Anaxagoras’ theory of matter offers a problem which, in bald outline, may be stated as follows. The theory rests on two propositions which seem flatly to contradict one another. One is the principle of Homoeomereity: A natural substance such as a piece of gold, consists solely of parts which are like the whole and like one another—every one of them gold and nothing else. The other is: ‘There is a portion of everything in everything’, understood to mean that a piece (...) of gold , so far from containing nothing but gold, contains portions of every other substance in the world. Unless Anaxagoras was extremely muddleheaded, he cannot have propounded a theory which simply consists of this contradiction. One or the other proposition must be reinterpreted so as to bring them into harmony. Some critics attack one, some the other; some try to modify both. Mr. C. Bailey has recently published a fresh attempt to reconstruct the theory in a form consistent with itself. But the result, as he admits, is arbitrary and uneconomical. These defects, like all the contradictions and obscurities found in other accounts of the system, can be traced to the second proposition: ‘There is a portion of everything in everything’, or rather to the construction put upon it. The language is crude, vague, and ambiguous. What does ‘everything’ mean? Has the first ‘everything’ the same sense as the second ? If taken to mean that there is a portion of every material substance in every material substance, the proposition leads to a result for which ‘uneconomical’ is an indulgent epithet. (shrink)

In lieu of an abstract, here is a brief excerpt of the content:Abailard and the Problem of Universals JOHN F. BOLER ABAILARD t IS A CLEVERman, but in one respect he is just like the rest of us: Given one clear idea of which he is convinced, he tends to become intolerant, thinking the worst of everyone else. Abailard's clear idea goes something as follows. In what does universality consist? It consists, says Abailard, in the signifying of many things by (...) one sign? Abailard's predecessors had been searching for some thing which was universal. But a sign must signify many things to be universal; and furthermore, the sign itself, as a thing--a noise, gesture, or statue--is individual. ~ It may help to describe the model which crops up here and there in Abailard's examples and which, I think, dominates his analysis. Consider, then, a statue which is not meant to stand for any one particular individual: for example, the Minute Man at Concord, Massachusetts.* First of all, the statue is an individual thing. Second, just as a piece of metal, it need not stand for anything--anymore than a bird bath would, had the town council decided to build that instead. What is more, it is information from other sources which leads us to take the statue as "general" rather than as depicting some individual (like Nathan Hale). And even though the statue stands for "all" minute men, not only is the statue an individual thing but all those things for which it stands are (or were) individuals. And finally, we might also point out that the statue must be taken as signifying; it does not have "representative" qualities in quite the same way that it has properties like weight and shape. t The text of Abailard to which I have referred is: Peter Abaelards Philosophische Schrqte, herausgegeben yon Dr. Bernhard Geyer, I Die Logica "Ingredientibus,'" II Die Logica "'Nostrorum Petitioni Sociorum" which is to be found in Beitraege zur Geschichte der Philosophie und Theologie des Mittelalters, Band XXI (1933). A partial translation of this text appears in R. McKeon, Selections from Medieval Philosophers (New York: Scribners, 1929), II, 208-258. Hereafter I shall refer to the latin text as "G" followed by the page number and lines; and to the translation, where possible, as "'M" with the page number. 9Abailard feels that when Aristotle says that a universal is what is fitted for being predicated of many things, it is the signifying of many things which is at stake; and he chides Aristotle for seeming to ascribe universality to things as well as to words. G ~ (M 221). The reference to Aristotle is On Interpretation, 17a (38-40). *See note 7, below. 9I have interpolated on two passages: G 22t~-~ (M 241-242), and G 522*t-=. [37] 38 HISTORY OF PHILOSOPHY The upshot of Abailard's insight is that universality pertains to the interpretation of signs: the effort to locate universal things is misguided. Some want to say that the universal is a collection; but do collections signify their members? ~ Some want to say that the universal is a substance of which individuals are accidents; but is a substance predicated of its accidents? e And some want to say that universals are words--that is noises; but noises are also individual things. ~ In short, to signify or to show ("monstrare") pertains to words; to be signified or shown pertains to things. 8 And to transfer the properties of one to the other leads to hopeless difficulties. ~ One can understand Abailard's exultation (and exaltation) at having shown both sides of a seething controversy to be equally misguided? ~ But what then remains as the problem of universals? It is this: one would expect that every sign would have some subject which it signifies; but universals seem to lack a proper subject. And does this not mean that universals are fictions (like goat-stag or chimera)? = Having thus set out rather baldly what I take to be Abailard's "clear idea," let me now try to show more fully how he goes about establishing the problem and providing for a solution. Abailard's position on universals is set forth in his two logic books, both of which begin... (shrink)

