In lieu of an abstract, here is a brief excerpt of the content:Modernity as a Rhetorical Problem: Phronēsis, Forms, and Forums in Norms of Rhetorical CultureJames Arnt AuneThe true paradises are the paradises that we’ve lost.—Marcel Proust, The Past RegainedThomas B. Farrell’s Norms of Rhetorical Culture (1993, 6) remains both a masterly synthesis of previous constructive work in rhetorical theory and the essential starting point for anyone committed to reconciling the practical impulses of Aristotelian rhetoric, ethics, and politics with the (...) critical imperatives of modernity. In what follows, I try to make a very simple point about Farrell’s recuperation of Aristotelianism: he neglects matters of social causation and institutional design that were essential to Aristotle’s understanding of rhetoric. In turn, by displacing the social in favor of the cultural—a displacement characteristic of much recent work in the human sciences (Schudson 1997)—Farrell lacks a coherent account of the gap between the normative aspirations of classical rhetoric and the empirical characteristics of public life in modern liberal democracies.The problem appears most clearly in chapter 7 of Norms : “Criticism, Disturbance, and Rhetorical Community.” Farrell defines culture as “the common definition of places for the invention and perpetuation of meaning. A culture offers to those who live in it symbols and families of practices that [End Page 402] permit ongoing performances of meaning and value” (1993, 277). Summarizing his previous arguments, Farrell contends that Aristotle’s Rhetoric informs modern “cultural occasions” in three ways: “the impetus for rhetorical meaning, which we find in Aristotle’s seminal understanding of phronēsis, typified by deliberative prudence; a concept of rhetorical form, which we have found in the prototype for public inference and judgment—the enthymeme; and a modern rhetorical forum, a space of engagement wherein the modern constraints of rhetorical culture might assert themselves” (1993, 277). Although these three concepts are inherently useful, both for analyzing past rhetorical episodes and for projecting emancipatory rhetorical possibilities in the present, they are insufficiently grounded in a historical account of the differences between ancient and modern prudential deliberation, rhetorical forms, and rhetorical forums. An adequate history of these differences would require attention to modern social systems as a whole, which include the economy, the polity, and social institutions such as the family, schools, religious and ethnic organizations, and, most crucially for contemporary social systems, the entire apparatus of the culture industry, including the news and entertainment “media.”The cultural aspect of the modern social system, loosely following Talcott Parsons (1951), includes norms, which make for communal solidarity, and values, which undergird the whole system. Although a thoroughgoing account of the place of rhetoric in the entire contemporary social system of a modern liberal democracy such as the United States or Canada would have required a book three times as long as Norms, there are three ways in which modernity complicates the appropriation of Aristotle’s concepts. First, rhetorical meaning is very different in a social system in which individual autonomy takes precedence over communal solidarity as a fundamental value (Pippin 1999). Second, rhetorical forms function differently in a social system in which those forms can be commodified (Aune 1994, 2001). Third, rhetorical forums are also far more complex, especially in an extended republic like Canada or the United States, requiring greater attention to the way in which constitutions literally create persons who speak (such as the president or prime minister) and spaces for speaking (Congress, the state or provincial houses [White 1984]). The need to raise massive sums of money to obtain media access for common rhetorical deliberation, as is especially the case in the United States, complicates the notion of a rhetorical forum immensely. Even without adopting a broadly Marxian framework, it is clear that the rise and development of capitalism have permanently altered rhetorical deliberation and its forms and forums. [End Page 403] In what follows, I expand on these three criticisms first, by developing a historical account of the social changes that necessitate a rethinking of classical rhetorical theory; second, by comparing and contrasting Farrell’s work with two other contemporary Aristotelianisms, one antimodernist and the other solidly modernist; and third, by developing a framework for normative and empirical investigation of rhetoric that is, I hope... (shrink)

