What do you think?
Rate this book
عالم در آیینه تفکر فلسفی
Karl Jaspers hat vor über dreißig Jahren in einem Vortragszyklus die Welt des philosophischen Denkens in einfachen Schritten entfaltet – und mit der vorliegenden Buchfassung eine dauerhafte und gar nicht beschwerliche Schule des philosophischen Denkens hinterlassen. Die Themenbereiche sind der Kosmos und das Leben, Geschichte und Gegenwart, das Wissen des Menschen, die Frage nach dem Menschen, die politische Diskussion, der Mensch in der Politik, Erkenntnis und Werturteil, Psychologie und Soziologie, die Öffentlichkeit, die Chiffren des Menschen, die Liebe, der Tod, die Philosophie in der Welt. Bei jedem Thema geht er von Realitäten des Lebens aus, um von daher zum Grund der Dinge zu finden. Jaspers gibt Denkanstöße, keine endgültigen Antworten – diese muß jeder für sich selber finden.
- GenresPhilosophy
167 pages, Unknown Binding
First published January 1, 1965
5 people are currently reading
68 people want to read
About the author
Karl Jaspers
422 books364 followersJaspers was born in Oldenburg in 1883 to a mother from a local farming community, and a jurist father. He showed an early interest in philosophy, but his father's experience with the legal system undoubtedly influenced his decision to study law at university. It soon became clear that Jaspers did not particularly enjoy law, and he switched to studying medicine in 1902.
Jaspers graduated from medical school in 1909 and began work at a psychiatric hospital in Heidelberg where Emil Kraepelin had worked some years earlier. Jaspers became dissatisfied with the way the medical community of the time approached the study of mental illness and set himself the task of improving the psychiatric approach. In 1913 Jaspers gained a temporary post as a psychology teacher at Heidelberg University. The post later became permanent, and Jaspers never returned to clinical practice.
At the age of 40 Jaspers turned from psychology to philosophy, expanding on themes he had developed in his psychiatric works. He became a renowned philosopher, well respected in Germany and Europe. In 1948 Jaspers moved to the University of Basel in Switzerland. He remained prominent in the philosophical community until his death in Basel in 1969.
Jaspers' dissatisfaction with the popular understanding of mental illness led him to question both the diagnostic criteria and the methods of clinical psychiatry. He published a revolutionary paper in 1910 in which he addressed the problem of whether paranoia was an aspect of personality or the result of biological changes. Whilst not broaching new ideas, this article introduced a new method of study. Jaspers studied several patients in detail, giving biographical information on the people concerned as well as providing notes on how the patients themselves felt about their symptoms. This has become known as the biographical method and now forms the mainstay of modern psychiatric practice.
Jaspers set about writing his views on mental illness in a book which he published in 1913 as General Psychopathology. The two volumes which make up this work have become a classic in the psychiatric literature and many modern diagnostic criteria stem from ideas contained within them. Of particular importance, Jaspers believed that psychiatrists should diagnose symptoms (particularly of psychosis) by their form rather than by their content. For example, in diagnosing a hallucination, the fact that a person experiences visual phenomena when no sensory stimuli account for it (form) assumes more importance than what the patient sees (content).
Jaspers felt that psychiatrists could also diagnose delusions in the same way. He argued that clinicians should not consider a belief delusional based on the content of the belief, but only based on the way in which a patient holds such a belief (see delusion for further discussion). Jaspers also distinguished between primary and secondary delusions. He defined primary delusions as autochthonous meaning arising without apparent cause, appearing incomprehensible in terms of normal mental processes. (This is a distinctly different use of the term autochthonous than its usual medical or sociological meaning of indigenous.) Secondary delusions, on the other hand, he classified as influenced by the person's background, current situation or mental state.
Jaspers considered primary delusions as ultimately 'un-understandable,' as he believed no coherent reasoning process existed behind their formation. This view has caused some controversy, and the likes of R. D. Laing and Richard Bentall have criticised it, stressing that taking this stance can lead therapists into the complacency of assuming that because they do not understand a patient, the patient is deluded and further investigation on the part of the therapist will have no effect.