Professor Sutton's thought-provoking book is directed principally to the question: His answer, baldly stated, is that if they are made right they are helpful, but if they are made wrong they are misleading.

P. F. Strawson famously distinguishes what a speaker presupposes from what she asserts in uttering a sentence like “The present King of France is bald”. This paper defends a claim about presupposition's epistemic significance, namely that presupposition can provide a distinctive testimony‐based way for an audience to learn about the world.

In his paper ‘Scmantic Theory and Tacit Knowlcdgc’, Gareth Evans uscs a familiar kind of cxamplc in ordcr to render vivid his account of tacit knowledge. We arc to consider a finite language, with just one hundrcd scntcnccs. Each scntcncc is made up of a subjcct (a name) and a prcdicatc. The names are ‘a’, ‘b’, . . ., T. The prcdicatcs arc ‘F’, ‘G’, . . ., ‘O’. Thc scntcnccs have meanings which dcpcnd in a systematic way upon their (...) construction. Thus, all scntcnccs containing ‘a’ mean something about john; all scntcnccs containing ‘b’ mean something about Harry; all scntcnccs containing ‘F’ mean something about being bald; all scntcnccs containing ‘G’ mean something about being happy; and so 011. For this vcry simple language L, wc arc to consider various semantic theories. We could consider thcorics whosc dclivcranccs about wholc scntcnccs are of.. (shrink)

The overarching topic of this dissertation is the semantics and pragmatics of definite descriptions. It focuses on the question whether sentences such as ‘the king of France is bald’ literally assert the existence of a unique king or simply presuppose the existence of such a king. One immediate obstacle to resolving this question is that immediate truth value judgments about such sentences are particularly unstable; some elicit a clear intuition of falsity whereas others simply seem awkward or strange. Because of (...) these variations, truth value judgments are generally considered unreliable. In the first chapter of the dissertation, an explanation of this phenomenon is developed. It is observed that when these types of sentences are considered in the context of a discourse, a systematic pattern in judgments emerges. This pattern, it is argued, should be explained in terms of certain pragmatic factors, e.g. whether a speaker’s utterance is interpreted as cooperative. A detailed and general explanation of the phenomenon is then presented which draws importantly on recent research in the semantics and pragmatics of questions and focus. It is shown that the behavior of these judgments can be systematically explained, that truth value judgments are not as unreliable as standardly assumed, and that the proposed explanation best supports the conclusion that definite descriptions presuppose rather than assert existence. In the second chapter, the following problem is investigated. If definite descriptions are assumed to literally assert existence, a sentence such as ‘Hans wants the ghost in his attic to be quiet’ is incorrectly predicted to be true only if Hans wants there to be a ghost in his attic. This prediction is often considered evidence against Russell’s quantificational analysis and evidence in favor of the referential analysis of Frege and Strawson. Against this claim, it is demonstrated that this problem is a general problem about the existence commitments of natural language determiners, i.e. not an argument in favor of a referential analysis. It is shown that in order to avoid these undesirable predictions, quite radical changes to the semantic framework are required. For example, it must be assumed that a sentence of the form ‘The F is G’ has the open sentence ‘x is G’ as its asserted content. A uniform quantificational and presuppositional analysis of definites and indefinites is outlined which by exploiting certain features of so-called dynamic semantics unproblematically assumes that the asserted contents indeed are open sentences. In view of the proposed quantificational/presuppositional analysis, the dissertation is concluded by a rejection of the argument put forward by Reimer and Devitt that definite descriptions are ambiguous between attributive and referential uses. Reimer and Devitt’s argument is based primarily on the assumption that definite descriptions are conventionally used to communicate singular thoughts and that the conventional meaning of a definite description therefore must be fundamentally indexical/directly referential. I argue that this argument relies crucially on tacit assumptions about semantic processing for which no empirical evidence is provided. I also argue that the argument is too general; if sound, it would be an argument for an indexical treatment of most, if not all, other determiners. I then conclude by demonstrating that the view does not explain any new data and thus has no clear motivation. In short, this dissertation provides a detailed pragmatic explanation of a long-standing puzzle about truth value judgments and then outlines a novel dynamic semantic analysis of definites and indefinites. This analysis solves a significant problem about existence commitments — a problem that neither Russell’s nor the Frege/Strawson analysis are equipped to handle. This analysis is then defended against the claim that definite descriptions are ambiguous. (shrink)