Con este artículo queremos mostrar que si bien los modelos democráticos liberal y republicano pretenden defender la libertad, y la igualdad de los hombres, sus prácticas generan gran marginalidad. Aunque desde el siglo XX se ha intentado corregir la marginalidad que generan, tal como se observa en los esfuerzos por mostrar que tanto liberalismo como republicanismo no son modelos tajantemente opuesto, reflexión desde la cual se ha propuesto un tercer modelo; Democracia Deliberativa, ese esfuerzo aún no logra su cometido. De (...) hecho en las críticas a este tercer modelo se observa que mientras se siga exigiendo condiciones de universalidad, especialmente de la razón como parámetro universal de argumentación, seguirá existiendo marginalidad, y en consecuencia necesidad de emancipación. (shrink)

Praising wishful thinking is a serious risk that I am willing to run not only in this article commenting of Natalie Stoljar’s work but also elsewhere in my own scholarship. Although I will analyze her claims and will agree mostly with them, I will criticize her for stopping one step short adopting the desirability or weaker claim, when in it is not merely possible but necessary to go one step beyond arguing for the necessity or stronger claim. Accordingly, I intend (...) to present further grounds for endorsing “conceptual (legal) analysis pluralism” by distinguishing the three different inquiry or projects that are and must be integrated and stating the normative priority of one of them, i.e. the prescriptive, interpretive, and moral.Resumen:Alabar el “pensamiento ilusorio y bien intencionado” es un riesgo que estoy dispuesto a correr no solamente en este artículo para comentar el trabajo de Natalie Stoljar sino además en el resto de mi producción académica. Aun cuando voy a analizar su argumento y voy a estar de acuerdo en la mayor parte con ella, también la voy a criticar por detenerse un paso antes al adoptar la tesis de la deseabilidad o tesis débil, cuando no es meramente posible sino necesario ir un paso más allá al adoptar la tesis de la necesidad o tesis fuerte. Para tal efecto, intento presentar algunas razones adicionales para apoyar el “pluralismo del análisis (jurídico) conceptual” al distinguir las tres investigaciones o proyectos diferentes que están y deben estar integrados y establecer la prioridad normativa de uno de ellos, i.e. prescriptivo, interpretivo y moral. (shrink)

La investigación ecológica a largo plazo (Long Term Ecological Research, LTER) maneja problemas que abarcan décadas o plazos más largos. El programa y su nombre formal comenzaron en Estados Unidos en 1980. Si bien los estudios y observaciones a largo plazo comenzaron tempranamente en 1400 y 1800 en Asia y Europa, respectivamente, el enfoque a largo plazo no se formalizó sino hasta el establecimiento de los programas de investigación ecológica de largo plazo en Estados Unidos. Estos programas han permitido experimentos (...) a nivel de ecosistemas y comparaciones entre sitios que condujeron a una mejor comprensión de la estructura y funcionamiento de la biosfera. El enfoque ecosistémico holístico de esta iniciativa permite también la incorporación de la dimensión humana en la ecología, y recientemente ha dado lugar al nuevo concepto de investigación socio-ecológica de largo plazo (LTSER). Hoy los programas de investigación socio-ecológica a largo plazo existen en por lo menos 32 países (esto es, los miembros de la Red Internacional de Investigación Ecológica a Largo Plazo o ILTER (International Long Term Ecological Research). Sin embargo, la consolidación de la red internacional dentro del paradigma de investigación socio-ecológica a largo plazo todavía requiere: (1) inclusión de algunas regiones remotas del mundo que aún están poco representadas, como el suroeste de América del Sur; (2) modificaciones en el tipo de investigación realizado, tales como la integración de las ciencias sociales y naturales con las humanidades y la ética, y (3) la incorporación de las conclusiones y resultados dentro de los procesos sociales y políticos. En este contexto, la naciente red de investigación socio-ecológica a largo plazo en Chile, que se extiende en el rango latitudinal más largo de bosque templado en el Hemisferio Sur, agrega una nueva región remota a las investigaciones ecológicas de largo plazo que había sido pasada por alto anteriormente. Además, la colaboración con la Universidad de North Texas y otros asociados internacionales ayuda a desarrollar un enfoque interdisciplinario para integrar las ciencias ecológicas y la filosofía ambiental, junto con los conocimientos ecológicos tradicionales, la educación informal y formal, la política, las humanidades, los procesos socio-políticos y la conservación biocultural. (shrink)

