XLRI, in association with a few Tata Group companies, established the XLRI-JRD Tata Foundation in Business Ethics in 1991 to mark their long-standing commitment and contribution to business ethics in India. The foundation seeks to address this by publicly affirming the urgent need for ethics in business and the need to bring about a conducive culture in which it can thrive.

The juxtaposition of models of God and Christian faith may seem repugnant to many, as models are tentative and faith aims at an abiding certainty. In fact, for many Christians, using models of God in worship amounts to idolatry. By examining Biblical and extra-Biblical views of idolatry, I argue that models are not idols. To the contrary, the practice of God-modeling inoculates Christians against one of the most seductive idols of our age: the love of certainty. Furthermore, by examining meditations (...) upon certainty in Melville’s Moby Dick and the early discourses of the Buddha, I suggest that overweening conviction is a vice that hinders rather than guarantees Christian discipleship, and that Christian faith is better defined as any or all of the following: relative confidence in propositions, faithful relationship, and a virtue of disciplined credulity. (shrink)

A friend, correspondent and intellectual successor to David Ricardo, John Ramsay McCulloch forged his reputation in the emerging field of political economy by publishing deeply researched articles in Scottish periodicals and the Encyclopaedia Britannica. From 1828 he spent nearly a decade as professor of political economy at the newly founded University of London, thereafter becoming comptroller of the Stationery Office. Perhaps the first professional economist, McCulloch had become internationally renowned by the middle of the century, recognised for sharing his ideas (...) through lucid lecturing and writing. The present work, first published in 1845, has been hailed as 'the first systematic account of the theory and policy of public finance'. After a general introductory chapter, the book discusses direct and indirect taxation, before considering national debt and how to deal with it. Several other works written or edited by McCulloch are also reissued in the Cambridge Library Collection. (shrink)

This book basically traces the historical movements that saw Aristotelian thought introduced to Islamic studies. The most significant translation movement was begun in Baghdad in the eighth century and sporadically continued until the middle of the eleventh century. When this movement was completed, every extant work of Aristotle was translated into Arabic. Peters offers a formidable collection of bibliography, doxography, and gnomonology that appeals more to eastern classical scholars than to Aristotelian philosophers. No significant philosophical issues are raised--this is really (...) not the author's intention. Whenever a remote philosophical point does arise, however, it does so a bit arbitrarily. For example, when Peters introduces a chapter on the triumph of Kalam in Islamic thought, he asserts, "it was the Greeks themselves who reduced philosophy to its status of 'handmaiden of theology'." No further explanation is given and Peters continues on his more certain ground--Islamic culture.--J. J. R. (shrink)

Elders' work is patterned after Ross's editions of Aristotle's Physics, Metaphysics, and Analytics, except that Elders does not include the Greek text to accompany his commentary. Each chapter of the four books of De Caelo is briefly summarized and a line by line commentary ensues with special consideration given to the more controversial passages. In an introduction to his commentary, Elders develops the essential themes surrounding Aristotle's cosmology: 1) The proper historical setting, 2) The notion of natural movement and elementary (...) bodies, 3) The role of metaphysics in Aristotle's cosmology, Aristotle's notion of science and methodology. Elders seems to gloss over the main problem that Aristotle's Cosmology engenders, viz., whether the heavenly spheres move by a natural necessity or are moved by a supra-celestial principle. His comment on the first chapter of Book III points out Aristotle's intention of including both the heavens and the sub-lunar sphere under the study of Physics. He correctly points out that if one is to understand the De Caelo, then one must "look upon cosmology the way its author did, viz., as a science of intellectual vision, rather than as a labor of toilsome research: the study of the cosmos is an intellectual effort which finds its end and its reward in itself."—J. J. R. (shrink)

