D'Arcy May, in his review, contends Magliola argues that the Buddhist doctrines of no-self and rebirth are contradictory, whereas Magliola in fact argues just the opposite--that these two Buddhist doctrines are not contradictory (and he explains why). What Magliola does contend is that Buddhist no-self and rebirth contradict the Catholic teachings of individual identity and "one life-span only." D'Arcy May's review contends that Magliola admits "authoritative statements" are "hard to come by" in Buddhism, whereas Magliola in his book contends that (...) "authoritative statements" play a very important role in Buddhism: his book explains how "authority" functions in Buddhism, and he directs readers to the careful "vetting" of his book--including his discussions of "authority in Buddhism"-- by Ven. Bhikkhu Bodhi (for Theravada) and Ven. Dr. Dhammadipa [Fa Yao] (for both Theravada and the two "Big Vehicles"). His book also cites approvals by several established academics who are Buddhologists. Magliola's "Reply" goes on to argue that D'Arcy May's interpretation of the "sensus fidelium" foists the opinions of "white intellectual elites and higher-income Catholics of the North Atlantic tier of countries and their geographical projections--Australia, etc. (only 9 percent of the world's Catholic population) upon the 68 percent of Catholics who live in the global South and East. Magliola's "Reply" also expresses his dismay that D'Arcy May, throughoout his review, dodges the pivotal Derridean notion of "samenesses erected by irreducible difference" though this "thought-motif" constitutes the scaffolding of Magliola's entire book. (shrink)

Despite there being deep lines of convergence between the philosophies of Alfred North Whitehead, C. S. Peirce, William James, John Dewey, and other classical American philosophers, it remains an open question whether Whitehead is a pragmatist, and conversation between pragmatists and Whitehead scholars have been limited. Indeed, it is difficult to find an anthology of classical American philosophy that includes Whitehead’s writings. These camps began separately, and so they remain. This volume questions the wisdom of that separation, exploring their (...) connections, both historical and in application. The essays in this volume embody original and creative work by leading scholars that not only furthers the understanding of American philosophy, but seeks to advance it by working at the intersection of experience and reality to incite novel and creative thought. This exploration is long overdue. Specific questions that are addressed are: Is Whitehead a pragmatist? What contrasts and affinities exist between American pragmatism and Whitehead’s thought? What new questions, strategies, and critiques emerge by juxtaposing their distinct perspectives? -/- . (shrink)

Distinguished philosophers, theologians, and cultural critics provide the first critical consideration of the work of philosopher John D. Caputo. Responses from Caputo are included.

May, John D'Arcy Review(s) of: Hyphenated Christians: Towards a better understanding of dual religious belonging, by Gideon Goosen, (Oxford/Bern/New York: Peter Lang, 2011), pp. xviii + 172.

The essays in this volume reflect the wide-ranging interests of John D. North, distinguished historian of science and philosophy.

An infinite lottery machine is used as a foil for testing the reach of inductive inference, since inferences concerning it require novel extensions of probability. Its use is defensible if there is some sense in which the lottery is physically possible, even if exotic physics is needed. I argue that exotic physics is needed and describe several proposals that fail and at least one that succeeds well enough.

John D. Caputo’s book is one in a new series from Penguin called “Philosophy in Transit”. The “transit” theme has a number of dimensions: the publisher announces that the authors use “various modes of transportation as their starting point”, and the books will use this idea to represent some aspect of the current state of philosophy itself (a leading metaphor of Caputo’s book is that truth is perpetually “on the go”). Furthermore, the publisher’s description of these books as “commute-length” (...) indicates when and where they expect people to read them. Future volumes – by Barry Dainton on “self”, Susan Neiman on “why grow up?” and the ubiquitous Slavoj Zizek on “event” – are forthcoming. (shrink)