La investigación ecológica a largo plazo (Long Term Ecological Research, LTER) maneja problemas que abarcan décadas o plazos más largos. El programa y su nombre formal comenzaron en Estados Unidos en 1980. Si bien los estudios y observaciones a largo plazo comenzaron tempranamente en 1400 y 1800 en Asia y Europa, respectivamente, el enfoque a largo plazo no se formalizó sino hasta el establecimiento de los programas de investigación ecológica de largo plazo en Estados Unidos. Estos programas han permitido experimentos (...) a nivel de ecosistemas y comparaciones entre sitios que condujeron a una mejor comprensión de la estructura y funcionamiento de la biosfera. El enfoque ecosistémico holístico de esta iniciativa permite también la incorporación de la dimensión humana en la ecología, y recientemente ha dado lugar al nuevo concepto de investigación socio-ecológica de largo plazo (LTSER). Hoy los programas de investigación socio-ecológica a largo plazo existen en por lo menos 32 países (esto es, los miembros de la Red Internacional de Investigación Ecológica a Largo Plazo o ILTER (International Long Term Ecological Research). Sin embargo, la consolidación de la red internacional dentro del paradigma de investigación socio-ecológica a largo plazo todavía requiere: (1) inclusión de algunas regiones remotas del mundo que aún están poco representadas, como el suroeste de América del Sur; (2) modificaciones en el tipo de investigación realizado, tales como la integración de las ciencias sociales y naturales con las humanidades y la ética, y (3) la incorporación de las conclusiones y resultados dentro de los procesos sociales y políticos. En este contexto, la naciente red de investigación socio-ecológica a largo plazo en Chile, que se extiende en el rango latitudinal más largo de bosque templado en el Hemisferio Sur, agrega una nueva región remota a las investigaciones ecológicas de largo plazo que había sido pasada por alto anteriormente. Además, la colaboración con la Universidad de North Texas y otros asociados internacionales ayuda a desarrollar un enfoque interdisciplinario para integrar las ciencias ecológicas y la filosofía ambiental, junto con los conocimientos ecológicos tradicionales, la educación informal y formal, la política, las humanidades, los procesos socio-políticos y la conservación biocultural. (shrink)

La investigación ecológica a largo plazo (Long Term Ecological Research, LTER) maneja problemas que abarcan décadas o plazos más largos. El programa y su nombre formal comenzaron en Estados Unidos en 1980. Si bien los estudios y observaciones a largo plazo comenzaron tempranamente en 1400 y 1800 en Asia y Europa, respectivamente, el enfoque a largo plazo no se formalizó sino hasta el establecimiento de los programas de investigación ecológica de largo plazo en Estados Unidos. Estos programas han permitido experimentos (...) a nivel de ecosistemas y comparaciones entre sitios que condujeron a una mejor comprensión de la estructura y funcionamiento de la biosfera. El enfoque ecosistémico holístico de esta iniciativa permite también la incorporación de la dimensión humana en la ecología, y recientemente ha dado lugar al nuevo concepto de investigación socio-ecológica de largo plazo (LTSER). Hoy los programas de investigación socio-ecológica a largo plazo existen en por lo menos 32 países (esto es, los miembros de la Red Internacional de Investigación Ecológica a Largo Plazo o ILTER (International Long Term Ecological Research). Sin embargo, la consolidación de la red internacional dentro del paradigma de investigación socio-ecológica a largo plazo todavía requiere: (1) inclusión de algunas regiones remotas del mundo que aún están poco representadas, como el suroeste de América del Sur; (2) modificaciones en el tipo de investigación realizado, tales como la integración de las ciencias sociales y naturales con las humanidades y la ética, y (3) la incorporación de las conclusiones y resultados dentro de los procesos sociales y políticos. En este contexto, la naciente red de investigación socio-ecológica a largo plazo en Chile, que se extiende en el rango latitudinal más largo de bosque templado en el Hemisferio Sur, agrega una nueva región remota a las investigaciones ecológicas de largo plazo que había sido pasada por alto anteriormente. Además, la colaboración con la Universidad de North Texas y otros asociados internacionales ayuda a desarrollar un enfoque interdisciplinario para integrar las ciencias ecológicas y la filosofía ambiental, junto con los conocimientos ecológicos tradicionales, la educación informal y formal, la política, las humanidades, los procesos socio-políticos y la conservación biocultural. (shrink)