Most commentators associate Jaspers with the philosophy of existentialism, in part because he draws largely upon the existentialist roots of Nietzsche and Kierk
Jaspers graduated from medical school in 1909 and began work at a psychiatric hospital in Heidelberg where Emil Kraepelin had worked some years earlier. Jaspers became dissatisfied with the way the medical community of the time approached the study of mental illness and set himself the task of improving the psychiatric approach. In 1913 Jaspers gained a temporary post as a psychology teacher at Heidelberg University. The post later became permanent, and Jaspers never returned to clinical practice.
At the age of 40 Jaspers turned from psychology to philosophy, expanding on themes he had developed in his psychiatric works. He became a renowned philosopher, well respected in Germany and Europe. In 1948 Jaspers moved to the University of Basel in Switzerland. He remained prominent in the philosophical community until his death in Basel in 1969.
Jaspers' dissatisfaction with the popular understanding of mental illness led him to question both the diagnostic criteria and the methods of clinical psychiatry. He published a revolutionary paper in 1910 in which he addressed the problem of whether paranoia was an aspect of personality or the result of biological changes. Whilst not broaching new ideas, this article introduced a new method of study. Jaspers studied several patients in detail, giving biographical information on the people concerned as well as providing notes on how the patients themselves felt about their symptoms. This has become known as the biographical method and now forms the mainstay of modern psychiatric practice.
Jaspers set about writing his views on mental illness in a book which he published in 1913 as General Psychopathology. The two volumes which make up this work have become a classic in the psychiatric literature and many modern diagnostic criteria stem from ideas contained within them. Of particular importance, Jaspers believed that psychiatrists should diagnose symptoms (particularly of psychosis) by their form rather than by their content. For example, in diagnosing a hallucination, the fact that a person experiences visual phenomena when no sensory stimuli account for it (form) assumes more importance than what the patient sees (content).
Jaspers felt that psychiatrists could also diagnose delusions in the same way. He argued that clinicians should not consider a belief delusional based on the content of the belief, but only based on the way in which a patient holds such a belief (see delusion for further discussion). Jaspers also distinguished between primary and secondary delusions. He defined primary delusions as autochthonous meaning arising without apparent cause, appearing incomprehensible in terms of normal mental processes. (This is a distinctly different use of the term autochthonous than its usual medical or sociological meaning of indigenous.) Secondary delusions, on the other hand, he classified as influenced by the person's background, current situation or mental state.
Jaspers considered primary delusions as ultimately 'un-understandable,' as he believed no coherent reasoning process existed behind their formation. This view has caused some controversy, and the likes of R. D. Laing and Richard Bentall have criticised it, stressing that taking this stance can lead therapists into the complacency of assuming that because they do not understand a patient, the patient is deluded and further investigation on the part of the therapist will have no effect.
Most commentators associate Jaspers with the philosophy of existentialism, in part because he draws largely upon the existentialist roots of Nietzsche and Kierk
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 6 of 6 reviews
September 28, 2025
I might have set my expectations wrong going into this book, but it didn’t quite deliver what I was hoping for. From the publisher's summary, I expected an accessible overview of philosophical ideas, perhaps with some historical context to guide the reader through key concepts. Instead, Jaspers presents his own philosophical worldview, often with a strong political undertone.
He begins from certain foundational premises, which he does not really justify or unpack in the book. While I don’t doubt these ideas were developed through years of deep philosophical reflection, the reader is largely left outside that process. The book assumes agreement rather than building understanding. Much of the discussion focuses on Western thought (traced back to the Greeks) and Judeo-Christian values, which Jaspers appears to treat as inherently superior.
In several parts, he argues that Western values, particularly those rooted in political freedom, are the only true human values, never stating why. This distinction between "free nations" (Europe and the U.S.) and others that supposedly don't grasp the concept of freedom felt uncomfortable and overly simplistic to me.
That said, it’s certainly an interesting read, and Jaspers' perspective is thought-provoking. But it’s not really a “school” of thought in the sense of offering a broad, educational overview, nor is it especially beginner-friendly. The language is dense, and key concepts are often presented without explanation, which makes it hard to recommend to a general audience.
If you’re looking for an introduction to philosophy, this may not be the place to start.