Keith Donnellan (1931 – ) began his studies at the University of Maryland, and earned his Bachelor’s degree from Cornell University. He stayed on at Cornell, earning a Master’s and a PhD in 1961. He also taught at there for several years before moving to UCLA in 1970, where he is currently Emeritus Professor of Philosophy. Donnellan’s work is mainly in the philosophy of language, with an emphasis on the connections between semantics and pragmatics. His most influential work was his (...) 1966 paper “Reference and Definite Descriptions”. In this paper, he challenges the canonical view, due to Bertrand Russell, about definite descriptions. Russell had argued that the proper semantic treatment of a definite description such as “the present king of France” was quantificational. Thus, a sentence like “the present king of France is bald” should be analyzed as “There exists one and only one entity x that is the present king of France, and x is bald”. Donnellan argues that in natural languages, there are actually two different kinds of uses of definite descriptions. Russell’s analysis picks out the “attributive” use of definite descriptions. When we use a definite description (“the F”) this way, we mean to make statements about the unique entity x that is F. However, Donnellan notes that we also sometimes use definite descriptions “referentially” to pick out a given entity and say something about it. To see this, imagine you are at a party where virtually everyone is drinking beer. However, you and your friend are observing a man in a corner of the room holding a martini glass. Unbeknownst to you, the man’s glass is filled with water. You turn to your friend and ask, “who is the man drinking a martini?” Suppose further that your friend knows that the man in question is Fred and that Fred’s glass is filled with water. According to the Russellian attributive analysis, such a question would amount to asking for the identity of the one and only one man drinking a martini. But the presupposition that there is a man drinking a martini is false, and so there should be no answer to the question.. (shrink)