This edition of Aristotelian scholarship contains the proceedings of the third Symposium Aristotelicum. Choosing to discuss one work of Aristotle, the Topics, the participants were thus able to center their discussions around Aristotle's notion of dialectics. Owen has arranged the papers into interesting categories, some of which contain critical analyses of the text. There is also a valuable index of sources. One especially interesting chapter deals with the question of the relationship between Aristotelian thought and Platonic thought. Under the specific (...) scrutiny of the Symposium, the question is: to what extent do the dialectics of Aristotle rely upon Plato's theory of Forms and the method of diaeresis that leads up to the Forms? Friedrich Solmsen, the most emphatic of all the writers on this point, claims that the dialectics of the Topics ignore any ontological reference. According to Solmsen, Aristotle accepted the logical structure of Plato's dialectic and diaeresis but then prescinded from any commitment to the Forms. C. J. De Vogel agrees with Solmsen insofar as Aristotle begins to see the theory of Forms as "problematic" due to the immaturity of Aristotle's own theory. De Vogel cites several passages that would seem to counter the position of Solmsen. For example, in defining "justice" as a virtue, Aristotle prefers the abstract term δικαιοσύνη as properly falling under the category ἀγαθόν, rather than the concrete δίκαιον. In a paper by Gilbert Ryle it is claimed that Aristotle never formally learned dialectical philosophy at Plato's academy, so that questions of how and why Aristotle broke from his master are unreal. Ryle suggests that the second part of Plato's Parmenides was written to exemplify the categories of the Topics and to school the more advanced students in the art of dialectics which was not taught to those under thirty years of age. How much Aristotle's dialectical philosophy is indebted to Plato is still a debatable point; but it is debated very well in these papers.--J. J. R. (shrink)

This survey of American philosophy first presents the classical "Golden Age of American Philosophy" with selections from Peirce, James, Dewey, Santayana, Whitehead, and Mead. This first part also includes selections from the schools of new and critical realism with R. B. Perry, A. O. Lovejoy, R. W. Sellars among the representatives. Part Two is entitled "The Contemporary Philosophical Scene" and has selections from the works of C. I. Lewis, Carnap, C. L. Stevenson, Quine, M. Black, B. Blanshard, Tillich, S. Hook, (...) and E. Nagel. Anthologies rarely please everyone. Some may feel that Josiah Royce should have been included in the "Golden Age" section. There are two good features of this volume, however, that make it suitable as either a text for a seminar in American philosophy or as a research manual or both. Each philosopher or philosophical movement is adequately introduced by the editor, and each section is concluded with a rather complete bibliography.—J. J. R. (shrink)

As part of the series Classics in the History of Thought, this volume is more general than its companion volume, American Philosophy in the Twentieth Century. The present volume is suited for a study in American Civilization prior to the twentieth century. Its range includes the political, religious, and moral thoughts of the colonial period ; the post-Independence period of "Reason and Revolution" ; conservatism in political theory and philosophy ; transcendentalism ; speculative and absolute idealism ; evolution and Darwinism. (...) There are interesting historical foundations for some contemporary social problems found in these selections, e.g., civil disobedience, church and state relations, racial prejudice. Also, as in the case of its sister volume, the book is rich in bibliographical references.—J. J. R. (shrink)

Almost every aspect of Aristotle's philosophy is touched upon in this book. Part One deals with the intellectual development of Aristotle and repeats Jaeger's claim that Aristotle's thought was a continual process of development and not a static system of concepts. The "First Athenian Period" finds Aristotle as Plato's pupil. The "Period of Travel" embraces the formulation of his theory of causes and substance. The "Second Athenian Period" includes the work at the Lyceum and its contribution to systematic investigation. In (...) this First Part, Lloyd suggests that the greatest enigma surrounding the development of Aristotle's thought is the latter's relation with Plato's philosophy. Lloyd sees Aristotle as more than "Plato's pupil." He sees Aristotle in reaction to Plato; inasmuch as the former rejects the notion of Forms as central to philosophy, introduces the principle of potentiality as an explanation of change, and distinguishes "substance" in a primary sense which gives concrete ground to reality. Yet, while Aristotle is critical of Platonism, certain Platonic notions are retained, e.g., that intelligibility is gained only through universals; that the basic world-view is teleological. The Second Part of the book is concerned with the fundamentals of Aristotle's thought, in which all of the highlights of his thought are outlined and commented upon. Logic, metaphysics, physics, psychology, ethics, poetics, politics--all are given a brief but accurate analysis. The author does not claim to write this book for the Aristotelian scholar; rather, it is directed toward the undergraduate or other interested reader who may want more knowledge of the philosopher from Stagira.--J. J. R. (shrink)

In 1951 Lukasiewicz [[sic]] linked Aristotle's Prior Analytics with modern formal logic. This book attempts to analyze Aristotle's syllogistic theory in the light of Lukasiewcz's work and the whole tradition of classic interpretations of Aristotle's logic. The first of the book's five chapters shows that for Aristotle the syllogism is basically a relationship of terms couched in conditional form; a relationship of variables rather than concrete terms; and a relationship that sees S linked with P not by the copula but (...) by less metaphysical expressions. The classical S is P form is not Aristotelian at all but a much later renovation. The second chapter maintains that Aristotle distinguishes "relative necessity" from "absolute necessity." Aristotle himself ignores his own distinction at times and thus creates logical difficulties for himself. The oft-fought sea battle is fought again in this chapter. Chapter three deals with the controversial notions of "perfect" and "imperfect" syllogisms. The author asserts that by "perfect syllogism" Aristotle means self-evident syllogisms that serve as axioms for deducing other proofs. Chapters four and five deal with the figures of the syllogism and the syllogism as a deductive system respectively. Patzig concludes that Aristotle's syllogistic theory is purely formal in its structure and can only be properly understood if it is not tied to a metaphysics and converted into a philosophical logic. He denies that it is a universal logic, but rather sees it as a specialized theory of relations.--J. J. R. (shrink)

