Page 237 - Communication and the Evolution of Society

214 Notes

Leuninger, “Linguistik und Psychologie,” in R. Bartsch and Vennemenn,
eds., Linguistik und Nachbarwissenschaften (Kronberg, 1973), pp. 225-
241.
43. E. H. Lenneberg, Biologische Grundlagen der Sprache (Frankfurt,
1972), and “Ein Wort unter uns,” in Leuninger et al., Linguistik und
Psychologie, pp. 53-72.
44. L. Kohlberg, “Stage and Sequence,” in D. Goslin, ed., Handbook
of Socialization Theory and Research (Chicago, 1969), and “From is to
Ought,” in T. Mischel, ed., Cognitive Development and Epistemology
(New York, 1971), pp. 151-236.
45. On this point, cf. U. Oevermann, ‘““Kompetenz und Peformanz,”
unpubl. MS, Max-Planck-Institut fur Bildungsforschung (1974).
46. Kant, Critique of Pure Reason, N. Kemp Smith, trans. (New
York, 1961), p. 138.
47. B. Stroud, ‘Transcendental Arguments,” Journal of Philosophy 9
(1968) :241-254; M. S. Gram, “Transcendental Arguments,” Nozs 5
(1971) :15-26; J. Hintikka, “Transcendental Arguments,” Nows 6 (1972):
174-281; and M. S. Gram, “Categories and Transcendental Arguments,”
Man and World 6 (1973) :252-269.
48. R. Bittner, “Transzendental,” in Handbuch philosophischer Grund-
begriffe, vol. 5 (Munich, 1974), pp. 1524-1539.
49. For example, the Kant reception of the Erlangen school assumes
a transcendental status for the basic concepts of protophysics only in a
limited sense; cf. the discussion volume edited by G. Bohme, Protophysik
(Frankfurt, 1975).
50. Piaget’s Kantianism is typical of this approach.
51. Cf. K.-O. Apel’s introductions to volumes 1 and 2 of C. S. Peirce’s
Schriften (Frankfurt, 1967 and 1970).
52. Cf. my “Postscript to Knowledge and Human Interests,” Philoso-
phy of the Social Sciences 3(1973):157—189; cf. also R. Bubner, “Trans-
zendentale Hermeneutik,” in Simon-Schafer and Zimmerli, eds., Wissen-
schafistheorie der Geisteswissenschaften (Hamburg, 1975), pp. 57-70.
53. F. Kambartel, Erfahrung und Struktur (Frankfurt, 1968).
54. J. Habermas, ‘““Wahrheitstheorien,” in Festschrift fir Walter Schulz
(Pfullingen, 1973), pp. 211-265.
55. W. Sellars, ‘‘Presupposing,” Philosophical Review 63 (1954) :197-
215; P. F. Strawson, “A Reply to Mr. Sellars,” Philosophical Review 63
(1954) !216-231.
56. U. Oevermann, “Theorie der individuellen Bildungsprozesse,”
unpubl. MS, Max-Planck-Institut fiir Bildungsforschung (1974).
57. On this point, cf. the controversy between Quine and Chomsky:
N. Chomsky, “Quine’s Empirical Assumptions,” and W. V. O. Quine,
“Replies,” both in Davidson and Hintikka, eds., Words and Objections
(Dordrecht, 1969), pp. 53-68 and 292-352; W. V. O. Quine, “Method-
ological Reflections on Current Linguistic Theory,’ in Davidson and