In his 2012 work, Faith of the Faithless, the philosopher Simon Critchley presented an ‘atheistic’ formulation of faith as an ‘experiment’ in ‘political theology.’ This work, as part of the so-called ‘turn to religion’ in continental political philosophy, gave an account of what Critchley had formerly articulated as ‘atheistic transcendence.’ Tracing the genesis of the latter and then linking to his notion of the supreme fiction, the paper seeks to account for Critchley’s ‘a/theological’ shift. Through a close reading, the paper (...) argues that Critchley’s ‘faith of the faithless’ depends on the Christian hermeneutic tradition – or radical theology – for its articulation. Finally, using John D. Caputo’s radical theology as the principal proponent in this regard, the paper demonstrates a necessary symmetry with Critchley’s faith of the faithless. Such a claim leads to the conclusion that while symmetrical, Critchley and Caputo are also inversely related. That is: a Critchlean radical politics nourished by radical theology opens up the possibility for a Caputoian radical political theology nourished by Critchlean radical politics. (shrink)

Contemporary philosophical discussion of religion neglects dualistic religions: although Manichaeism from time to time is accorded mention, Zoroastrianism, a more plausible form of religious dualism, is almost entirely ignored. We seek to change this state of affairs. To this end we present the basic tenets of Zoroastrian dualism, argue that objections to the Zoroastrian conception of God are less strong than typically imagined, argue that objections to the Zoroastrian conception of the devil are less strong than typically imagined, and offer (...) some brief concluding thoughts. (shrink)

_The Psychodynamic Image_ is the first selection of John D. Sutherland’s major papers. It provides an overview of the development of his thought on self and society and reveals the extent of his contribution to the field of mental health. Jill Savege Scharff introduces Sutherland’s most important and influential essays. These reflect his range as a theoretician, moving easily from the intrapsychic to the interpersonal level, building bridges between points of view and integrating psychoanalytic and social theories. Sutherland’s work (...) calls for changes at the individual level through understanding conflicts and unconscious processes as aspects of parts of the self in interaction. He inspires respect and understanding of the self and its drive toward autonomy. These papers push the boundaries of psychoanalytic thinking and succeed in demonstrating the relevance of psychoanalysis to the wider society. They will be of great interest to psychoanalysts, psychotherapists, counsellors and social workers. (shrink)

This is a review of John Caputo’s recent Routledge book on religion. Caputo’s central idea is captured by the phrase ‘religion without religion’, by which he means a religious stance or attitude that is not circumscribed by allegiance to any specific creed.

This is a review of John Caputo’s recent Routledge book on religion. Caputo’s central idea is captured by the phrase ‘religion without religion’, by which he means a religious stance or attitude that is not circumscribed by allegiance to any specific creed.

I deny that the world is fundamentally causal, deriving the skepticism on non-Humean grounds from our enduring failures to find a contingent, universal principle of causality that holds true of our science. I explain the prevalence and fertility of causal notions in science by arguing that a causal character for many sciences can be recovered, when they are restricted to appropriately hospitable domains. There they conform to loose and varying collections of causal notions that form folk sciences of causation. This (...) recovery of causation exploits the same generative power of reduction relations that allows us to recover gravity as a force from Einstein's general relativity and heat as a conserved fluid, the caloric, from modern thermal physics, when each theory is restricted to appropriate domains. Causes are real in science to the same degree as caloric and gravitational forces. (shrink)

ArgumentD’Arcy Thompson has often been portrayed as a loner. His science of form has frequently been labeled anachronistic, idiosyncratic, and unconnected to his contemporary biology. This article aims to challenge this interpretation. Thompson's representation as a loner did not lie in the idiosyncrasies of his science, but in our own historiography. Through the use of unedited archival sources, this study shows that Thompson's biology was well-connected to an international research program – a program mainly shared by developmental biologists, physiologists, and (...) morphologists. In addition, this article also aims to propose a new interpretation of Thompson'sOn Growth and Form. Drawing on his private correspondence and published sources, the paper re-contextualizes the contents and conclusions of Thompson's seminal work. We will see that Thompson defended a particular kind of organismal biology. The bio-science he supported stemmed not only from Aristotle's zoology or Pythagorean mathematics, but had many allies among twentieth-century naturalists. (shrink)