This volume represents the majority of papers delivered at the 1966 Workshop of Christian Philosophy and Religious Renewal held at the Catholic University of America. The Workshop's main task was to re-evaluate Christian philosophy in the light of contemporary phenomenological and analytic philosophy. Dietrich von Hildebrand's paper on the "Phenomenology of Values in a Christian Philosophy" urges a "rehabilitation" of ethics through an existential "value response." Ethical values are rescued from the "laboratory" of abstract study and returned to the world (...) where they belong. In "Analytic Philosophy and Language about God," W. Norris Clarke cites four basic challenges that analytic philosophy offers a philosophy of God: that theism has not unravelled the confusion concerning the use of "God" as naming or describing; that it is a "category mistake" to state "God is a necessary Being" since "necessary" is a term meaningful only in propositions and not about things; that according to the falsification theory of meaning there is no way to check the validity of statements about God, such as "God is providential and loving," since anything that happens would be providential and loving in a strange and hidden way; that there can be no meaningful predication of God since language would then refer to a realm that transcends experience. Father Clarke sees these challenges as forcing a re-evaluation of a philosophy of God and holds that only by using all the philosophical resources at hand, e.g., phenomenological, semantic, symbolic, metaphysical, will one be able to work out real positive meaning concerning God. Some other themes discussed are "Person," "Freedom," and "Love," written by Mother Mary Clark, L. B. Geiger, and Robert O. Johann respectively.—J. J. R. (shrink)

This third and final volume of the collected papers of the late Alfred Schutz contains for the most part the author's evaluation of later Husserlian thought. As in the first and second volumes, Schutz attempts to show the relevance of phenomenology to social experiences. All the papers in this volume were originally published between 1953-1958, except that in which Schutz compares James' "stream of thought" with Husserl's "stream of consciousness." The sequence of papers that follow the James article is: "Husserl's (...) Ideals, Vol. II," in which Schutz describes Husserl's attempt at a phenomenological analysis of the constitution of nature, beginning with inanimate objects, proceeding to "nature in a second and enlarged sense", and concluding with the region of Geist. "Husserl's Ideas, Vol. III": a brief paper analyzing the Husserlian ambition of a phenomenology which affords a fundamental method of grounding all knowledge. "The Problem of Transcendental Intersubjectivity in Husserl," in which Schutz pinpoints the problem well: since it is impossible to experience another person's original mental content, how can "another psychophysical ego be constituted in my ego?" How can solipsism be avoided? How can phenomenology be applied to the social sciences? Schutz concludes that with his notion of "pairing" in his Cartesian Meditations Husserl does not succeed in constituting a transcendental intersubjectivity through the conscious operations of a transcendental ego. "Type and Eidos in Husserl's Late Philosophy": the phenomenological look at the problem of universals. "Some Structures of the Life-World": a consideration of the Lebenswelt with an eye toward establishing the relevance to social sciences. The last two papers deal with the philosophy of Max Scheler.—J. J. R. (shrink)

In order to assay the dynamism in the philosophy of Wolff, Father Burns examines "substance," "bodies," and "elements" in Christian Wolff's philosophy, and in so doing provides some valuable information on a philosopher who has had scant attention in the English-speaking world. In the first chapter, simple substance is distinguished from composed substance, with the former being the only true substance for Wolff. Even here, the author contends, substance for Wolff is solely a concept of essences and, hence, Wolff's ontology (...) is restricted to the realm of possible beings and excludes actual existing things. In an informative chapter on "Bodies," the Wolffian notion of active force as the principle of motion in bodies is challenged. The author maintains that an a priori commitment necessitated that Wolff locate the force principle in simple substances; and further, that Wolff's reasoning to simple substances involves a basic fallacy of identifying unity with indivisibility. A brief third chapter identifies the elements or first principles of bodies with the simple substances. While the author rightly claims that the terminology of Wolff makes it necessary to compare and contrast Wolff's ontology-cosmology with Aristotelian-scholastic thought, the conclusion of the book makes it difficult at times to ascertain whether the main task is a critical exposition of Wolff's dynamism or a staunch defense of traditional metaphysics. Within the latter frame of reference, Wolff's notion of force and motion is shown to be physical and/or mathematical rather than metaphysical, and is summarily set down as a distortion of the "true picture of substance and actuality into a caricature."—J. J. R. (shrink)

