Much of today’s public and private discourse surrounding social norms, morals, and values is non-productive, if not counter-productive. It is rare that any kind of consensus is reached when such discrepancies surface. Some of this is due to honest disagreement among genuinely reflective and open-minded individuals, but it is becoming more obvious that a large and perhaps growing portion of this problem stems from misunderstandings about the nature of these concepts themselves. Sadly, these misunderstandings do not seem to be diminishing. (...) This essay is an attempt to further the clarification of these ideas from the perspective of a concerned citizen. (shrink)

In lieu of an abstract, here is a brief excerpt of the content:207 THE CARELESS SKEPTIC THE 'PAMPHILIAN' IRONIES IN HUME'S DIALOGUES In "Hume and the Legacy of the Dialogues" E. C. Mossner sets out a widely accepted interpretation of one of Hume's major intentions in that great work. He argues that Hume's main use of irony therein is to dissimulate with respect to his true religious convictions. The purpose is to provide Hume with a defense against the expected negative (...) reaction to the powerful attack on religion mounted 2 in the Dialogues. The attack, as is well known, is set out in the arguments of Philo against natural and revealed religion as espoused by Cleanthes and Demea, and Philo's views are taken to be those of Hume. It is argued or assumed that since such attacks were in Hume's day imprudent, they must be made by indirection, that is, by a device such as irony. Thus the Dialogues have surface meanings in which the religious views under attack are said (by Pamphilus) to win out; they also have other meanings, underlying or implicit, in which the religious views are conclusively refuted. That they are refuted is a conclusion drawn by the interpreters, in the present case Mossner and those who share his views. These destructive refutations are derived from explication and assessment of the ongoing argument as embodied in the explicit statements of the contestants, and are thus not explicitly linked to Hume. In consequence, quite often from one standpoint (a trivial one of external comment by an immature and prejudiced onlooker) the design argument wins; and from another, more sophisticated one, it loses. The upshot is that "Philo, who as Hume's spokesman for mitigated 208 skepticism will perforce be the victor in the philosophic debate, will nevertheless be 'artfully' depicted as being vanquished by the antagonist." The strategy Mossner finds in the Dialogues thus has the youthful Pamphilus, a ward of Cleanthes, and one who takes no actual part in the adversarial discussions, interposing (in brief asides) comments that superficially but subtly belittle Philo's philosophical position. Philo is characterized, for instance, as having a "careless scepticism," in contrast with Cleanthes, who has an "accurate philosophical turn [of mind]" (D 128). Similarly, at the end of the Dialogues, Pamphilus awards the victory to Cleanthes. In support of his thesis that Philo is a devious Hume's mouthpiece, Mossner brings forth two kinds of evidence, roughly characterizable as external and internal. One kind of external evidence is exemplified in Hume's correspondence with Gilbert 4 5 Elliot of Minto, and Adam Smith; the letters involved are interpreted as showing that Philo represents Hume. Another kind involves comparing the amount of space devoted to the arguments of the three adversaries. The internal evidence is derived from the explication and appraisal of the explicit statements of the contestants; and it is essentially identified with the arguments and conclusions of Philo, except where Cleanthes can be said to make claims which square with those made by Hume in other works such as the Treatise. Thus Hume's views and the related arguments are interpreted as those of Philo, in part because they are considered to be more valid and sound than those of Cleanthes, and in part because they are held to square with the views and arguments affirmed in Hume's other writings. Hume's views, as indicated above, are taken to be those of 209 Philo except where Philo appears to agree with Cleanthes and to accept a form of the design argument. Hume is Cleanthes when Cleanthes sets forth doctrines of the Treatise and the Enquiry that are in accordance with the received (more or less) positivistic interpretation of Hume's skepticism. It is this view that requires that in those places in Parts III, X, and XII, where Philo appears to avow a form of the design argument or to let it stand unrefuted, he be (ironically) dissimulating. Thus the surface victories of Cleanthes and natural religion, which the adversarial flow of the statements of Philo and Cleanthes exhibits, are refuted by the propositions derived from the assessed form and content of the philosophical debate. The basic irony, therefore, lies in aspects of the... (shrink)

Das hier angezeigte Buch stellt sich dar als eine repräsentative Studie zur byzantinischen Buchkunst über einen Zeitraum von mehr als anderthalb Jahrtausenden. In einem knappen Vorwort reiht Peter Schreiner es in eine bedeutende Forschungstradition ein und zugleich in die Abfolge einer „unübersehbar gewordenen Literatur“. Dabei wird zu Recht hervorgehoben, daß im Unterschied zu vielen anderen Veröffentlichungen des Faches die Buchkunst aus dem slawisch-orthodoxen Bereich voll einbezogen wird, an dessen Erforschung die Verf. mit zahlreichen Arbeiten beteiligt ist. Sie stellt in ihrer (...) eigenen Einleitung dem Leser das vorwiegend liturgische Buch als wesentliches Fundament der byzantinischen Kultur vor Augen. Skizzenhaft erläutert sie seine religiös bestimmte Würde, aus der sich zugleich seine Zierate und Illustrationen rechtfertigen. Es ist einer der Vorzüge der Darstellung, daß dem politischen und kulturellen Zentrum des Reiches Provinzen und Nachbarländer mit vollem Gewicht an die Seite treten: – Syrien, das koptische Ägypten und Äthiopien, Armenien und Georgien, Bulgarien, Rumänien, die Walachei und nicht zuletzt Rußland. (shrink)

In this article, Latin American identity is analyzed from an anthropological and holistic perspective. Dynamic contradictions are offered as a contribution towards understanding the process of construction-deconstruction of our identity, within the global historical context of its emergence an..

Stone and Dung, Oil and Spit: Jewish Daily Life in the Time of Jesus. By Jodi Magness. Grand Rapids, Mich.: William B. Eerdmans Publishing Co., 2011. Pp. xv + 335, illus. $25.

Experimental Essays on Zhuangzi is a classic in the field. Originally published in 1983, this edition makes it available again in an expanded version, with four additional contributions, and in an updated format, with pinyin transcription, Chinese characters embedded in the text, and reference style notes. The work is a well respected textbook and essential reader in Daoist thought. It continues to constitute an essential contribution to the study of Daoism and Chinese philosophy.

Chicks reared in the absence of light and rat pups reared without extra stimulation fail to exhibit behavioral laterality, implying that a threshold amount of environmental stimulation is necessary for the brain to follow an asymmetry pathway. Reverse asymmetry has been reported in the chick, but not the rat, though a sex difference resembling reverse asymmetry has been found in the rat.