A table of contents, in lieu of abstract -/- Foreword by Aaron Ehasz -/- Introduction: “We are all one people, but we live as if divided” Helen De Cruz and Johan De Smedt -/- Part I The Universe of Avatar: The Last Airbender -/- 1 Native Philosophies and Relationality in ATLA: It’s (Lion) Turtles All the Way Down Miranda Belarde-Lewis and Clementine Bordeaux 2 Getting Elemental: How Many Elements Are There in Avatar: The Last Airbender? Sofia Ortiz-Hinojosa 3 The Personalities (...) of Martial Arts in Avatar: The Last Airbender Zachary Isrow 4 The End of the World: Nationhood and Abolition in Avatar: The Last Airbender Nicholas Whittaker 5 The Bending World, a Bent World: Supernatural Power and Its Political Implications Yao Lin -/- Part II Water 6 Avatar: The Last Airbender and Anishinaabe Philosophy Brad Cloud 7 “Lemur!” – “Dinner!”: Human–Animal Relations in Avatar: The Last Airbender Daniel Wawrzyniak 8 On the Moral Neutrality of Bloodbending Johnathan Flowers 9 On the Ethics of Bloodbending: Why Is It So Wrong and Can It Ever Be Good? Mike Gregory 10 Mystical Rationality Isaac Wilhelm 11 “I will never, ever turn my back on people who need me”: Repairing the World Through Care Nicole Fice 12 Spirits, Visions, and Dreams: Native American Epistemology and the Aang Gang Justin Skirry and Samuel Skirry -/- Part III Earth 13 Time Is an Illusion: Time and Space in the Swamp Natalia Strok 14 There Is No Truth in Ba Sing Se: Bald-faced Lies and the Nature of Lying Nathan Kellen 15 The Rocky Terrain of Disability Gain in ATLA: Is Toph a Supercrip Stereotype or a Disability Pride Icon? Joseph A. Stramondo 16 The Earth King, Ignorance, and Responsibility Saba Fatima 17 The Middle Way and the Many Faces of Earth Thomas Arnold -/- Part IV Fire 18 The Battle Within: Confucianism and Legalism in the Nation, the Family, and the Soul Kody W. Cooper 19 Not Giving Up on Zuko: Relational Identity and the Stories We Tell Barrett Emerick and Audrey Yap 20 Uncle Iroh, from Fool to Sage – or Sage All Along? Eric Schwitzgebel and David Schwitzgebel 21 Being Bad at Being Good: Zuko’s Transformation and Residual Practical Identities Justin F. White 22 Compassion and Moral Responsibility in Avatar: The Last Airbender: “I was never angry; I was afraid that you had lost your way” Robert H. Wallace -/- Part V Air 23 The Fire Nation and the United States: Genocide as the Foundation for Empire Building Kerri J. Malloy 24 Anarchist Airbenders: On Anarchist Philosophy in ATLA Savriël Dillingh 25 A Buddhist Perspective on Energy Bending, Strength, and the Power of Aang's Spirit Nicholaos Jones and Holly Jones 26 Ahimsa and Aang’s Dilemma: “Everyone … [has] to be treated like they're worth giving a chance” James William Lincoln 27 The Avatar Meets the Karmapa: Interconnections, Friendship, and Moral Training Brett Patterson . (shrink)

Der Streit um den Humanismus ist älter als das Wort. Was die Sache selber sei, ist aber schon zur Zeit der griechischen Klassik umstritten. Seit Humanismus auch noch als Epochenbegriff verwendet wird, konkurrieren sogar Humanismen im Plural miteinander. Dabei versuchen die unterschiedlichen Richtungen, den Begriff für sich zu besetzen, ja zu monopolisieren. Freilich entstehen bald auch ausdrückliche Antihumanismen, die nur insofern humanistisch bleiben, als sie sich weiterhin der griechisch-römischen Antike verpflichtet fühlen: eine andere, zum Beispiel "archaische" und "heroische" Antike der (...) wie auch immer "humanen" konfrontieren. Seitdem gibt es einen Humanismusstreit im engeren und bis heute andauernden Sinn. Entscheidende Voraussetzung dafür ist, dass Humanismus stets Antike-Rezeption und Humanität zugleich meinte, also auch "Humanitarismus" gewesen ist. - Vorwort - I. Antiker und moderner Barmherzigkeitsdiskurs - H. Cancik: Entrohung und Barmherzigkeit, Herrschaft und Würde. Antike Grundlagen von Humanismus - F. Hartmann: "Das Wohlergehen des Kranken... oberster Grundsatz"? Über Menschlichkeit und Menschen-Heilkunde - II. Menschenrechtsdiskurse und ihre Problematik - A. Haratsch: Entstehung und Entwicklung der Menschenrechte - E. Stölting: Humanismus und Eurozentrismus - C. Elsas: Potentiale religiös-kultureller Traditionen zur Achtung von Menschenrechten - K. Meyer: Feminismus zwischen Neo- und Posthumanismus. Betrachtungen zu Martha Nussbaum und Judith Butler - III. Antihumanistische Diskurse des späten 19. und 20. Jahrhunderts - E. Flaig: Kultur und Krieg. Antihumanismus bei Jakob Burckhardt und Friedrich Nietzsche - Richard Faber: Humanistische und faschistische Welt. Über Ludwig Curtius (1874-1954) - E. Rudolph: Humanismus und Antihumanismus im Streit. Cassirer und Heidegger in Davos - A. Geisenhanslüke: Antihumanismus? Über Michel Focault und die Folgen - IV. Prohumanistische Plädoyers bis heute - A.-U. Sommer: Franz Overbeck, ein skeptischer Humanist? - G. Wedekind: Europa im Exil. Erich Auerbachs säkulare Weltbürgerschaft - C. Türcke: Die Falle der Selbstentfaltung. Humanismus und kritische Theorie. (shrink)

Vleeskens, F. D. A. Spinoza en zijn tijd.--Klever, W. N. A. Ervaring en rede.--Petry, M. J. De Regenboog.--Bend, J. G. van der. Spinoza's liberale rechtsstaat.--Sperna Weiland, J. Vrijheid.

