Rau, D. Die Ethik R. Saadjas.--Neumark, D. Saadya's philosophy.-- Vajda, G. Saadia Gaon et l'amour courtois.--Diesendruck, Z. Saadya's formulation of the time-argument for creation.--Altmann, A. Saadya's conception of the law.-- Vajda, G. Saʻadyā commentateur du "Livre of la création."-- Vajda, G. Études sur Saadia.--Harkavy, A. Fragments of anti-Karaite writings of Saadiah in the Imperial Public Library at St. Petersburg.--Eisler, M. Vorlesungen über die jüdischen Philosophen des Mittelalters.

Saadya Gaon (882 – 942), one of the outstanding Rabbis in the period of the Geonim, rejected the legitimacy of legal inference, as part of his polemics with his contemporary Karaite scholars. The paper analyzes Saadya's stance regarding the logical basis of legal inference, and shows that Saadya's distinction between reason and revelation in the domain of legal inference is only in regard to the ‘illah– the factor that connects the case with its law. The rationality (...) of the commandments, on the other hand, is based according to Saadya upon the manfa‘ah– the utility of the commandments, and hence Saadya's religious doctrine turns out to be coherent and consistent. Maimonides (1138–1204), who was one of the most important figures in the Jewish scholarly world in the Middle Ages, adopted the Aristotelian concept of dialectics in order to facilitate his theory of Jewish legal argumentation. Unlike Saadya, Maimonides saw inferences in the realm of the law as legitimate. His position can be considered an inclination towards the Karaite ideology according to which reason must be the ruler in the realm of the law. Nevertheless, Maimonides' stance deviates from that of Karaites in a crucial point: according to Maimonides, only authorized institutions are qualified to use legal inference. Since the Talmud, according to Maimonides, represents the teachings of the rabbinical authorized institutions, its legal instructions must be followed. The article describes Maimonides' position regarding legal and Talmudic inferences, and shows that Maimonides' inclination towards the Karaite theory remains within the limits of the Rabbanite ideology. (shrink)

Hertz, J. H. Saadya gaon.--Altmann, A. Saadya's theory of revelation.--Herzog, D. The polemic treatise against Saadya.--Krauss, S. Saadya's Tafsir of the seventy hapax legomena explained and continued.--Leveen, J. Saadya's lost commentary on Leviticus.--Markon, I. explained by Saadya and his successors.--Marmorstein, A. The doctrine of redemption in Saadya's theological system.--Mittwoch, E. An unknown fragment by Gaon Saadya.--Rabin, C. Saadya gaon's Hebrew prose style.--Rawidowicz, S. Saadya's purification of the idea (...) of God.-- Robertson, E. The relationship of the Arabic translation of the Samaritan Pentateuch to that of Saadya.--Rosenthal, E. I. J. Saadya's exegesis of the Book of Job.--Stein, S. Saadya's Piyyuṭ of the alphabet.--Weis, P. R. The anti-Ḳaraite tendency of R. Saadya gaon's Arabic version of the Pentateuch.--Wieder, N. Fourteen new Genizah-fragments of Saadya's Siddur together with a reproduction of a missing part. (shrink)

The Commentary on Sefer Yeṣira, with its pronounced Pythagorean and Neo-Platonic overtones, written by Saadya Gaon in 931, stands out among the other writings of this Jewish theologian, and raises the question of the purpose of its composition. It has been argued that in writing a commentary on this work of letter-speculation, Saadya responded to mythical and mystical trends in tenth-century Judaism, endeavoring to recast this foundational mystical text as a work of rational philosophy. The present article (...) argues that Saadya was also responding to the intellectual challenge of his broader environment, stretching beyond the Jewish community. In some circles in the Islamicate world, letterspeculations, often associated with the sciences of the occult, were presented in this period as the height of philosophy. In particular, al-Tawḥīdī’s account of the Pure Brethren and Ibn Masarra’s Book on the Properties of Letters demonstrate the relevance of these trends in Saadya’s immediate geographic and intellectual environment. (shrink)