This volume of selections provides a fresh translation of some of the major philosophical and literary achievements of the beleaguered editor of the Encyclopedie. For the most part, the selections follow a chronological sequence with each selection given a brief explanation in which the reader is referred to the 1875 Assezat and Tourneux edition of Diderot's works. The main thrust of Diderot's philosophical materialism is embodied in D'Alembert's Dream, in which the author argues that the mechanized-physical view gives coherent unity (...) to cosmological, biological, and moral speculation. Yet, if Diderot is to be a materialist, he is to be a humanistic one, for in his Refutation of Helvetius he rails against the latter's view of man as a mere sensory-bound animal devoid of real moral feelings. Thus there is in Diderot a vacillation between a heartfelt desire for moral values which beg to be grounded on reason, and a reason that cannot accept the basis for the values of his day since experience seems to contradict such a basis. Diderot expresses this dichotomy well in Rameau's Nephew. In the mastery of his dialogue form, Diderot plays the man of moral stability while the nephew represents the moral nihilist. It is interesting to note that Hegel saw in the nephew a cultural alienation or self-estrangement which gradually produced the characteristic cleavage between faith and reason in the age of the French Enlightenment. Since he bore this inner tension within himself, and since it is men who make up "ages," one can say that Diderot was the French Enlightenment.—J. J. R. (shrink)

This reconstruction of Empedocles' thought for the most part depends upon how the notions of rest and movement are related to the elements. Many traditional interpretations have both the love and strife forces of Empedocles as moving causes which combine and separate the elements respectively. O'Brien claims, however, that there is really only one moving cause: strife; and therefore there is only one time of rest in the cosmos, when love unites the elements into the Sphere. Strife is seen as (...) Empedocles' explanation of diversity in the world, and love as his explanation of unity. O'Brien's reconstruction, then, would rank Empedocles as a serious metaphysician coping with the problem of the one and the many; rather than as a naive pre-scientist explaining the genesis of animals by the combining of "separated limbs." O'Brien suggests that Empedocles is attempting to save the Parmenidean notion of unity without relegating movement to the realm of illusion. In this way, Empedocles also appears to anticipate Plato's attempt to explain the spatial and temporal world in terms of what is non-spatial and timeless. Roughly speaking, as Plato's Forms are to the physical world, so love and strife are to the elements. O'Brien's reconstruction project is carefully done with a rather thorough analysis of all the sources. Appended to the work is a 61-page bibliography which includes every book and article exclusively on Empedocles written from 1806 to 1965.--J. J. R. (shrink)

J. N. Findlay has selected ten lectures given at the British Academy spanning the years 1921-1962. The lectures include: H. A. Prichard's Duty and Ignorance of Fact in which the author examines the notion of moral obligation; G. E. Moore's Proof of an External World which inaugurated the debate whether or not Moore would endorse an "ordinary language" view of philosophy; and J. L. Austin's Ifs and Cans, which begins by asking "Are cans constitutionally iffy?" Austin, after investigating at great (...) length main clauses that contain "cans" in order to see whether or not such clauses are preceded by if clauses, hopes in the end that there will be someday a science of language which can stand independent of philosophy. Then, such a science will be "kicked upstairs" as it were—rid of philosophy just as physics and mathematics rid themselves of philosophy when graciously "kicked upstairs." K. R. Popper examines the historical significance of Baconian empiricism and Cartesian rationalism in his 1960 lecture Sources of Knowledge and Ignorance. There is no research value in this edition. It contains no bibliography and Findlay's very brief introduction simply offers a capsule paragraph on each lecture. In general, as Findlay states, the lectures serve to "illustrate the strong British penchant... for exact, cautious, logical thinking...."—J. J. R. (shrink)

