Michael Krausz (born 1942) is a Swiss-born American philosopher as well as an artist and orchestral conductor. His philosophical works focus on the theory of interpretation, theory of knowledge, philosophy of science, philosophy of history, and philosophy of art and music. Krausz is Milton C. Nahm Professor of Philosophy at Bryn Mawr College, and he teaches Aesthetics at the Curtis Institute of Music. He has taught at University of Toronto and has been visiting professor at American University, Georgetown University, Oxford University, Hebrew University of Jerusalem, American University in Cairo, University of Nairobi, Indian Institute of Advanced Study, and University of Ulm, among others. Krausz is the co-founder (with Joseph Margolis) and former Chair of the fourteen-institution Greater Philadelphia Philosophy Consortium.
Biography
Krausz is a son of musician and artist Laszlo Krausz (1903–1979) and pianist and composer Susan Krausz (1914–2008), and he is husband of artist Constance Costigan.
Krausz earned a PhD from University of Toronto, including post-graduate work at Linacre College, Oxford University. He was a Special Student at the London School of Economics, and holds a BA from Rutgers University and an MA from Indiana University. His notable teachers include Sir Isaiah Berlin, William Dray, Patrick Gardiner, Rom Harré, Sir Karl Popper, and John Oulton Wisdom. He has also been influenced by R.G. Collingwood, Joseph Margolis and Bimal Krishna Matilal.
Krausz currently serves as series editor for a number of publications, including Brill Publishers Series in Philosophy of History and Culture, Rowman and Littlefield Publishers Series on Philosophy and the Global Context, Rodopi Publishers Series on Interpretation and Translation, and Penn State University Press Series of the Greater Philadelphia Philosophy Consortium.
Works
Philosophy
I. Ideals and Aims of Interpretation. Michael Krausz’s interests in the theory of interpretation address the following cluster of questions. For such cultural phenomena as works of art, music, literature, and the self, can a single admissible interpretation exist? Or, for such phenomena, can a multiplicity of admissible interpretations exist? For such phenomena, can opposing interpretations be jointly defended? Does interpretive activity affect the nature and number of that which is interpreted? Does interpretation aim for the elucidation of its objects, the edification of its interpreters, or both? How does the question of singularity or multiplicity of admissible interpretations bear on the singularity or multiplicity of life paths and projects?
Singularism asserts that objects of interpretation always answer to one and only one ideal interpretation. In contrast, multiplism asserts that objects of interpretation may answer to more than one opposed interpretation. Both singularism and multiplism require that competing interpretations address one and the same object of interpretation. Where different interpretations address different objects of interpretation, an innocuous pluralism occurs. Where objects of interpretation cannot be delineated as to number, neither singularism nor multiplism can apply.
Krausz probes the relation between these ideals of interpretation and their ontologies. Singularism and multiplism are each compatible with either realism or constructivism. Singularism does not uniquely entail realism (and vice versa) and multiplism does not uniquely entail constructivism (and vice versa). Orthodox combinations include singularist-realism and multiplist-constructivism. Heterodox combinations include singularist-constructivism and multiplist-realism.