The argument of this paper hinges on Derrida's relation to Judaism as a religious heritage and/or as an essential experience. If he can be said to ‘appropriate his Jewish roots’ at all, as Colby Dickinson (2011) has recently proposed, this is not because Derrida concurs that all belief in an ultimate reality (‘as such’) must now be understood in merely conditional terms (‘as if’). Rather, it is because Derrida deconstructs the difference between the Jew and the non-Jew, along with the (...) differences between the ‘as if’ and the ‘as such’ and the performative and the constative, in his very demonstration of the impossibility of ‘being-jewish’. Dickinson thus misunderstands the way in which Derrida appropriates Kant's regulative ‘as if’, and thus misrepresents what is at stake in Derrida's ‘faith’ in ‘Jewishness’. What is at stake is what Derrida calls deconstructive responsibility, and it takes the form of a radical fidelity to the principle of reason (to an ‘unconditional theoreticism’). This responsibility, paradoxically, demands and impels the interrogation of critical thinking itself, with its principles, its essences and its identities. Accordingly, Derrida interrupts both the ‘as such’ and the ‘as if’ with the ‘if’ of a dangerous ‘perhaps’. (shrink)

Motivated by the work of Hardwig (1985, 1991) on epistemic dependence and trust in expertise, we enquire into the nature and extent of the critical assessment that non-scientists can make—and that they should be taught to make—with regard to science. Our thesis is that critical assessment of science is possible for non-experts because at the basis of science is a set of norms, beliefs and values that are contestable by non-scientists. These norms, beliefs and values are of critical importance to (...) science education and valuable to explore from a pedagogical perspective. (shrink)

Motivated by the work of Hardwig (1985, 1991) on epistemic dependence and trust in expertise, we enquire into the nature and extent of the critical assessment that non-scientists can make—and that they should be taught to make—with regard to science. Our thesis is that critical assessment of science is possible for non-experts because at the basis of science is a set of norms, beliefs and values that are contestable by non-scientists. These norms, beliefs and values are of critical importance to (...) science education and valuable to explore from a pedagogical perspective. (shrink)

Motivated by the work of Hardwig (1985, 1991) on epistemic dependence and trust in expertise, we enquire into the nature and extent of the critical assessment that non-scientists can make—and that they should be taught to make—with regard to science. Our thesis is that critical assessment of science is possible for non-experts because at the basis of science is a set of norms, beliefs and values that are contestable by non-scientists. These norms, beliefs and values are of critical importance to (...) science education and valuable to explore from a pedagogical perspective. (shrink)

Jacques Derrida regularly appeals to an affirmative gesture that is ‘prior’ to or more ‘originary’ than the form of the question, and this suggests one way to understand deconstruction's critical force. The ‘Yes, yes’, he says, situates a ‘vigil or beyond of the question’ with respect to an ‘irreducible responsibility’. Some Derrida scholars therefore construe the double affirmation as a source or ground of critique. In this paper, I refute this suggestion. While an originary ‘Yes, yes’ or ‘come’ (viens) does (...) open the fields of (for example) ‘inheritance’, language, or ‘holistic webs’, I argue, it only marks (will have marked) the processes of différance or of trace that make signification possible in general. No thing, as such, is thereby affirmed. This is why the originary affirmation cannot be said to constitute, in itself, the imperative (il la faut) of the logic (la logique) of ethical-political critique. To explain why a certain ethical imperative can be associated with deconstruction, one must determine why one is always already subject to a vigil that opens critique to its own possibility. One must also determine how the affirmative gesture relates to deconstruction's critical force. (shrink)

This paper demonstrates that when the concept of ethicalpolitical responsibility is taken in its modern sense as a decision or outcome based on the protocols of reason, responsibility is neither simply possible nor simply impossible. Paradoxically, it appeals to a demand that it cannot fulfil; responsibility is thus (im)possible. Moreover, insofar as a deconstructive demonstration of this aporia is itself a response to reason’s own demand, deconstruction cannot be characterized as simply responsible or irresponsible. Rather, deconstruction inscribes itself as the (...) interior limit of the order of ethics, of responsibility, as such. Deconstruction is thus characterized best as an (ir)responsible interrogation of the very principle of reason to which political philosophers such as Habermas appeal when they invoke responsibility. To this extent deconstruction enacts the strange responsibility of interrogating critically precisely what is deemed ‘just’. Key Words: critique • deconstruction • Derrida • Enlightenment • ethics • Habermas • justice • modernity • reason • responsibility. (shrink)

