Carington kindly placed at my disposal, because they seem to me to illustrate some of the main themes of this book.

This volume is concerned with the philosophical foundations of Psychical Research. Traditional metaphysical theories have led to apparently insoluble problems concerning the nature of mind, of matter and the relation between the two. The author holds that these theories arise from misconception about the way in which words acquire meaning. His aim is to show that once the relation between words and the experienceable entities which they mean is clearly understood, these seemingly insoluble problems disappear, and the metaphysical theories which (...) give rise to them are seen to be literally nonsensical. The philosophy which results is a radically empirical one, a form of Neutral Monism. The book intended to ‘clear the decks’ for Psychical Research by removing certain traditional pseudo-problems, but it will be of interest to all who followed the revival of Empiricist Philosophy, whether they are students of Psychical Research or not. It is written in a pithy and sparkling style, with a minimum of technical terms, and serves as an introduction to Empiricist Philosophy. Originally published 1949. (shrink)

With very little fanfare (as far as I’ve seen), Routledge has republished three books in the relatively recent history of psychical research. All are available in quite expensive hardback versions, and Broad’s book is also mercifully available as a less expensive (but hardly bargain-priced) paperback. Moreover, all three can be purchased as e-books, but don’t expect bargains there either. As of this writing, the best Kindle price I saw for Smythies’ and Carington’s book is $92, although Broad’s can be (...) had for about $35. (shrink)

This work has been selected by scholars as being culturally important, and is part of the knowledge base of civilization as we know it. This work was reproduced from the original artifact, and remains as true to the original work as possible. Therefore, you will see the original copyright references, library stamps (as most of these works have been housed in our most important libraries around the world), and other notations in the work.This work is in the public domain in (...) the United States of America, and possibly other nations. Within the United States, you may freely copy and distribute this work, as no entity (individual or corporate) has a copyright on the body of the work.As a reproduction of a historical artifact, this work may contain missing or blurred pages, poor pictures, errant marks, etc. Scholars believe, and we concur, that this work is important enough to be preserved, reproduced, and made generally available to the public. We appreciate your support of the preservation process, and thank you for being an important part of keeping this knowledge alive and relevant. (shrink)

Originally published in 1937, this book provides a detailed discussion of the nature of Christian faith and belief in its relationship with the concept of redemption.

First Published in 1999. Routledge is an imprint of Taylor & Francis, an informa company.

In a book on Justinian’s wars of conquest, Peter Heather has argued that Rome’s ability to wage war in the sixth century CE was helped, to a large degree, by the military revolution that took place in Late Antiquity, which consisted of two principal parts: an increased deployment of Roman soldiers to the eastern frontier, and a shift towards Hunnic tactics. In this essay, however, I argue that these claims are misguided, and using five criteria set out by Lee Brice (...) in an article on military revolution during the reigns of Philip II and Alexander the Great of Macedon, I show that the changes which Heather argues in favour of had begun long before Late Antiquity. Instead, what we see is the continued gradual evolution of Rome’s military, with the Roman state shifting troops to the east from the beginning of the imperial era, and the first documented implementation of steppe-inspired changes dating to the second century. (shrink)

Richard Whately’s views of arguments involving authority are very different in his Elements of Rhetoric and his Elements of Logic. This essay begins by documenting these differences and wondering why they are. It then proceeds to take a broader and more historical view of Whately’s discussions of authority and finds him occupying an important developmental ground between his predecessor Locke and contemporary views of the argument from authority. In fact, some of the things we now think are important (...) in a good argument from authority are anticipated by Whately. (shrink)

Despite its basically syllogistic character, Richard Whately's Elements of logic presents the subject in a modern theoretical setting. Whately, for instance, regarded logic as an abstract science, and defined the syllogism as a purely formal device to be used as a means of determining the validity of all arguments. In this paper, I argue that such instances of abstractive ascent place Whately's theory in closer proximity to later 19th-century developments than to the work of his 17th-century predecessors. (...) In addition to discussing the theory itself, other sections deal with its historical setting, and various reactions to it. (shrink)

In 1839 and 1840, Newman preached four Oxford University Sermons, which critiqued the evidential apologetics advocated by John Locke (1632-1704) and William Paley (1743-1805) and subsequently restated by Richard Whately (1787-1863). In response, Newman drew upon Whately’s earlier works on logic and rhetoric to develop an alternative account of the reasonableness of religious belief that was based on implicit reasoning from antecedent probabilities. Newman’s argument was a creative response to Whately’s contention that evidential reasoning is the only (...) safeguard against superstition and infidelity. (shrink)

A short presentation of Richard Whately's ideas on logic, method, and the status of political economy.

