David Eso and Kay Burns edition of philosopher Leo Ferraris previously unpublished 1973 manuscript brings to light a long forgotten satirical work, which, in an age of fake news, possesses renewed relevance. The editors contextualize The Earth is Flat! for the reader with a scholarly introduction and a humorous Forewarning. Author, Leo Ferrari, draws on his extensive knowledge of classical thought and its key figures to present a history of ideas that is sometimes accurate, sometimes speculative. Speculative or alternative (...) aspects of this history support his Flat Earth theme, as do a number of scientific experiments outlined, which the reader is encouraged to try. He traces the conflict between Globularist and Planoterrestrial beliefs from antiquity to his contemporary moment of the early 1970s, marked by space exploration. Later chapters chart the activities and philosophies of the Flat Earth Society of Canada, including Ferraris experience on the lecture circuit and in media platforms. The authors method is to blur the line between seriousness and humour and to show that intellectual work can also be good fun. He uses the idea of a spinning, spherical planet to symbolically represent the alienating effects of technological modernity. (shrink)

Mr. Brown's paper contains a detailed statement of the industrial situation at the present day, and the part which Scholastic philosophy should naturally take in bettering it. Some of the facts he delineates will come as a surprise to many people; those, for example who expect the workingman to gain redress through the courts will find added interest in this paper.

The timliness of an investigation into the phenomena of suggestion today can hardly be over estimated. With each succeeding advance it is being given more importance in advertising, in education, and in heath. The author has made it the subject of his master's thesis. Here we have the kernel of his months of thought. The Editor.

While it is no doubt a good pedagogical principle to stress the most convincing proof in the first learning of a philosophic thesis, yet a man with any pretence to philosophic effeciency should certainly have at his beck and call several proofs to do service in various situations. Mr. Brown indicates a few subsidiary proofs in connection with the subject of materialsm, a consideration of grave import in the philosophical world today.