Truths are strange entities. (1) they depend on us. For it is a sentence or a belief of human creatures which can be true or false. (2)Truths are nothing like a modeling clay in our hands. It’s not up to us whether our beliefs are true or false. How do (1)and(2) go together? In dealing with this question we will investigate the relation between the concepts of truth, facts, and objectivity.(396Z.)

The seminar aims at a clarification of the concept of knowledge as it is built in our experiential relations to the world. An analysis is needed of the difference between knowledge and belief, of the relation between objectivity and knowledge, and of the role of reasons for having knowledge. Additionally, the legitimacy of different types of knowledge claims should be evaluated.

Certainty is the absence of doubt. Certainty is rational when there are reasons to reject doubt. What are these reasons? What types of certainty are rational lie in the answer. Candidates for such reasons are founded on scientific methods. But can feelings also acquire the status of reasons? And what about those reasons that are not able to refute every doubt?

Technological developments and political conflicts provoke the question: Who and what is reasonable? Are robots reasonab or merely reliable? Is „reason = intelligence“ true? Are experts, e.g. climatologists, more reasonable than the folk? Should they have more political influence? Answering such questions requires a philosophical clarification of the concepts rationality, reason, and intelligence.

Responsibility is a key concept in ethics: The individual's responsibility is emphasized. Contrary to that, one often points to the limits of a person's responsibility, e.g. for a stock market crash, for greenhouse gas emissions, for injust social conditions. What belongs to to our responsibility as individuals and what to our collective responsibility? And do robots have responsibilities?