El estudio de la obra de Arturo A. Roig pone en evidencia su carácter de "clásico" de la filosofía "nuestroamericana". En efecto, el filósofo ha instituido categorías nuevas, redefinido otras más tradicionales, explorado vías para enriquecer el acervo filosófico con saberes provenientes de otras formas discursivas, escritas o populares trasmitidas por el lenguaje oral, y formado un discipulado prestigioso. Esta producción en su integridad, aun los estudios sobre la Historia de las Ideas Latinoamericanas, fue concebida por su autor como ancilla (...) emancipationis, una "filosofía del concernimiento" en términos de la Filosofía Intercultural. Como homenaje al Maestro Arturo A. Roig se comunica aquí un breve desarrollo teórico que incorpora las categorías de "a priori antropológico" y "moralidades emergentes", así como las redefiniciones de "ciudadanía" y "dignidad humana", a una investigación filosófica intercultural en curso sobre las "ciudadanías interculturales emergentes", resultante de las migraciones que constituyen el "fenómeno biopolítico mayor de nuestro tiempo". The study of Arturo A. Roig's work highlights his character as a "classic" of Our American philosophy. Indeed, the philosopher has instituted new categories, redefined more traditional ones, he has also explored new ways to enrich the philosophical wealth with the knowledge coming from other discursive forms, whether written or popular traditions transmitted orally, and he has built a prestigious discipleship. The totality of his production, even his studies on the History of Latin American Ideas, has been conceived as an ancilla emancipationis, "a philosophy of concern", as Intercultural Philosophy formulates it. Thus, as a homage to the Master Arturo A. Roig this contribution exposes a brief theoretical development incorporating as well the categories "anthropological a priori" and "emerging moralities", as the redefinitions of "citizenship" and "human dignity", to an actual philosophical enquiry on the "emerging intercultural citizenship" which results from the international migrations. (shrink)

Aune acknowledges in his preface that his greatest intellectual debt is to Wilfrid Sellars to whom the book is dedicated. And the influence of Sellars is manifest throughout the book. Many of Sellars' characteristic themes and approaches as well as his general synoptic vision of man in the world are echoed in these pages. But Aune develops these in fresh and novel ways. A detailed critique of the "foundation" picture of empirical knowledge is the leitmotif of this study, (...) and many of the philosophic ramifications of a rejection of "myth of the given" in its many varieties are sketched for us. Knowledge neither has nor requires such a foundation. Aune explores the consequences of this "new" orientation for such traditional problems as the nature of "privacy," "mind-body," the nature of thought and sensations, and the relation of scientific theory to common sense. Throughout there is an attempt to give just due to the claims of ordinary language and those of theoretical science. Although this study is not really "an introduction to Theory of Knowledge and the Philosophy of Mind," it is a good introduction to a comprehensive theory that has been emerging on the American philosophic scene during the past few decades.--R. J. B. (shrink)

