In lieu of an abstract, here is a brief excerpt of the content:Provoking a ConversationDavid H. PorterLee T. Pearcy's The Grammar of Our Civility: Classical Education in America (Baylor University Press, Waco, Tex. 2005) is a book every classicist should read. Pearcy's focus is on the state of classics in our country today: where we are, how we got there, where we need to go. His book is wide-ranging, tightly argued, and carefully researched. Pearcy's assessment of the present state of (...) classics in America strikes me as overly bleak, but his analysis deserves our close attention. Chapters 1 and 2, which trace the history of classical studies in Europe and America since the Renaissance, are filled with valuable information and insights; chapter 3 dissects four interlinked arguments that, to Pearcy's thinking, explain the parlous state of classics today—and threaten its future survival; and chapter 4 offers thoughtful suggestions as to how classicists might respond to these challenges. I doubt that most readers will agree with all of Pearcy's analysis—I certainly do not—but I found his book consistently stimulating. He writes that his purpose is to provoke a conversation, not to solve a problem (118); it is a conversation that will benefit us all, and this book is a welcome and timely catalyst.Pearcy's starting point, and the theme to which he repeatedly returns, is what he identifies as an essential difference between classical studies in Europe (including Great Britain) and classical studies in America. To quote from Pearcy's account of Vittorino da Feltre, whom he sees as an architect of what we now call "liberal education," classical education was designed above all "to take those who would... rule and those who might be admitted to the governing class and to form their minds and souls in such a way that they would be the best rulers (8)... "Renaissance classical education... [was] designed to educate members of the governing class by exposing them to the best patterns of conduct, modes of thinking, and products of culture..." (9). In Europe this form of education made sense in that its presupposition of a governing class matched the social and political realities of the countries in question. In America, by contrast, the advent of democracy undermined the central assumptions of such education and threatened its relevance to our society: "The necessary openness of thought in a democracy has a consequence that is fatal to [End Page 595] the paradigm of classical liberal arts education. In a democratic society, the freedom and theoretical equality of all citizens make it necessary to avoid privileging any single set of beliefs or ideas" (23).Pearcy's hypothesis is thought-provoking, but it strikes me as overly neat. A quick glance at two individuals, one English, the other American, offers some corroboration and also raises some intriguing questions. Leonard Woolf majored in classics at St. Paul's School and Cambridge, and, though his origins were not "aristocratic," upon graduation he entered the ranks of the governing class as a civil servant in Ceylon. The progression matches Pearcy's model, and Woolf even comments on it in terms similar to those Pearcy uses: "The male members of the British aristocracy of intellect went automatically to the best public schools, to Oxford and Cambridge, and then into all the most powerful and respectable professions."1 By contrast, S. S. McClure, the American publisher, migrated from Ireland to the States at age nine as a virtual pauper, spent eight years putting himself through Knox College, and chose to major in classics for reasons similar to those Pearcy identifies as the basis for classical education: "During the years that he reads and studies Greek a boy gets certain standards that he uses all the rest of his life, long after he has forgotten grammar and vocabulary."2 Unlike Woolf, however, McClure found to his dismay that though he had graduated third in a class of thirty, his classical education did not open doors to a professional career: "I talked with other boys, and found that most of them had arranged for the immediate future. One classmate was going into his father's law office; another was going to enter his uncle's... (shrink)

Nel 1451, nel 1460 e nel 1494 tre diversi predicatori, Giacomo della Marca, Roberto Caracciolo e Bernardino da Feltre, celebrano la grandezza di Bernardino da Siena scomparso nel 1444. I sermoni dei tre appartenenti all’Osservanza francescana hanno lo scopo di mantenere la memoria di questo “secondo Francesco” e di offrire alle folle un modello. Sono tre mattoni utili per la ricostruzione della vita del Senese ma soprattutto per agire sugli uomini e sulle donne che accorrevano a sentire i tre (...) famosi ed assai seguiti predicatori. Tutto il discorso è un impasto di ricostruzione storica e di impegno nel presente come si coglie bene soprattutto nel sermone su Bernardino da Siena di Giacomo della Marca che rende emblematicamente l’intento di usare la memoria per agire sugli uomini del suo tempo in una continuità attiva con Bernardino da Siena ma anche con Francesco. (shrink)

I have conducted a similar investigation on a text by a different author. The results of this investigation, which was performed on a text passage of 100,000 letters, are presented in the following tables from which one can see how and to what extent the limit theorems of the calculus of probability actually become evident.

During the fifteenth and sixteenth centuries, the Franciscan regular Observance and its milieu produced a series of hagiographical portraits of its greatest and most renowned preachers:1 Bernardino da Siena, Giovanni da Capestrano, Giacomo della Marca, and Bernardino da Feltre.2 This biographical material has been long disregarded by scholars or used only partially, and has rarely been compared in its entirety.3 The majority of these texts are virtually unknown, written by anonymous or little-known authors, and the goals and audiences of (...) these biographies remain equally shadowy.All of these vitae stand in a tradition that began during the fifteenth century, but.. (shrink)

Первое российское энциклопедическое издание, посвященное философии буддизма, является самым полным в отечественной литературе сводом знаний о буддийской философии. Его главная цель - описать философское кредо буддизма в контексте разнообразия школ.

Articles, on metaphysics, originally published in Siḷumiṇa, weekly Sinhalese newspaper and written by Ven. Baḷangoḍa Ānandamaitreya.

В книге анализируются проблемы творчества с позиции новейших достижений когнитивной науки и неклассической эпистемологии. Предназначено специалистам по философии.

Este libro es parte de la colección e-Libro en BiblioBoard.