This article argues for two main theses concerning Aristotle's Politics. The first is that outside the explicit discussion of citizenship in 3.1-5 'citizen' is used without reference to the criterion of legal eligibility which plays a central role in 3.1's account, and is instead used with reference to the non-legal attributes of individuals. The second is that there are differences with respect to virtue among those who claim citizenship based on 'free birth' and that Aristotle holds that a citizen should (...) have a minimal level of virtue, which excludes some of the free born. These theses are then brought to bear on the controversial thesis that the common interest is the interest of the citizens. The conception of 'citizen' related to the common interest must not be tied to eligibility and must include a minimal level of virtue such that the individual can participate in a correct regime. These results taken together suggest that the explicit account in 3.1 should be displaced as the primary account of the citizen. (shrink)

Designed as a companion to the study of apologetics and philosophy of religion, this pocket dictionary by C. Stephen Evans offers 300 entries covering terms, apologists, philosophers, movements, apologetic arguments and theologies.

Introduction: conceptual analysis of teaching, by B. P. Komisar and T. W. Nelson.--A concept of teaching, by B. O. Smith.--The concept of teaching, by I. Sheffler.--A topology of the teaching concept, by T. F. Green.--Teaching: act and enterprise, by B. P. Komisar.--Must an education have an aim? By R. S. Peters.--Curriculum as a field of study, by D. Heubner.--Can and should means-ends reasoning be used in teaching? By C. J. B. Macmillan and J. E. McClellan.

Bespiegelingen over collectieve schuld en symbolische identiteit, waarmee Duitsers nog steeds worstelen. Uiteindelijk zijn ook de Duitse oorlogsmisdaden terug te brengen tot een menselijk tekort, een probleem van de menselijke psyche in het algemeen.

The fact that we still group all his predecessors together as ‘presocratics’ indicates that Socrates significantly changed the character of philosophy. Yet it is not easy to determine exactly what change Socrates made, much less why. Socrates himself left no record of his thoughts, so we have to refer to the writings of the three authors who knew him. But in the Clouds Aristophanes depicts ‘Socrates’ as a ‘sophist’ who taught cosmology as well as rhetoric, i.e. as a ‘presocratic’. In (...) his Memorabilia Xenophon merely declares that Socrates did not investigate the nature of all things or the cosmos. To find out when and why Socrates turned to study the human things, we have to put together three retrospective statements he gives about his development as a philosopher in Plato’s dialogues. Working on the basis of the supposed chronology of composition, scholars have not done so. (shrink)

Whether the interpretations made by social scientists of the thoughts, utterances and actions of other people, including those from an alien culture or a different period in history, are objectively correct, whether the forms of explanation they employ conform to those of the natural sciences, and whether values have a role in arriving at the theory that delivers the interpretations, are the main questions addressed by the contributors to this volume. Of particular importance in the discussion of the issues are (...) developments in the philosophy of language and mind. The eight essays converge on the themes of intentionality, realism and theory choice, reflecting the amount of attention being given to these matters when this book was first published in 1980. Together they make a distinguished contribution to discussion in the area and serve to underline the importance of intellectual collaboration on such discussion between philosophy and the social sciences. (shrink)

least this was his later view. He had begun with the more obvious but more naive view that need was the key to the process and that removal of the need ...