Aristotle had accused the Presocratic philosophers of constantly turning up the wrong set of principles as explanations of physical reality. To speak of the archai as if they were physical entities was, according to Aristotle, to confuse the notion of archai with that of stoicheia. This volume by Sinnige, however, traces the notion of "matter" through Presocratic thought and reveals a non-tangible, indeterminate view of matter that is sometimes identified with that of infinity. The author shows how Anaximander carried over (...) the mythical concept of Chronos as the ruling power of the universe into a more rational notion of apeiron. Sinnige's conclusion here is that "matter" for Anaximander is not a sensible substance at all, but rather the infinite and divine expanse of the universe. Each of the Presocratic views on matter and infinity is considered in its turn. Sinnige maintains that with the Pythagoreans the notion of the apeiron became more fully identified with that of instability and indeterminateness. The author also takes issue with the traditional interpretations of the doxographers who make Zeno's paradoxes nothing more than arguments against the reliability of sensory knowledge. Rather, Sinnige claims, Zeno's view of infinity marks a turning point in which mathematical dimensions are irrevocably associated with that term. Basically the author shows that early notions of matter and infinity vacillate between corpuscular theories on the one hand and mathematical views on the other.--J. J. R. (shrink)

This translation and commentary is a valuable addition to the Aristotle Series begun by the late professor J. L. Austin and continued by J. L. Ackrill. The translation offers the English reader a fresh approach to the nature of Aristotle's metaphysical inquiry contained in books Gamma, Delta, and Epsilon. The opening lines of book Gamma which are traditionally read as "There is a science which studies being qua being," is rendered here as "There is a discipline which studies that which (...) is qua thing-that-it-is." Significant in this new version is the translation of: 'episteme' as 'discipline' instead of the now-specialized term 'science'; 'to on' as 'that which is'; 'on' as 'thing-that-it-is'. Justification for these and other new translations are offered in notes that comprise two-thirds of the volume. The translator's notes avoid the age-old controversy concerning the subject matter of Aristotle's Metaphysics--whether it be everything that is, or some special kind of things that are. By limiting the selection to these three books, the editor's chief concern is with the nature of the study, rather than with the nature of the things being studied. It is what we might call Aristotle's meta-Metaphysics.--J. J. R. (shrink)

Editors display an amazing versatility in producing "new and different" series. While the selections in this volume on Plato and Aristotle present nothing novel, the series adds a new twist by concentrating on only two thinkers in each period. Volume One of a twelve-volume set offers two chapters introducing the times and the men. A third chapter contains selections from eight of Plato's dialogues ranging from the Apology to the Timaeus. Chapter four has usual selections from Aristotle. The concluding chapters (...) make a bold attempt at novelty by presenting modern commentaries of Platonic and Aristotelian scholars. Unfortunately, these critiques are so severely edited that they may be beyond comprehension apart from the original work. What is most misleading, however, is the claim in the chapter introducing ancient philosophy that there are only two significant commentaries on Presocratic thought: John Burnet's Early Greek Philosophy, and Cornford's Principium Sapientiae.--J. J. R. (shrink)

Too often the historians of philosophy tend to relegate a philosopher to a meaningless anonymity by rigidly classifying his thought into one particular category. De Vogel feels that this has been done to Pythagoras and the Pythagorean tradition. He claims that because philosophical scholars have relied chiefly on Platonic and Aristotelian accounts of Pythagoras, two misleading effects have ensued: 1. We have lost sight of the man Pythagoras and his charismatic influence on the people of Croton and Magna Graecia; 2. (...) Pythagoras, cosmic theory of numerical ratios has been emphasized to the neglect of, and in separation from, his political and social teachings. De Vogel hopes to remedy these two impressions by returning to "neglected evidence" and reconstructing the life of Pythagoras. He hopes to remove Pythagoras from that vague classification as one of the οἱ φυσικοί into which Aristotle had placed all the pre-Socratic thinkers. Furthermore, the author wants to show the essential unity of Pythagoras' cosmic, social, and political thinking. The neglected evidence on which De Vogel bases his reconstruction is mainly the testimony of Timaeus, an historian of Southern Italy and Sicily; Aristoxenus, a follower of Pythagoras; and Dicaearchus, a writer of cultural history. In addition to these last mentioned sources, the author cites the testimony of coins and quotes leading archaeologists; he refers to the many historians and biographers of Pythagoras; and especially, he draws from the four speeches of Pythagoras that are recorded by Iamblichus. With these source materials, De Vogel reconstructs a Pythagoras who is a charismatic preacher-moralist; one who gives precepts of life governing justice, friendship, love, health, education, rhetoric, and medicine. What is more, all of these social and political teachings are shown to be integrated with the cosmic theory of numbers which De Vogel removes from the realm of abstract and idle theory. Pythagoras emerges as a leading figure in Croton and throughout Magna Graecia. All in all, this volume is an excellent contribution to Pythagorean scholarship.--J. J. R. (shrink)

