing" of problematic aspects in the works of foundational Western philosophers.
- Evaluation of current legal and ethical education regarding these historical biases.
Excerpt from the book
4.1 Who was Anton Wilhelm AMO?
Anton Wilhelm AMO (also known as „Antonius Guilielmus Amo Afer ab Aximo“) was a man, an indigenous personality, from what today is to be called „Ghana“. He was enslaved, came to Germany, was allowed to study, learnt several languages (German, English, French, Latin, Hebrew, Greek, Dutch), became „Magister“ (master) in philosophy and – so called - „liberal arts“ , later on, he made his PhD. As e.g. Prof Dr Scott W. WILLIAMS54 puts it „In 1729 he [sc. AMO] graduated from Halle in law with his Disputation55 De jure Maurorum in Europa . In 1730 Amo went to Wittenberg University and in the same year gained a degree as Doctor of Philosophy.“56 Furthormore, WILLIAMS also states: „As his [sc. Second!] Disputation was published, Amo was made Professor of Philosophy.“57 (AMO’s second (!) doctoral thesis was published in 1734.58)
Summary of Chapters
1 Introduction: Introduces the critical focus of the study regarding the positive narratives surrounding major Western philosophers and sets the framework for the investigation.
2 („Holy“?) Bartolomé DE LAS CASAS: Discusses the historical and ethical contradictions surrounding Bartolomé de las Casas and his involvement in the treatment of indigenous and African populations.
3 Juan LATINO (Juan DE SESA): Profiles the life and scholarly work of Juan Latino, an African professor in 16th-century Granada, highlighting his exclusion from traditional philosophical canons.
4 Anton Wilhelm AMO: Focuses on the life and intellectual contributions of Anton Wilhelm Amo and questions why his work is systematically ignored by contemporary universities.
5 David HUME: Critically evaluates the reception of David Hume's work, particularly addressing the deliberate omission of his racist viewpoints in standard academic presentations.
6 Race/“Rasse“; „Rassengesetze“; Racism/“Rassismus“: Analyzes the conceptualization and definitions of race and racism, particularly drawing upon encyclopedic sources to show how these terms were manipulated.
7 Immanuel KANT: Provides a comprehensive critique of Immanuel Kant, focusing on his racist and misogynistic writings, and examining how various scholars have attempted to justify or ignore these aspects of his work.
8 HEGEL: Examines the racist and totalitarian elements within Hegel's philosophy and how these are often glossed over in legal and economic discourse.
9 Karl LARENZ and the NS-regime: Investigates the intellectual legacy of Karl Larenz, specifically addressing his role during the National Socialist era and the continued glorification of his work in modern legal discourse.
10 Conclusion and „Outlook“?: Summarizes the necessity for a more honest and critical academic approach, emphasizing the responsibility of professors in shaping the ethical consciousness of students.
Keywords
Anton Wilhelm Amo, Immanuel Kant, G.W.F. Hegel, David Hume, Juan Latino, Racism, Philosophy of Law, Ethics, Enlightenment, Eurocentrism, Colonialism, Human Rights, Anti-semitism, Academic Discourse, Critical Reflection.
Frequently Asked Questions
What is the fundamental purpose of this work?
The work aims to provide a critical, fact-based, and scientific reassessment of major Western philosophers, challenging the predominantly positive and uncritical narrative presented in modern academic and university curricula.
What are the central thematic fields covered?
The study centers on philosophy, legal history, legal ethics, and the sociology of academic knowledge production, with a focus on human rights and historical race relations.
What is the primary research question?
The research asks why historical philosophers like Kant and Hegel, who hold "racist and exclusionary" views, are presented in modern universities as "infallible role models" and "saints" without addressing their deeply problematic texts.
Which scientific method does the author employ?
The author employs a critical, fact-bound, and polemical analysis, systematically contrasting the established academic canon with primary sources and historical evidence of racist and exclusionary thought.
What is covered in the main body of the text?
The main body systematically critiques the works of major philosophers including Kant, Hegel, and Hume, while introducing the work of marginalized intellectuals like Anton Wilhelm Amo and Juan Latino to demonstrate alternative academic possibilities.
Which keywords characterize this work?
Key terms include Anton Wilhelm Amo, racism, Eurocentrism, critical ethics, legal philosophy, and the "whitewashing" of history in philosophical discourse.
Why is the role of universities highlighted so prominently?
The author argues that universities perpetuate a "convergent" and "uncritical" way of thinking by shielding students from the full, often disturbing, reality of the texts written by foundational Western thinkers.
What is the significance of the "island-example" (Insel-Beispiel) in relation to Kant?
The author cites this example to demonstrate Kant’s rigid adherence to the death penalty, using it as a case study to question the "humanistic" interpretations of Kantian philosophy.
- Arbeit zitieren
- Mag. Georg Schilling (Autor:in), 2009, „Vom faulen Holze lebend“?! – „Remapping“ the "jungle" with Amo, Latino, Levinas et al.?, München, GRIN Verlag, https://www.hausarbeiten.de/document/137650