He begins from certain foundational premises, which he does not really justify or unpack in the book. While I don’t doubt these ideas were developed through years of deep philosophical reflection, the reader is largely left outside that process. The book assumes agreement rather than building understanding. Much of the discussion focuses on Western thought (traced back to the Greeks) and Judeo-Christian values, which Jaspers appears to treat as inherently superior.
In several parts, he argues that Western values, particularly those rooted in political freedom, are the only true human values, never stating why. This distinction between "free nations" (Europe and the U.S.) and others that supposedly don't grasp the concept of freedom felt uncomfortable and overly simplistic to me.
That said, it’s certainly an interesting read, and Jaspers' perspective is thought-provoking. But it’s not really a “school” of thought in the sense of offering a broad, educational overview, nor is it especially beginner-friendly. The language is dense, and key concepts are often presented without explanation, which makes it hard to recommend to a general audience.
If you’re looking for an introduction to philosophy, this may not be the place to start.
November 30, 2020
“La filosofia è universale. Nulla esiste che non la riguardi. Chi filosofa si interessa a tutto. Ma nessun uomo può sapere ogni cosa. Che cosa distingue la vana via dell’onniscienza dalla via filosofica che conduce all’onnicomprensività? Il sapere è infinito e disperso; la via filosofica cerca, utilizzando il sapere, di pervenire al centro”.
——————-
Chiamato dalla radio bavarese a tenere un corso settimanale di lezioni filosofiche, Karl Jaspers non si sottrasse e ne scaturirono 13 episodi, qui trascritti in quest’opera, che per forza di cose è breve, piccola. Ma, come dice lo stesso filosofo nella prefazione, questo non significa che tratti di piccoli temi, perché fare filosofia significa sempre e comunque “affrontare grandi temi”. E tra questi il cosmo, la storia, l’uomo, l’amore, la morte...
Fare filosofia non vuol dire per forza scrivere in modo prolisso e utilizzare paroloni e concettoni, e Jaspers qui lo dimostra. Ovviamente costruisce un percorso che va seguito con attenzione, ma chiunque potrebbe approcciarsi a queste lezioni, perché Jaspers è discorsivo, riprende i concetti e li affronta da altri punti di vista, li riassume al termine di ogni “puntata”. E nel mentre, ci introduce al grande mondo dell’esistenzialismo: l’uomo e l’Esserci, l’uomo e il mondo, la vita pratica, i piccoli grandi problemi della vita. Tutto sembra naturale, semplice, immediato; ed è proprio questo il modo più efficace di fare filosofia.
——————-
Chiamato dalla radio bavarese a tenere un corso settimanale di lezioni filosofiche, Karl Jaspers non si sottrasse e ne scaturirono 13 episodi, qui trascritti in quest’opera, che per forza di cose è breve, piccola. Ma, come dice lo stesso filosofo nella prefazione, questo non significa che tratti di piccoli temi, perché fare filosofia significa sempre e comunque “affrontare grandi temi”. E tra questi il cosmo, la storia, l’uomo, l’amore, la morte...
Fare filosofia non vuol dire per forza scrivere in modo prolisso e utilizzare paroloni e concettoni, e Jaspers qui lo dimostra. Ovviamente costruisce un percorso che va seguito con attenzione, ma chiunque potrebbe approcciarsi a queste lezioni, perché Jaspers è discorsivo, riprende i concetti e li affronta da altri punti di vista, li riassume al termine di ogni “puntata”. E nel mentre, ci introduce al grande mondo dell’esistenzialismo: l’uomo e l’Esserci, l’uomo e il mondo, la vita pratica, i piccoli grandi problemi della vita. Tutto sembra naturale, semplice, immediato; ed è proprio questo il modo più efficace di fare filosofia.
Read
November 2, 2025Einführung in das philosophische Denkens Karl Jaspers', in der aber zentrale Begriffe dieser Philosophie (Chiffre oder Transzendenz etwa) gar nicht genau oder nur beiläufig, anscheinend widerwillig eingeführt werden. Interessante und kluge Gedanken gibt es allemal. Das Buch funktioniert auch gut als Plädoyer für Philosophie mit Blick auf persönliche und gedankliche Freiheit, Demokratie, Selbsterkenntnis und Menschenwürde.
Interessanterweise definiert Jaspers Menschsein mit Anthropina, die alle auf unterschiedliche Weisen falsch sind. Good stuff.