Students of politico-philosophical thought should welcome this attempt to understand present-day Soviet philosophy in the light of its historical background. What is there in Soviet thought today that echoes the classical Marxist theory? In what way has the contemporary ideology broken with the past or at least revamped the classic view? The historical view can best approach these questions, and beginning with the Young Hegelian, Hegelian, and Feuerbachian influence on Marx, the author follows history's path through Leninism, Stalinism and finally (...) into the contemporary scene. The limited size of the text necessarily restricts discussion, but an annotated bibliography of some secondary works will aid the student's further research.—J. J. R. (shrink)

This handy paperback edition offers a new translation of the almost untranslatable style of Pascal. As expected, the greater portion of the book is made up of selections from Pensées. Works classified as "Religious" and "Moral" are also offered, along with one of Pascal's witty and biting Provincial Letters in which Pascal had aligned himself with the Jansenists of Port Royal. Several selections highlight Pascal's pioneering in scientific method—"Treatise on the Vacuum" and "Reflections on Geometry and the Art of Persuading."—J. (...) J. R. (shrink)

Since all of the distinguishing features of the early development of modern physical science seem to be embodied in the works of Newton, e.g., the abhorrence of occult qualities and the great surge of experimental knowledge, the mechanical view of matter explained by mathematical theory, the constant attempt to reconcile the God of revelation with the world machinery, Robert Boyle has too often been overlooked. In addition to giving a short sketch of Boyle's life, Mrs. Hall has admirably selected texts (...) from the eighteenth century Birch edition which at once manifest the genius of Boyle and his influence on Newton. Each selection is adequately explained and commented upon by Mrs. Hall in Part One. The chapter headings in the author's introductory essay parallel the headings she has given to the selections in Part Two: "The New Learning and its Method," "The Mechanical Philosophy," "Chemistry," and "Pneumatics." The sections on mechanical philosophy contain the core of Boyle's natural philosophy. The characteristic blend of natural philosophy with natural religion which was common to many members of the Royal Society led Boyle to disdain the Baconian attempt to banish teleology from investigations. Boyle's view of a world machinery is never considered as a scientific hypothesis as that term is understood today, but rather it appears to be at times a theological doctrine. The mechanical theory itself—the corpuscular theory of matter—which Boyle promised to set down in systematic form was actually never written as a complete system. Mrs. Hall has done much to give systematic coherence to Boyle's corpuscular theory in her excellent commentary and selection of texts. The book contains an adequate index, bibliographical notes, and a partial list of Boyle's works. One with an historical interest in the Newtonian age will discover another giant whose shoulders made it all possible.—J. J. R. (shrink)

This volume deals with the nature of Presocratic thought in general; the sources of our knowledge of the Presocratics; the earliest philosophers up to Heraclitus. The articles cover a wide range of significant topics: mathematics, contrary qualities in Presocratic thought, equality and justice, the question of Ionian "science". Several traditional views are challenged and tempered. Gregory Vlastos shows how it is quite wrong to divorce the Presocratic Physiologoi from their religious heritage. He thinks that Burnet's Early Greek Philosophy has created (...) the impression that the Presocratics were mere naturalists completely bracketed off from their religious beliefs and feelings. W. K. C. Guthrie has an interesting article on "Aristotle as Historian." Guthrie has found scholars who have so canonized Cherniss' work on Aristotle's criticism of the Presocratics that Aristotle is completely written off as biased. Guthrie reasons that there is much historical merit in Aristotle's references to Presocratic thought even though Aristotle approaches them from his own point of view. This volume also contains a very spirited controversy between Karl Popper and G. S. Kirk. Popper advocates a return to the Presocratic tradition which witnessed a new cosmology with each generation. This was possible, Popper claims, because it was "a tradition of critical discussion which tolerated "criticism and refutation," e.g., Anaximander's challenge of Thales. Popper asserts that each man put forth a new view because he was not tied to observation and inductive methods. Kirk takes issue with Popper, maintaining that Presocratic theories are very much a part of their observations. He strongly criticizes Popper for ignoring the historicity of the Presocratic theories and attempting to force them into a contemporary frame-work. All in all, this volume is an excellent edition of Presocratic scholarship. A second volume will range from Parmenides to Democritus.--J. J. R. (shrink)

These papers were first presented at a symposium held under the auspices of the A. P. A. Western Conference. The general theme involves the role of science and philosophy in teaching, more specifically, the role of human reason and its ability and/or inability to plumb the depths of physics, psychology, mathematics and to convey any results in an intelligible way. Anton offers an essay on the teaching of philosophy in a general science-culture background. Carl C. Lindegren evaluates the role of (...) philosophy in the teaching of sciences. Alden L. Fisher relates philosophy to psychology. Hippocrates G. Apostle views the teaching of mathematics in a philosophical atmosphere, and William Earle distinguishes philosophy from science as "king of the humanities" rather than merely "a handmaiden of science."—J. J. R. (shrink)