This is an exploration of what Locke and Whately said about the Argumentatum ad Hominem, especially in the context of what they said about the other ad arguments, and with a view to ascertaining whether what they said lends support to the understanding of this argument implicit in Johnstone's thesis that all valid philosophical arguments are ad hominem. It is concluded that this support is forthcoming insofar as Locke and Whately had in mind an argument concerned with principles.The (...) essay ends with a brief reformulation of Johnstone's generalization regarding philosophical arguments. (shrink)

Le terme de catallaxie a été forgé par F. Hayek pour exprimer l’ordre spontané du marché. Hayek a créé ce terme à partir du mot catallactique, ressorti peu avant de l’oubli par L. Mises, mot venu du verbe grec signifiant « échanger », pour éviter les ambigüités du mot « économie ». Ce papier a pour objet de rechercher la généalogie du terme « catallactique », depuis Richard Whately, qui a été le premier auteur, en 1831, à vouloir rebaptiser (...) « l’économie politique » en « catallactique ». Ce terme était connu et utilisé tout au long du XIX° siècle et on le trouve encore au début du XX° siècle dans divers manuels. L’utilisation de ce terme par Mises, puis Hayek, est donc la reprise d’une tradition remontant à Richard Whately. C’est l’occasion aussi de se pencher sur la vie de Richard Whately, professeur d’économie politique à Oxford jusqu’en 1831, puis archevêque anglican de Dublin. Il a notamment joué un grand rôle dans l’enseignement de cette discipline, en créant 4 000 cours d’économie politique. Un personnage intéressant, un peu trop ignoré aujourd’hui, qui a joué un rôle non négligeable dans la pensée économique. (shrink)

In 1839 and 1840, Newman preached four Oxford University Sermons, which critiqued the evidential apologetics advocated by John Locke (1632-1704) and William Paley (1743-1805) and subsequently restated by Richard Whately (1787-1863). In response, Newman drew upon Whately’s earlier works on logic and rhetoric to develop an alternative account of the reasonableness of religious belief that was based on implicit reasoning from antecedent probabilities. Newman’s argument was a creative response to Whately’s contention that evidential reasoning is the only (...) safeguard against superstition and infidelity. (shrink)

So wohl Campbell als auch Whately sind sehr besorgt um die verschiedenen argumentations Formen zu analisieren, aber nicht in seiner abstrecten Vielfalt, sondern den verschiedenen Ableihungen des gebrauches oder der gegenwärtigen argumentations absicht im Entwurf jedes Arguments. In seiner Analyse haben sie beobachtet, dass die etische Begründung bemerkensmert verschieden als die Wissenschafliche. Beide Verfasser sind damit einverstanden dass es einen grossen Unterschied gibt zwischen: der existenten Prämisse in der Wissenchaftlichen Probe, und zweitens, die Form in der die Prämissen im (...) induktiven (oder moralen) Begründung verbunden sind, wiel in diesen letzten verschaffen die Prämissen getrennter Wiese eine Kosistenz auf dem Abschluss, aber sie müsen zusammen bleiben damit der Abschluss beweisbarer ist. Dieser Unterschied zwischen den art die Wharheit oder probabilität zwischen Wissenschaft und Humanität zu erzeugen, ist eines der grossen Themen der Philosophie aber das hermeneutische Paradigma zweifalt über die wissenschaftliche Folgerung, sind die Prämissen nicht doch der gleichen art vorgestellt, wer weiss, mit einer gewiss logischen Interdependenz zwischen inhnen und eine extralogische argumentative last die sie verbindet dem Anlass die Schlussfolgenung konsistente zu machen. (shrink)

After discussing the contents of this sermon—which is structured around the Athanasian Creed and emphasizes the inner life of the Trinity—this study raises the question of whether Newman wrote this sermon as a response to the Trinitarian heterodoxy of his one-time mentor, Richard Whately, Anglican Archbishop of Dublin.