Bridging the gap between the world of science and the realm of the spiritual, B. Alan Wallace introduces a natural theory of human consciousness that has its roots in contemporary physics and Buddhism. Wallace's "special theory of ontological relativity" suggests that mental phenomena are _conditioned_ by the brain, but do not _emerge_ from it. Rather, the entire natural world of mind and matter, subjects and objects, arises from a unitary dimension of reality that is more fundamental than these dualities, as (...) proposed by Wolfgang Pauli and Carl Jung. To test his hypothesis, Wallace employs the Buddhist meditative practice of _samatha_, refining one's attention and metacognition, to create a kind of telescope to examine the space of the mind. Drawing on the work of the physicist John Wheeler, he then proposes a more general theory in which the participatory nature of reality is envisioned as a self-excited circuit. In comparing these ideas to the Buddhist theory known as the Middle Way philosophy, Wallace explores further aspects of his "general theory of ontological relativity," which can be investigated by means of _vipasyana_, or insight, meditation. Wallace then focuses on the theme of symmetry in reference to quantum cosmology and the "problem of frozen time," relating these issues to the theory and practices of the Great Perfection school of Tibetan Buddhism. He concludes with a discussion of the general theme of complementarity as it relates to science and religion. The theories of relativity and quantum mechanics were major achievements in the physical sciences, and the theory of evolution has had an equally deep impact on the life sciences. However, rigorous scientific methods do not yet exist to observe mental phenomena, and naturalism has its limits for shedding light on the workings of the mind. A pioneer of modern consciousness research, Wallace offers a practical and revolutionary method for exploring the mind that combines the keenest insights of contemporary physicists and philosophers with the time-honored meditative traditions of Buddhism. (shrink)

Philosophy long sought to set knowledge on a firm foundation, through derivation of indubitable truths by infallible rules. For want of such truths and rules, the enterprise foundered. Nevertheless, foundationalism's heirs continue their forbears' quest, seeking security against epistemic misfortune, while their detractors typically espouse unbridled coherentism or facile relativism. Maintaining that neither stance is tenable, Catherine Elgin devises a via media between the absolute and the arbitrary, reconceiving the nature, goals, and methods of epistemology. In Considered Judgment, she argues (...) for a reconception that takes reflective equilibrium as the standard of rational acceptability. A system of thought is in reflective equilibrium when its components are reasonable in light of one another, and the account they comprise is reasonable in light of our antecedent convictions about the subject it concerns.Many epistemologists now concede that certainty is a chimerical goal. But they continue to accept the traditional conception of epistemology's problematic. Elgin suggests that in abandoning the quest for certainty we gain opportunities for a broader epistemological purview--one that comprehends the arts and does justice to the sciences. She contends that metaphor, fiction, emotion, and exemplification often advance understanding in science as well as in art. The range of epistemology is broader and more variegated than is usually recognized. Tenable systems of thought are neither absolute nor arbitrary. Although they afford no guarantees, they are good in the way of belief. (shrink)

La reprise des travaux aux « Magasins Dessenne » au cours des années 2012 et 2013 avait permis de réévaluer l’histoire de l’édifice à l’aune de nouvelles observations architecturales. Certaines des hypothèses émises par le fouilleur A. Dessenne et par différents chercheurs concernant le phasage de l’édifice avaient été revues. Nous proposions en effet de voir dans la ruine non pas deux édifices distincts de part et d’autre d’un corridor central, mais plutôt un noyau initial auquel se seraient...

For German townsmen, life during the sixteenth and seventeenth centuries was characterized by a culture of arms, with urban citizenry representing the armed power of the state. This book investigates how men were socialized to the martial ethic from all sides, and how masculine identity was confirmed with blades and guns.

Bringing together Deleuze, Blanchot, and Foucault, this book provides a detailed and original exploration of the ideas that influenced Deleuze's thought leading up to and throughout his cinema volumes and, as a result, proposes a new definition of art. Examining Blanchot's suggestion that art and dream are "outside" of power, as imagination has neither reality nor truth, and Foucault's theory that power forms knowledge by valuing life, Eugene Brent Young relates these to both Deleuze's philosophy of time and his work (...) with Guattari on art. In doing so, he uses case studies from literature and popular film, including Kafka's Castle, Villeneuve's Arrival, and Kubrick's Eyes Wide Shut. Providing important new insights for those working in literary and cinematic studies, this book advances a new definition of art as that which reverses the realities and truths of power to express obscure ideas and values beyond both our exterior and interior worlds. (shrink)