This volume makes a bold and successful attempt to trace the historical roots of memory-art from the Greek era to the Middle Ages where the Art's role was central to all other arts—literary, architectural, etc. Yates concentrates on the Renaissance period with a detailed study of the memory theater of Giulio Camillo, the continuation of Lullism as an Art of Memory, the influence of Giordano Bruno and Peter Ramus. Several chapters are devoted to the Theatre Memory system of Robert Fludd (...) and the reconstruction of the Globe Theatre. A final chapter indicates that although the gradual birth of a new way of thinking—the scientific method of Bacon, Kepler, et alio—would seem to quiet forever mnemonic arts, this latter art played no small influence on the more scientific thinkers, especially Leibniz and his "dissertation on the art of combining." The book is supplemented with numerous plates and charts of antiquity which illustrate the forgotten art of memory.—J. J. R. (shrink)

This is a translation of a tenth century Arabic work that purports to be Aristotelian but is obviously written by one who prefers Plato's philosophy. In fact, the Phaedo is apparently the model after which this dialogue is fashioned. Aristotle is on his deathbed surrounded by his disciples. He periodically sniffs at an apple in his hand in order to sustain his failing breath while urging his followers toward philosophy that will reject this world and lead them to salvation. The (...) Aristotle of The Apple wants at least two points clear: the soul is immortal and the world is not eternal. The book might well be called, "The Recantation of Aristotle." The Apple was introduced to European philosophers in 1235 in Barcelona where it was translated from Arabic to Hebrew. In 1255, a Latin translation was made and it was pretty much accepted as part of the Aristotelian corpus for several centuries. This English translation is part of a series of "Medieval Philosophical Texts in Translation." The translator admits that The Apple contributes little to the development of philosophy. From an historical point of view, however, she thinks it is a "semiprecious document." It is interesting to see how concerned certain Moslem, Hebrew, and Christian thinkers were to get Aristotle on God's side.--J. J. R. (shrink)

Some will wonder why this book was ever written, thinking perhaps that there is nothing more to be said about "proofs" for the existence of God. Others of a more traditional inclination might be surprised at some of the conclusions drawn by the author. Kenny carefully scrutinizes the five ways of St. Thomas and concludes that they do not constitute rational proofs for God's existence. Kenny's chief criticism is that the arguments of Aquinas are too closely wedded to a cosmology (...) that cannot stand up under a modern critique. The value of this book rests precisely in its use of contemporary philosophy in evaluating the five ways. Perhaps the author's most serious criticism is directed against the Thomistic concept of esse and the notion of God as ipsum esse subsistens. These metaphysical notions of Aquinas have long been acclaimed as extensions of Aristotelian thought. Kenny, however, claims that they are Platonic in nature and hence subject to the centuries of criticism leveled against Plato's Ideas. Under a logical analysis, the notion of God as ipsum esse subsistens "turns out to be the Platonic Idea of a predicate which is at best uninformative and at worst unintelligible."--J. J. R. (shrink)

Which offers the better philosophical explanation, a philosophy of nature or a philosophy of space? Yves Simon posed this question in a series of lectures at the University of Chicago in 1959. Aristotle champions the philosophy of nature which recognizes a world of substantiality, individuality, qualitative differences, and mutability. Such a world is best explained in terms of causes; causes of real things. Descartes advocates a philosophy of space which ignores or denies qualitatively distinct realities and establishes "appearance saving" laws. (...) Thus Simon establishes the protagonists of the great dialogue: Nature versus Space, real things versus phenomena, causality versus laws, Aristotle versus Descartes. Simon does not pretend to be neutral in this debate. He favors Aristotle's theory of causality with its metaphysical-based view of nature. The Cartesian physics pays too great a price in "saving the appearances." In fact, Simon contends, it leads to an erroneous notion of science. Simon is critical of modern thinkers who have defined science in such a way that "Nature" is excluded. He is critical of early positivists in general, and Comte and Mach in particular, for giving inadequate descriptions of science. Simon contends that an Aristotelian framework is helpful in understanding science's role. In his style and approach to Aristotle's philosophy of Nature, Simon is similar to Frederick Woodbridge in the latter's efforts to show the relevance of Aristotle's view of nature. Because of his terminal illness, Yves Simon was not able to revise and publish the lectures he began in 1959. This collection of rather informal talks shows why he was a popular teacher and lecturer.--J. J. R. (shrink)