Ideen- und imperialismusgeschichtlich relevant ist hier, dass noch 1965 der Souveränität von Staaten immer wieder eine große moralische Bedeutung angedichtet wurde und bei einer Aufzählung der zeitgenössischen Gefahren für die Menschheit zwischen Militärdiktatur und Atomwaffen von der Bevölkerungsvemehrung die Rede ist - mit dem eindrucksvollen Satz: "Das Bewußtsein der farbigen Rassen (mehr als zwei Drittel der Menschen) wendet sich mit wachsender Empfindlichkeit und Wildheit gegen die Weißen." (S. 173).
Das lässt einen auch perplex zurück, weil aus Jaspers' Philosophie eigentlich überzeugend ein selbstkritisches, reflektierteres, die Menschenwürde ausnahmslos anerkennendes, nach Wahrheit strebendes, freiheitliches Denken folgt.
Diese Dissonanz ist vielleicht ein schönes Symbol für die Zeit des deutschen Bildungsbürgertums zwischen 1945 und 1968.
Interessanterweise definiert Jaspers Menschsein mit Anthropina, die alle auf unterschiedliche Weisen falsch sind. Good stuff.
Ideen- und imperialismusgeschichtlich relevant ist hier, dass noch 1965 der Souveränität von Staaten immer wieder eine große moralische Bedeutung angedichtet wurde und bei einer Aufzählung der zeitgenössischen Gefahren für die Menschheit zwischen Militärdiktatur und Atomwaffen von der Bevölkerungsvemehrung die Rede ist - mit dem eindrucksvollen Satz: "Das Bewußtsein der farbigen Rassen (mehr als zwei Drittel der Menschen) wendet sich mit wachsender Empfindlichkeit und Wildheit gegen die Weißen." (S. 173).
Das lässt einen auch perplex zurück, weil aus Jaspers' Philosophie eigentlich überzeugend ein selbstkritisches, reflektierteres, die Menschenwürde ausnahmslos anerkennendes, nach Wahrheit strebendes, freiheitliches Denken folgt.
Diese Dissonanz ist vielleicht ein schönes Symbol für die Zeit des deutschen Bildungsbürgertums zwischen 1945 und 1968.
August 7, 2017
Alza la radio...parla il professor Jaspers
un esperimento interessante e particolare: una serie di lezioni radiofoniche tenute da Jaspers negli anni sessante per la radio bavarese - nel tentativo di spiegare cosa è la filosofia, cosa significa filosofare e a cosa serve nel nostro mondo, vengono toccati i temi fondamentali: soggetto e oggetto, essere e esistenza, storia, politica, amore e morte.... Sono pagine corpose e dense, non facili specie nei passaggi più tecnici su soggetto/oggetto ed EsserCi/Esistere, ma comunque rigorose e chiare nel delineare le questioni in gioco. Jaspers non cita a ogni piè sospinto teorie e sistemi filosofici (se non per riferirsi a Kant, sua guida fondamentale, e per bastonare Marx e Freud) e quindi riesce ad accompagnare il lettore verso la filosofia, che altro non è alla fine che porsi domande, anche se forse, le risposte non sono raggiungibili....
un esperimento interessante e particolare: una serie di lezioni radiofoniche tenute da Jaspers negli anni sessante per la radio bavarese - nel tentativo di spiegare cosa è la filosofia, cosa significa filosofare e a cosa serve nel nostro mondo, vengono toccati i temi fondamentali: soggetto e oggetto, essere e esistenza, storia, politica, amore e morte.... Sono pagine corpose e dense, non facili specie nei passaggi più tecnici su soggetto/oggetto ed EsserCi/Esistere, ma comunque rigorose e chiare nel delineare le questioni in gioco. Jaspers non cita a ogni piè sospinto teorie e sistemi filosofici (se non per riferirsi a Kant, sua guida fondamentale, e per bastonare Marx e Freud) e quindi riesce ad accompagnare il lettore verso la filosofia, che altro non è alla fine che porsi domande, anche se forse, le risposte non sono raggiungibili....
January 7, 2020
Wel in het Nederlands gelezen...
July 21, 2021
This entire review has been hidden because of spoilers.
Displaying 1 - 6 of 6 reviews