Marie-Élise Zovko
Marie-Élise Zovko, née Deslattes, July 1, 1959 in Ithaca, New York, U.S.A., attended school in Bethesda and Rockville, Maryland (Thomas Wootton High School, Valedictorian, Class of 1977); B.A. in Philosophy and Religion, with minors in English and German at James Madison University, Virginia (Valedictorian, Class of 1981); M.A. in Philosophy / German Philolology under Privatdozent Dr. Michael Elsässer, 1985 (summa cum laude, "Mit Auszeichnung"; thesis title: Der Zeitbegriff bei Heidegger und Plotin, Freiburg i. Br. 1985), PhD. in Philosophy/ German Philology/ Classical Greek Philology, mentor Privatdozent Dr. Michael Elsässer († 1990), subsequently Prof. Dr. Bernhard Rang, 1992 (magna cum laude; thesis title: Natur und Gott: Das wirkungsgeschichtliche Verhältnis Schellings und Baaders, Freiburg i. Br. 1992) Albert-Ludwigs-University, Freiburg i. Br. Employed at the Institute of Philosophy, Zagreb, since 1991. Academic lecturer and mentor, Department of philosophy, Studia Croatica, University of Zagreb, 1992–2016; Adj. professor for history of philosophy 2008–2013; doctoral thesis advisor, University of Zadar, Humanities Studies, Dept. of Philosophy, 2012–ongoing.
Areas of specialization: Ancient Greek philosophy, Platonism/Neoplatonism, Mysticism, Spinoza, Kant, German Idealism, German Romantic philosophy, Schelling, Franz v. Baader, metaphysics, theory of mind, philosophizing with children/ philosophizing in life contexts.
Areas of specialization: Ancient Greek philosophy, Platonism/Neoplatonism, Mysticism, Spinoza, Kant, German Idealism, German Romantic philosophy, Schelling, Franz v. Baader, metaphysics, theory of mind, philosophizing with children/ philosophizing in life contexts.
less
InterestsView All (10)
Uploads
Papers by Marie-Élise Zovko
foundation of metaphysics. According to Kant’s limitation of cognition to the realm of sense intuition, theoretical knowledge of God, the subject, things-in-themselves,
transcendental ideas is impossible. This leads to a kind of “negative theology” of the highest principle and the supersensible as a whole. The reasons are rooted in the character of propositional thought, which can only circumscribe a singular, supersensible reality by means of predicative sentences and discursive thought. Taking Kant’s lead, but in contrast to his terminology, I call really existent singularities, including the thinking,
knowing, desiring, feeling unique individuals we know as human beings, spontaneities, in order to distinguish them from descriptive characteristics attributed to them by predicative thought. Kant’s “practico- dogmatic” account of the postulates of God and
immortality of the soul, based on the “fact of freedom” and its connection to the moral imperative, ensure the possibility of the “highest good” as final aim of moral behaviour — but cannot satisfy our need for knowledge of the supersensible. To “lay the groundwork” for experience of our own self-conscious reality, the reality of others like ourselves, of things which transcend the boundaries of sense intuition, and of true reciprocity, a
different method is needed, one which leads us “beyond being and thought” to the unconditional beginning of conditional reality
foundation of metaphysics. According to Kant’s limitation of cognition to the realm of sense intuition, theoretical knowledge of God, the subject, things-in-themselves,
transcendental ideas is impossible. This leads to a kind of “negative theology” of the highest principle and the supersensible as a whole. The reasons are rooted in the character of propositional thought, which can only circumscribe a singular, supersensible reality by means of predicative sentences and discursive thought. Taking Kant’s lead, but in contrast to his terminology, I call really existent singularities, including the thinking,
knowing, desiring, feeling unique individuals we know as human beings, spontaneities, in order to distinguish them from descriptive characteristics attributed to them by predicative thought. Kant’s “practico- dogmatic” account of the postulates of God and
immortality of the soul, based on the “fact of freedom” and its connection to the moral imperative, ensure the possibility of the “highest good” as final aim of moral behaviour — but cannot satisfy our need for knowledge of the supersensible. To “lay the groundwork” for experience of our own self-conscious reality, the reality of others like ourselves, of things which transcend the boundaries of sense intuition, and of true reciprocity, a
different method is needed, one which leads us “beyond being and thought” to the unconditional beginning of conditional reality
The imagery of the Line is associated with the imagery of above and below, ascent and descent contained in the adjacent analogies of the Sun and the Cave, but is formulated not as a simple arithmetic progression, but as a geometric proportion. Socrates presents the image of the Line in the manner of a mathematical problem, a task to be undertaken, and a riddle to be solved. With the Analogy of the Line, Plato elaborates the epistemic conditions of knowledge and reality. In its primary division, it depicts the relationship of knowledge (epistēmē) and probable opinion or belief (doksa), to their correlata, intelligible and sensible reality (noēta, aisthēta), demarcating in its subdivisions the individual faculties which contribute to this main division, their interrelationships, and their respective objects. At the same time – like its exposition in the Analogy of the Cave – it describes a path, the path of knowledge, which is at once a path of ascent and a path of descent.
To discover the proper configuration of the divisions of the Line and ‘position’ it correctly in relation to the other two analogies, and to recognize possible clues for their mutual interpretation, one must first be able to ‘see’ the relationship of the original two Analogies and terms in the equation (analogues), on the basis of which the further elements of the overarching analogy are derived. To be able to apply that ratio to the interpretation constituent elements of the equation (the likenesses, and likenesses of likenesses) and of Plato’s metaphysical project, one needs to familiarize oneself with the properties of the proportion equation on which the Divided Line is based.