This article offers a close reading of Derrida's response to the events of 11 September 2001, in the interview he conducted immediately afterwards with Giovanna Borradori in the text Philosophy in a Time of Terror (2003). I argue that this text is significantly different from previous philosophical responses to horrific political events (such as those by Walter Benjamin, Theodor Adorno and Hannah Arendt) insofar as it invites us to contest radically the assumption that philosophy's role is to envision and to (...) realize the `good'. Instead, Derrida's response provokes us to acknowledge that philosophy's role was only ever to criticize itself, that this is the absolute limit of what philosophy can or should do, and that this work is both genuinely risky and crucially important, because in undertaking a critique of itself philosophy intervenes for democracy, without rules or guarantees, in the very determinations that are the material of political life. Key Words: 9/11 • Theodor Adorno • critique • deconstruction • democracy • Jacques Derrida • futurity • philosophy • terror • to-come. (shrink)

Prediction of daily rainfall is important for flood forecasting, reservoir operation, and many other hydrological applications. The artificial intelligence algorithm is generally used for stochastic forecasting rainfall which is not capable to simulate unseen extreme rainfall events which become common due to climate change. A new model is developed in this study for prediction of daily rainfall for different lead times based on sea level pressure which is physically related to rainfall on land and thus able to predict unseen rainfall (...) events. Daily rainfall of east coast of Peninsular Malaysia was predicted using SLP data over the climate domain. Five advanced AI algorithms such as extreme learning machine, Bayesian regularized neural networks, Bayesian additive regression trees, extreme gradient boosting, and hybrid neural fuzzy inference system were used considering the complex relationship of rainfall with sea level pressure. Principle components of SLP domain correlated with daily rainfall were used as predictors. The results revealed that the efficacy of AI models is predicting daily rainfall one day before. The relative performance of the models revealed the higher performance of BRNN with normalized root mean square error of 0.678 compared with HNFIS, BART, xgBoost, and ELM. Visual inspection of predicted rainfall during model validation using density-scatter plot and other novel ways of visual comparison revealed the ability of BRNN to predict daily rainfall one day before reliably. (shrink)

Propose une hypothèse originale sur les sources de la pensée de Bergson et sa portée profonde, sur le mouvement de son oeuvre et la méthode qui s'impose pour la lire, sur la place de sa philosophie dans l'histoire.

Despite the ubiquity of healthcare simulation and the humanities in medical education, the two domains of learning remain unintegrated. The stories suffused within healthcare simulation have thus remained unshaped by the developments of narrative medicine and the health humanities. Healthcare simulation, in turn, has yet to utilize concepts like co-construction and narrative competence to enrich learners’ understanding of patient experience alongside their clinical competencies. To create a conceptual bridge between these two fields (including narrative-based inquiry more broadly), we redescribe narrative (...) competence via Ronald Heifetz’s distinction of “technical” and “adaptive” challenges outlined in his adaptive leadership model. Heifetz, we argue, enriches learners’ self-understanding of the unique demands of cultivating narrative competence, which can be both elucidated on the page and tested within the charged yet supportive simulation environment. We introduce Co-constructive Patient Simulation (CCPS) to demonstrate how working with simulated patients can support narrative work by drawing on the clinical vicissitudes of learners in the formulation and enactment of case studies. The three movements of CCPS—resensing, retelling, and retooling—told through learner experiences, describe the affinities and divergences between narrative medicine’s sequence of attention, representation, and affiliation; Montello’s three forms of narrative competence (departure, performance, change), and Heifetz’s three steps (observe, interpret, and intervene) of adaptive leadership. (shrink)

Razón, poesía, historia.--La cuestión del estoicismo español.--El querer.