The author desires to take a "new look" at Thomistic philosophy and perhaps reveal a "timely way of being Thomistic." He claims that a proper understanding of Leo XIII's Aeterni Patris and other Church documents which encouraged Thomistic studies simply urged that St. Thomas' philosophy can be a valuable beginning for all philosophical studies entered upon by one who has made a commitment to faith. But McInerny oversimplifies the criticism of philosophy in Catholic circles by facetiously setting up reactionaries who (...) want to dismiss Thomism completely because of their experiences as students with "Catechetical Thomism." The bleak picture of seminary philosophy painted by the author is based on "quite audible hearsay" which he terms "exaggerated" but which he evidently never bothered to check. After making the point that Catholic philosophers have an obligation to introduce the student to the "Christian context of philosophizing," the author follows with some vague platitudes that do not quite fit any context: "There is practically nothing we have to do in our philosophy offerings." "Just as there is no orthodox philosophy, so there is no orthodox curriculum." "The best kind of philosophy for a Catholic college is the best kind of philosophy." The deficiencies of this book find their source in its style. The author wants it to be light and nontechnical, but it becomes rambling, verbose and repetitious.—J. J. R. (shrink)

Can the humanities survive in an age of science? Yes, if analytic philosophers will only stop picking on traditional philosophy and recognize the latter's proper and legitimate role in society. That role according to Veatch, is one that enables man to grasp the nontechnical meaning of our everyday world where we learn to know and understand the nature of things. Such knowledge serves as the necessary ground for not only our common sense attitudes, but also for establishing values and norms (...) for a moral life. What is more, Veatch contends, this knowledge of man, his nature, and his values is not merely emotive or psychological; rather, it is factual. Using traditional logic as its organon, knowledge of a more humanistic variety can establish itself as factual in spite of analytical claims to the contrary. Thus Veatch proceeds from the general problem of the humanities versus science to the more specific area of the two logics: traditional Aristotelian logic and modern symbolic logic. The former is the proper tool of the humanities, the latter serves the method of the physical sciences. Both logics deal with facts in their respective areas. Traditional logic lays bare the facts that make human life meaningful, while symbolic logic operates with formal structures that make technological progression possible. One logic does not cancel out the other. Veatch prefers to view the two logics as a "both... and" structure rather than as an "either... or" situation. To effect this he launches a counterattack against analytic philosophy's repudiation of traditional logic. He charges certain analysts with committing a fallacy that makes necessities and impossibilities a mere function of our language rules. Veatch, however, sees our rules of language as determined by real necessities in the world. He claims that Wittgenstein's celebrated attack on the doctrine of essences never really denies Aristotle's notion of substance as the formal or intelligible aspect of individual entities. Although his justification of traditional logic as a grammar for discourse in the humanities presupposes certain metaphysical commitments, on the whole his plea for traditional philosophy is persuasive.--J. J. R. (shrink)

This is a paperback edition of a translation that was done in 1942. The present edition is an exact copy of the first work; nothing has been added; no new preface has been written. The purpose of this translation was to present the "average student" with a clear version of the Poetics without a surfeit of references and cross-references that would interest only the scholar. Adhering to this norm, the translator adds only a few explanatory footnotes to an otherwise uninterpreted (...) text of Aristotle. Since 1942 however, other translations have reached the sophistication of today's student without being too pedantic. Gerald Else's 1967 translation, for example, contains original elements that stimulate thought and discussion. Key words such as 'mimesis', 'harmatia', 'catharsis', seem too important to gloss over--even for the "average student."--J. J. R. (shrink)

The aim of this index of pre-1500 Platonic manuscripts is to prepare for a complete reediting of a new edition of Plato's works. The project, which began over ten years ago, brings together in one collection microfilms of all the older extant manuscript material. The index first lists the manuscripts according to the libraries in which they are found, including the library shelf number. The second half of the index lists the manuscripts by dialogue. The need for a new edition (...) of the Platonic text is based--for the most part--on the findings of E. R. Dodds in his work on the Gorgias. Dodds discovered that the nineteenth-century textual scholars oversimplified matters by assuming that the extant manuscripts were handed down by scribes. Dodds has shown that as much editing was done as transcribing; hence, the manuscripts could include "extensive possible unsystematic contamination." Also, the nineteenth-century scholars erred in assuming a "fixed rule of evidence." Thus--of three manuscripts-two having similar readings would be accepted and the third considered erroneous. However, probability theory shows that the agreement of two against one will work seven out of eight times. But the eighth instant will have the single reading as the right one--with no way of telling which out of the eight instances will have the single reading as the original. This new and convenient index should enhance Platonic scholarship.--J. J. R. (shrink)