Bridging the gap between the world of science and the realm of the spiritual, B. Alan Wallace introduces a natural theory of human consciousness that has its roots in contemporary physics and Buddhism. Wallace's "special theory of ontological relativity" suggests that mental phenomena are _conditioned_ by the brain, but do not _emerge_ from it. Rather, the entire natural world of mind and matter, subjects and objects, arises from a unitary dimension of reality that is more fundamental than these dualities, as (...) proposed by Wolfgang Pauli and Carl Jung. To test his hypothesis, Wallace employs the Buddhist meditative practice of _samatha_, refining one's attention and metacognition, to create a kind of telescope to examine the space of the mind. Drawing on the work of the physicist John Wheeler, he then proposes a more general theory in which the participatory nature of reality is envisioned as a self-excited circuit. In comparing these ideas to the Buddhist theory known as the Middle Way philosophy, Wallace explores further aspects of his "general theory of ontological relativity," which can be investigated by means of _vipasyana_, or insight, meditation. Wallace then focuses on the theme of symmetry in reference to quantum cosmology and the "problem of frozen time," relating these issues to the theory and practices of the Great Perfection school of Tibetan Buddhism. He concludes with a discussion of the general theme of complementarity as it relates to science and religion. The theories of relativity and quantum mechanics were major achievements in the physical sciences, and the theory of evolution has had an equally deep impact on the life sciences. However, rigorous scientific methods do not yet exist to observe mental phenomena, and naturalism has its limits for shedding light on the workings of the mind. A pioneer of modern consciousness research, Wallace offers a practical and revolutionary method for exploring the mind that combines the keenest insights of contemporary physicists and philosophers with the time-honored meditative traditions of Buddhism. (shrink)

Do psychological traits predict philosophical views? We administered the PhilPapers Survey, created by David Bourget and David Chalmers, which consists of 30 views on central philosophical topics (e.g., epistemology, ethics, metaphysics, philosophy of mind, and philosophy of language) to a sample of professional philosophers (N = 314). We extended the PhilPapers survey to measure a number of psychological traits, such as personality, numeracy, well-being, lifestyle, and life experiences. We also included non-technical ‘translations’ of these views for eventual use in other (...) populations. We found limited to no support for the notion that personality or demographics predict philosophical views. We did, however, find that some psychological traits were predictive of philosophical views, even after strict correction for multiple comparisons. Findings include: higher interest in numeracy predicted physicalism, naturalism, and consequentialism; lower levels of well-being and higher levels of mental illness predicted hard determinism; using substances such as psychedelics and marijuana predicted non-realist and subjectivist views of morality and aesthetics; having had a transformative or self-transcendent experience predicted theism and idealism. We discuss whether or not these empirical results have philosophical implications, while noting that 68% of our sample of professional philosophers indicated that such findings would indeed have philosophical value. (shrink)

In the modular design of generative theory the syntax-semantics interface has accounted all along for meanings at the level of Logical Form. The syntax-pragmatics interface, on the other hand, is the result of what one may call the 'pragmatic turn' in the linguistic theory, where content is partitioned into given and new information. In other words, the structural division of the clause has been subjected to criteria of information, or discourse structure. Both interfaces require a structurally descriptive inventory whose specific (...) shapes can be motivated on theory-internal grounds only. The present collection of original articles develops the concept of these interfaces further. The papers in the first section focus on the syntax-semantics interface, those in the second section on the syntax-pragmatics interface. (shrink)