Un verbe exprime en français l'un des secrets de notre être et l'une des clés de notre époque maniaco-dépressive : ce verbe, c'est revivre. Il a deux sens que tout paraît opposer. Revivre, c'est en effet renaître, retrouver le sentiment d'être vivant et relié à autrui. Mais c'est aussi se laisser rattraper par "un passé qui ne passe pas » et se replier sur soi-même. Chacun de nous fait cette double expérience, souvent sans le savoir. Il faut pourtant la penser, (...) l'affronter, résister à ce qui nous enferme, accéder à ce qui nous délivre. Inventaire de nos blessures et de nos ressources, diagnostic du moment présent, parcours dans les idées et les oeuvres, ces propos renouent avec les actes les plus intenses de notre vie. Un art de vivre, c'est-à-dire de revivre, qui pourrait bien être le seul possible aujourd'hui. (4e de couv.). (shrink)

From classic aesthetic theories to fresh aesthetic methods, this volume is an accessible introduction to the main topics in contemporary aesthetics: the media-technological challenges, transcultural aesthetics and aesthetic methodology.

There are several theses in political science that are usually explicitly called ‘laws’. Other theses are generally thought of as laws, but often without being explicitly labelled as such. Still other claims are well-supported and arguably interesting, while no one would be tempted to call them laws. This situation raises philosophical questions: which theses deserve to be called laws and which not? And how should we decide about this? In this paper we develop and motivate a strategy for thinking about (...) laws in political science which integrates two core concepts: spatio-temporal stability and social mechanisms. The proposed strategy is a set of guidelines that political scientists can use to reflect on and argue about specific cases within their discipline, not a clear-cut demarcation criterion. We defend and motivate this strategy and apply it to two cases (one with respect to state repression, one about parliamentary elections). After we have developed and motivated our strategy for political science, we show that our proposal is relevant for other disciplines in the social sciences. We explain how our views fit into critical realism and embed them in the debate on laws in general philosophy of science and in the philosophy of the social sciences. (shrink)

If it is true that Spinoza belongs to the history of Jewish Philosophy, his concept of God also cannot cease to being “Jewish”. Our aim here is to call into question if Spinoza’s concept of God, as exposed in Ethics’ definitions, has something of Jewish, particularly when faced with conceptions yielded by some of the main philosophers from Jewish and Arabic traditions: Saadya, Avicenna, Ibn Gabirol, Halevi, Maimonides and Crescas. Our answer, at the end, is negative.

This chapter describes how philosophical theorizing about justice can be connected with empirical research in the social sciences. We begin by drawing on some received distinctions between ideal and non-ideal approaches to theorizing justice along several different dimensions, showing how non-ideal approaches are needed to address normative aspects of real-world problems and to provide practical guidance. We argue that there are advantages to a transitional approach to justice focusing on manifest injustices, including the fact that it enables us to set (...) aside some reasonable disagreements about justice. The ‘bottom-up’ approach we advocate, for which we borrow Wolff’s term ‘real-world political philosophy’, is an empirically-informed normative analysis that attends to specific, identifiable injustices, and thus is partial, though not isolationist. We illustrate our approach by considering how different models of the nature of disability suggest different kinds of remedy for injustices faced by persons living with disabilities. We reflect on the nature and significance of vulnerabilities, and we assess the role of public opinion in normative theorizing, suggesting a particular significance for the opinions and experiences of marginalized groups. We finally reflect on the relevance of European legal and institutional frameworks for theorizing justice in Europe. (shrink)

The paper provides a reconstruction of the notion of material Apriori while exhibiting the anti-Kantian inspiration and factual grounding thereof. The attempt is made to show that a non-formal Apriori obtains because the sensuous has a normative character; further, that the difference between material and formal eidetic laws is rooted in the difference between sensuous contents, given in experience, and intellectual contents, originating in activities of judgement. The material Apriori is not independent of all experience, since it is grounded on (...) sensuous eidetic contents and thus depends on the latter’s givenness and characteristics. It is thanks precisely to this ,contingency‘ that it has an ontological significance. (shrink)