Autor: Markus Siedenberg

In the literary study “Goethes Ode Prometheus, das Dramenfragment Prometheus und die Hymne Ganymed: Gehalt und Gattungspoetik im Vergleich“ the author is incorporating musicology and philosophy into his research to show Goethe’s hidden concept behind both the fragment of a drama on Prometheus and the odes of Prometheus and Ganymed detecting e.g. overlooked significant errors in the theory of Goethe researcher Inka Mülder-Bach (Goethe-Handbuch). In the history study “Eine Jugend für den Krieg -- Deutsche Propagandabildpostkarten mit Kindern als Motiv aus der Zeit des 1. Weltkriegs“ the segment of German propaganda picture postcards displaying children is analyzed and interpreted in detail for the first time with the method of Sabine Giesbrecht, a pioneer in picture postcard research who is also the founder of the world’s biggest picture postcard archive on the Wilhelminian era (University of Osnabrück). In the history study “Warum fiel Rom ?” the author analyzes and interpretes the reasons why Rome fell and if it fell at all. Its fall is denied by the modern transformationist school paradigm (see the massive series The Transformation of the Roman World, Brill Publishing, Leiden). The author is concentrating on Peter Heather’s Hun hypothesis, Bryan Ward- Perkins crash hypothesis supported by archeological evidence and Alexander Demandts Germanic hypothesis. In four final theses, the author of the present study points at scaring structural differences and similarities to the unevitable fall of today’s last Rome, significantly enhanced by the Germanic-controlled Empire’s Consul Merkelus’ deliberate opening of the Roman limes for the Huns against the will of the senate and the people in A.D. 2015 being a bizarre irony of history. In the philosophical study „Klassiker neu lesen I -- Descartes’ V. Meditation und der unwiderlegbare Euklidische physikalische Raum“ the author presents an analysis of Descartes’ Fifth Meditation in which Descartes deals e.g. with the essence of space and material things. The author appreciates Descartes’ concept of Euclidian physical space as still correct showing e.g. similarities and differences to the concept of the Erlangen School of Constructivism founded by Paul Lorenzen. Additionally, e.g. the Cartesian definition of matter is in accordance with the perennial and crucial phoronomic definition of matter. In his philosophical study “Klassiker neu lesen II - Was ist materiell ? Studie über die historische Kontroverse zwischen Friedrich Ferdinand Kampe und Franz v. Brentano bzgl. einer evtl. Materialität des Seelenkerns (noûs poietikós) des Menschen bei Aristoteles“ the author analyzes the historic dispute between Brentano and Kampe on the character of the soul’s nucleus according to Aristotle. The author of the present study is siding with Hubertus Busche and proves in detail for the first time that the argumentation of Kampe is significantly better than Brentano’s spanning all important aspects of the problem. Both in the study of this dispute and in falsifying Einsteinian relativity, the phoronomic/kinematic definition of matter as the most basic definition in physics and philosophy through the ages (Busche) plays an essential argumentative role. The electron discovered by modern physics has no extension, the photon no mass, but both particles are material. Consequently, mass and extension are not necessary for being material. If relativistic space also really (i.e. observerindependently) moves/contracts (as a result things really get shorter; see e.g. Joachim Schulz, University of Hamburg and all physics textbooks), this leads to a materialization of space which is contradictory to the claimed and theory-necessary immaterial relativism of space. In his World Association of Chinese Studies-peer reviewed article “A Comparison of the Essence of the Evil in The Water Margin and Faust (Part I and II)” the author analyzes William Sin’s article „The Water Margin, Moral Criticism, and Cultural Confrontation“ in which relativistic arguments are presented to counter Liu Zaifu's view who thinks that the novel and the unjustifiable atrocities committed by the rebels in The Water Margin (and also Romance of the Three Kingdoms) have corrupted Chinese readers for generations. Liu is a moral absolutist in contrast to Sin. It can be shown using logically correct concepts of the unfree will (see e.g. Derk Pereboom, Cornell University, and with him one in eight Anglo-American philosophers) that truth lies in the middle between Sin’s and Liu’s opinion, partly because of arguments not contained in Sin’s and Liu’s argumentation. Relativism is rejected by Siedenberg because it’s logically contradictory. Especially in the Anglo-American world, pressure is high to subscribe to this nonsensical ideology. However, applying evolutionary psychology, it can be shown what bad, maladaptive and what good, adaptive behaviour is. The Anglo American adoption of relativism is an interesting case of an evolutionary maldadaption itself.