In lieu of an abstract, here is a brief excerpt of the content:Reviewed by:Saving Persuasion: A Defense of Rhetoric and JudgmentJames Arnt AuneSaving Persuasion: A Defense of Rhetoric and Judgment. Bryan Garsten. Cambridge, Mass: Harvard University Press, 2006. Pp. xii + 276. $45.00, hardcover.Something of what rhetoricians perennially run up against in modern political philosophy is illustrated by a recent article by Jürgen Habermas in Communication Theory. In a searing indictment of contemporary democracy and the mass media, Habermas writes, "Issues (...) of political discourse become assimilated into and absorbed by the modes and contents of entertainment. Besides personalization, the dramatization of events, the simplification of complex matters, and the vivid polarization of conflicts promote civic privatism and a mood of antipolitics" (2006, 422). Any historian of political communication in the Western democracies since the early nineteenth century is bound to be puzzled by this observation, for the emergence of mass democracy in the United States and England, at least, was characterized by intense popular participation in politics, precisely because political campaigns were heavily personalized, dramatized, simplified, and polarized. At the beginning of the article, Habermas praises Aristotle's Politics for its union of normative theorizing and empirical research, forgetting apparently that Aristotle also wrote a normative and empirical Rhetoric.That Habermas distrusts persuasion is obvious, but what is less clear is how the rhetoriphobia he shares with virtually every modern and contemporary philosopher came about. Bryan Garsten's book—the most important work on rhetoric and political philosophy since Ronald Beiner's Political Judgment—makes the startlingly original argument that the anti-rhetorical stance not only is grounded in a suspicion of private judgment, but that it can be traced back to Hobbes's, Rousseau's, and Kant's fear of the persuasive power of post-Reformation religious enthusiasm. Garsten not only provides provocative rereadings of these three fathers of modern liberalism but also extends our understanding of rhetorical and political judgment in Aristotle and Cicero. His analysis of the problems of persuasion and democracy in the twentieth century, while somewhat less satisfying, includes cogent criticisms of Rawls, Habermas, and theorists of deliberative democracy from what might be called a Ciceronian-Madisonian republican stance. [End Page 94]Saving Persuasion began as a doctoral dissertation in Government at Harvard, under the direction of Harvey Mansfield—after Allan Bloom, perhaps the most influential and controversial of the disciples of Leo Strauss. Although Garsten's book displays both the virtues and vices of Straussianism, it would be unfair to dismiss it as a neoconservative manifesto for rhetoric. (An enthusiastic review of the book appeared in the neoconservative Weekly Standard in February 2007, illustrating the curious fact that the Right "gets" rhetoric in ways that liberals and leftists do not (Deneen 2007).) Currently an assistant professor of political science at Yale, Garsten also received an MA from Cambridge in political theory and intellectual history. His book reveals the influence of Quentin Skinner and the Cambridge School of political theory, whose insistence on reading political philosophy in its historical context is the antithesis of the Straussian rejection of historicism. Garsten thus combines the Straussian emphasis on close reading with the contextual-rhetorical perspective of Skinner; this unique synthesis enables Garsten to solve some ongoing problems in textual interpretation (especially the relationship between Academic skepticism and Stoic natural law theory in Cicero) while developing interesting causal arguments about the rise of the public sphere in the eighteenth century, the decline of interest in rhetoric by liberal political theorists, and the pathologies of contemporary democratic politics.The book is divided into two main parts, following an introduction in which Garsten lays out his central thesis: "[A] politics of persuasion—in which people try to change one another's minds by appealing not only to reason but also to passions and sometimes even prejudices—is a mode of politics worth defending. Persuasion is worthwhile because it requires us to pay attention to our fellow citizens and to display a certain respect for their points of view and their judgments" (3). Persuasion rightly understood cannot be reduced either to manipulation or pandering. Rather, persuasion is inextricably linked to judgment, a human faculty threatened by modernity. Judgment is "the mental activity of responding to particular situations" by... (shrink)

This document provides a system of punctuation that is based on the syntax of English sentences. It accords with the practice of leading publishers, and it conforms to the recommendations of such publications as The New York Public Library Writer’s Guide to Style and Usage. Skillful writers often punctuate in ways that violate this system of punctuation, but they have earned the right to do so: they know what they are doing and why. If you master the system presented in (...) this document, you will not make errors of punctuation that teachers and editors will want to correct. You will also have the ability to justify your occasional departures from the rules: you will understand why your usage is preferable in the circumstances. (shrink)

Written for the general reader and the student of moral philosophy, this book provides a clear and unified treatment of Kant's theory of morals. Bruce Aune takes into account all of Kant's principal writings on morality and presents them in a contemporary idiom. Originally published in 1980. The Princeton Legacy Library uses the latest print-on-demand technology to again make available previously out-of-print books from the distinguished backlist of Princeton University Press. These editions preserve the original texts of these important (...) books while presenting them in durable paperback and hardcover editions. The goal of the Princeton Legacy Library is to vastly increase access to the rich scholarly heritage found in the thousands of books published by Princeton University Press since its founding in 1905. (shrink)