Die Aussagen der Konfirmanden habe ich, wie im Anfang bereits erwähnt, in verschiedene Sachgebiete aufgeteilt. Die aufgeführten Aussagen stehen für eine Reihe von Konfirmanden, die hinsichtlich der Sachgebiete in übereinstimmender Weise reagiert haben. Zu A) Zweifel an der Existenz Gottes Der auf die Realität des konkreten Alltags ausgerichtete Konfirmand vermißt eine sichtbare und greifbare Offenbarung Gottes. Der Glaube ist noch nicht gefestigt genug, um an den unsichtbaren Gott, an seinem Wort Halt zu finden. Diese Kinder erhoffen, daß Gott doch für (...) sie da ist, auch wenn sie noch nicht glauben können, nicht im Glauben Gottes Gegenwart erfahren. Anstoß und Ärgernis ruft die als unverständlich gewertete Ausdrucksweise der Bibel hervor, die ihnen Gottes Nähe eher verdunkelt, anstatt zu erhellen. Zu B) Sinn des Leides und Leidens Leid und Leiden sind schon recht verständig eingeordnet in den Heilsplan Gottes mit den Menschen im Erdendasein. Es wird als eindringlicher Fingerzeig auf die Führung und Fügung Gottes angesehen, als eine Wegweisung aus der Anonymität kirchlicher Gleichgültigkeit in die persönliche Nähe Gottes und ehrfürchtige Anbetung seines Namens. Sie sehen es auch an als eine Prüfung der Glaubensstärke und Beständigkeit. Zu C) Existenzielle Wandlung durch Gottes Wort Das Vorbild, das "Fremderleben", die Erfahrung der Umkehr zum Glauben, erlebt am Mitmenschen, bewirkt bei den Konfirmanden eine Eigenbesinnung. Ob es sich um die innere Wandlung eines Religionslehrers, um die erreichte Gebetsfähigkeit eines Gliedes der Evgl. Jungschar oder um glaubenweckende Diskussionen innerhalb der Konfirmandengemeinschaft handelt, spielt dabei keine Rolle. Zu D) Bekennen und Verleugnen Das persönliche Bekenntnis zum Christenglauben in der Öffentlichkeit wird, von Ausnahmen abgesehen, als undurchführbar abgelehnt. Der Verlust des Ansehens bei den Schulkameraden und Freunden wird als zu hoher Preis gegenüber dem Wert des öffentlichen Christusbekenntnisses eingeschätzt. Das Verhalten gegenüber spöttisch lachenden Kameraden bewegt sich zwischen Widerspruch, Mitmachen, einem Sich-still-Verhalten und einem Bedauern des Spötters bei den an sich glaubensernsten Konfirmanden. Zu Hause, abends in der Stille der Stube ohne Beisein Gleichaltriger kommt es zum Bekenntnis. Es ist neben der Bekenntnisscheu auch guter Vorsatz vorhanden, im Leben Halt im Glauben zu finden. Zu E) Der säkularisierte Mensch unserer Tage vergißt Gott Auch hier ist die Skala der Aussagen zwischen extremen Höhen- und Tiefpunkten von sehr kontrastierenden Auffassungen ausgefüllt. Einmal die Ablenkung des Menschen von Gott durch fortschreitende Technisierung und Automatisierung des alltäglichen Lebens - bis hin zum Götzendienst an einer verselbständigten, zur Allmacht erhobenen Technik! Daneben das Aufzeigen der Grenze zwischen menschlicher Ohnmacht und göttlicher Macht im Versagen menschlicher Erfindungen, wenn Gott es will! . Zu F) Stimme des Guten und Bösen im Gewissen Das schlechte Gewissen im Frühstadium des Glaubens hat noch Angst vor Strafe zum Inhalt, ist also ganz diesseitig bestimmt. Darum kann sich dann "in einer gewissen Kraft" von außen allmählich das göttliche Eingreifen manifestieren, und auch Mut machen zum öffentlichen Bekennen des begangenen Unrechts. Die psychische Entlastung und Erleichterung nach dem Schuldbekenntnis wirkt sich physisch aus: "als löse die Last der Sünde sich auf meinen Schultern auf"16. Neben der Angst vor Strafe