Eric Fabri | : Le cinquième chapitre du Second traité du gouvernement de John Locke a été l’objet de nombreuses mésinterprétations dont l’origine est à chercher dans la volonté des commentateurs d’y trouver une « théorie de la propriété », là où ne se trouvait qu’une « théorie de l’appropriation ». Après une présentation du texte et de ses interprétations, l’article étudie le contexte d’écriture des Deux traités du gouvernement et la place qu’y occupe le cinquième chapitre pour démontrer (...) que l’intention de Locke dans ce chapitre était restreinte : il ne s’agissait que de légitimer l’appropriation originelle dans l’état de nature en vue de poser les jalons indispensables à la démonstration aboutissant au droit de résistance. La distinction faite entre « théorie de la propriété » et « théorie de l’appropriation » permet alors de comprendre comment les interprètes ont extrapolé les écrits de Locke et quels problèmes cette extrapolation pose aux théories modernes de la propriété d’inspiration lockéenne. | : Because most commentators searched a “theory of property” where only a “theory of appropriation” was to be found, the fifth chapter of Locke’s Second Treatise of Civil Government has often been misinterpreted. After recalling briefly Locke’s text and presenting the two major lines of interpretations, the article examines in detail the political destination of the Two Treatises and the role of the fifth chapter in their general economy. The objective is to demonstrate that Locke’s intention when writing this chapter was rather restricted : he only aimed at legitimating private appropriation in the State of Nature because it was a necessary preliminary step for concluding that resisting an arbitrary political power is legitimate. With the distinction between a « theory of property » and a « theory of appropriation » at hand, the article points out which indeterminacies allowed such divergent interpretations to coexist, and further explores the problems this distinction rises for modern theories of property like the Nozickean “entitlement theory”. (shrink)

David Doat ,Olivier Sartenaer | : Peut-on raisonnablement penser qu’un même phénomène naturel, comme l’esprit par exemple, puisse en même temps être continu et discontinu avec les processus physico-chimiques qui conditionnent son advenue au monde ? Autrement dit, est-il possible de construire une philosophie de la nature qui rejette simultanément la dichotomie métaphysique et la pure identité, c’est-à-dire qui se situe sans contradiction sur la ligne de séparation entre le dualisme et le matérialisme ? En y répondant par l’affirmative, (...) class='Hi'>John Dewey et Lloyd Morgan, deux pionniers respectifs du pragmatisme et de l’émergentisme au siècle dernier, ouvrirent la voie d’un nouveau naturalisme antiréductionniste. L’objectif de cet article est, d’une part, de montrer comment ces deux auteurs cherchèrent à relever ce défi en mobilisant le concept d’émergence ; d’autre part de préciser la nature des divergences d’interprétation et d’usage du concept chez Morgan et Dewey. | : Can we reasonably conceive of a given natural phenomenon, say, the mind, that can at the same time be continuous and discontinuous with the physico-chemical processes that give rise to it ? In other words, is it possible to vindicate a philosophy of nature that simultaneously rejects the metaphysical dichotomy and the pure identity, or that consistently stands on the line that separates dualism and materialism ? By answering these questions positively, John Dewey and Lloyd Morgan, respectively pioneers of 20th century pragmatism and emergentism, have opened a path towards a new antireductionist naturalism. The purpose of this paper is, on the one hand, to show how both authors have met this challenge through the use of the concept of emergence and, on the other hand, to explicate the different ways in which both authors have construed and used the concept of emergence. (shrink)

Introduction -- Caputo -- Metaphysics -- Ethics -- God and religion -- Conclusion: Divine hyperbolics, two visions, four errors.