findet sich auch die Erkenntnis: Strafe ist notwendig, damit Wiederholung von Unrecht vermieden werde. Wird alles mit dem Samtmäntelchen verzeihender Scheinliebe zugedeckt, kann es zur Nivellierung des Gewissens, zum Einschläfern seiner lebendigen Funktion führen. Zu G) Kritik am elterlichen Einsegnungsverständnis als traditionsgebundene, kirchlich-gesellschaftliche Verpflichtung Das nachdenkliche, für Glaubensfragen aufgeschlossene Konfirmandenkind spürt sehr bald, wenn die Eltern in der kirchlichen Erziehung inkonsequent sind, d. h. wenn sie die Zurüstung und die Konfirmation nur als eine äußere Form ansehen. Der Konflikt entsteht, wenn bei den Konfirmanden aufgrund von persönlichen Gruppengesprächen und Einzelgesprächen mit dem Pfarrer eine tiefere Bindung an Gottes Wort und Gemeinde sich anbahnt, die über die zwei Konfirmandenjahre hinausreicht. Hart stoßen sich die Gegensätze zwischen den Generationen: Das kirchlich-gesellschaftliche Verständnis von Unterricht und Einsegnung bei den Eltern- die geistlich ausgerichtete Kontaktsehnsucht nach bleibender Gemeinschaft in Gottes Wort und Kirche bei dem Konfirmandenkind. Zu H) Jesus als Nothelfer Neben Rettung vor dem Erstickungstod beim Bau einer unterirdischen Erdhöhle oder der Bewahrung eines Arbeiters vor einem tödlichen Betriebs-unfall in einer Gießerei, sind besonders eindrücklich die Glaubensaussagen der Konfirmandenkinder in der Kriegs- und unmittelbaren Nachkriegszeit. Der Schrecken des letzten Krieges, die Entbehrungen danach prägen sich hier im Bewußtsein der 14/15jährigen Konfirmanden sehr plastisch aus. Die Panik in einer Kohlengrube während eines Fliegerangriffes, der Mangel an Brot und Feuerung, die Bestürzung über den Verlust einer Lebensmittel-karte, und überall Jesus als Helfer, das ist sehr echt und realistisch dem Leben nachgebildet. (shrink)

Political ecology is one of the most vibrant fields of environmental research. This book introduces political ecology to a new generation of students in a daring new way: as an interdisciplinary approach to environmental research but also as a series of lived realities and a praxis for change. The origins of political ecology are often traced through an Anglo-American canon. In Discovering Political Ecology, Gustav Cederlöf and Alex Loftus instead take up the challenge of presenting the key conversations and the (...) diverse traditions that have shaped this field with attention to its extensive international roots. Inspired by voices and research in Asia, Africa, Europe and the Americas, the authors address the concerns of those who from different social backgrounds have grown up in a world shaped by climate change and increasing environmental inequalities.Engaging and accessible in style, Discovering Political Ecology introduces a set of key concepts around which conversations in political ecology coalesce. It also shows how these concepts allow you to make sense of some of the most pressing issues of our time-issues around water, energy, agriculture, forestry, climate change and environmental justice. Each chapter includes learning outcomes and suggested further readings, extensive bibliographies and seminar activities to be used by students and educators. At the cutting-edge of the field, the book will be of interest to those in all disciplines brought together in political ecology, including but not limited to anthropology, development studies, ecology, geography, history and political science. (shrink)