Numerous studies have demonstrated that both catechol- O -methyltransferase ( COMT ) gene and monoamine oxidase A ( MAOA ) gene have been involved in aggressive behavior, as have stressful life events (SLEs). However, most of available evidence was based upon single gene or single gene–environment design, which is limited in accounting for the variance of aggressive behavior, a complex phenotype. This study examined the possible gene × gene × environment interactions between SLE (interpersonal problems and academic pressure) and two (...) genetic polymorphisms ( MAOA T941G and COMT Ala22/72Ser) correlated with aggressive behaviors in a sample of 658 Chinese male adolescents. Mothers and teachers reported on adolescents’ aggressive behavior using Achenbach’s Child Behavior Checklist and Teacher Report Form, respectively. Adolescents completed Self-Rating Life Events Checklist. Saliva samples were collected for DNA analysis. The results revealed no main effects of MAOA T941G and COMT Ala22/72Ser polymorphisms on male adolescents’ aggressive behaviors. However, a two-way interactive effect of interpersonal problems and MAOA T941G genotype on teacher-reported aggressive behavior was observed: adolescents with lower activity of MAOA T allele, but not those with MAOA G allele, exhibited greater aggressive behavior with an increase in interpersonal problems. A three-way interaction among COMT Ala22/72Ser and MAOA T941G polymorphisms, and SLE in the academic pressure on aggressive behavior was also identified. Among adolescents with lower activity of COMT GT/TT genotype and MAOA T allele, the higher level of academic pressure was significantly linked with an amplification of aggressive behavior, whereas this association didn’t exist among those with other genotypes. The present study presents the first evidence of COMT × MAOA × SLE interaction effect on male adolescents’ aggressive behavior, highlights the importance of considering distinct domains of stressful events and information bias when examining the effect of MAOA and COMT on aggressive behavior, and thereby contributes to MAOA gene-aggression and COMT gene-aggression literature. (shrink)

Az értelmiségi mint történelmi probléma -- Dic cur hic -- Van-e a filozófiának múltja? (hiszen örök) -- A német kontraszt -- Beszéd a félelem nélküli beszédről -- Öt tanács a hazának -- Utolsó feljegyzések -- Felhívás a Bürök című folyóirat megalapítására -- Jegyzetek -- Életrajzi kísérlet.

Contributed articles on Ghazzālī, 1058-1111, Islamic philosopher and his Islamic philosophy.

Boldly focusing on sexuality as a crucial definer of social order, Being and Symptom argues that there is an "M theory" -- a master theory of theories -- not only in Quantum Physics, but also in Continental Philosophy, Psychoanalysis, and Sociology, disclosing how the ontological structure of the "fantastic four" ingredients of metaphysics (potentiality, impotentiality, actuality, completion) has recurred through time. Öğüt also seeks to turn Thomas Hobbes's political philosophy into a social theory within the fields of sexuality and sovereignty (...) and to locate parallels among Aristotle, Ibn Khaldun, Kant, Hegel, Heidegger, Foucault, Lacan, Agamben, Nash, Derrida, Girard, Kristeva, and Žižek, with a special emphasis on how Žižek has adapted Lacanian psychoanalysis into social theory. Öğüt conveys a highly original analysis of the unconscious of our social (sexual) relations, subjectivities, and politics. (shrink)

This book contains papers from a colloquium held in 1973 at Kings College, Cambridge. The contributions deal with the number of questions on which a great deal of current linguistic research and writing focus. These include the problem of quantification and reference in natural language; the application of formal logic to natural language semantics; the semantics of non-declarative sentences; the relation between natural language semantics and programming languages; the relation between sentences and their contexts of use; discourse meaning; and the (...) relation between surface syntax and logical meaning. An adequate treatment of these issues requires the interaction of a number of different linguistic approaches. As one of the contributors to the volume points out, there recently have developed three major new developments in areas of research into linguistic phenomena: transformational grammar, formal logic, and speech act theory. Although no one of these are represented singly in this volume, a number of the problems which are discussed involve issues which depend on the interfaces between these various approaches. (shrink)

In this paper we consider the classes of all continuous $\mathcal {L}$ -(pre-)structures for a continuous first-order signature $\mathcal {L}$. We characterize the moduli of continuity for which the classes of finite, countable, or all continuous $\mathcal {L}$ -(pre-)structures have the amalgamation property. We also characterize when Urysohn continuous $\mathcal {L}$ -(pre)-structures exist, establish that certain classes of finite continuous $\mathcal {L}$ -structures are countable Fraïssé classes, prove the coherent EPPA for these classes of finite continuous $\mathcal {L}$ -structures, and (...) show that actions by automorphisms on finite $\mathcal {L}$ -structures also form a Fraïssé class. As consequences, we have that the automorphism group of the Urysohn continuous $\mathcal {L}$ -structure is a universal Polish group and that Hall’s universal locally finite group is contained in the automorphism group of the Urysohn continuous $\mathcal {L}$ -structure as a dense subgroup. (shrink)

Edie has produced a thorough and lucid discussion of language from a phenomenological point of view. He locates a phenomenology of language historically and conceptually in relation both to Husserl and Merleau-Ponty and to contemporary linguistics and analytic philosophy. He takes as the central problem in a phenomenology of language the relation between language and speech. The tension which exists between these two is utilized by him to explain the development of a phenomenological approach to language and to present a (...) distinctive theory of meaning and metaphor. (shrink)

In this monograph the author attempts to explain what speakers say in using language and how what they say is understood by developing a generative theory of illocutions. Such a theory consists of a finite set of rules and a finite vocabulary structured together in such a way that there is one and only one description produced of what is said by a speaker in each and every case in which what is said can be understood differently. The theory is (...) to mark all features of the utterance situation that produce these differences. In more conventional terms, Travis presents a kind of pragmatic theory for language use in which sentence-tokens can have characteristics in specific circumstances which are not features that belong to their sentence-types. In developing this model the author exploits features of transformational linguistic theory—specifically the notion of a generative description and the requirement that an adequate theory provides one and only one description of each distinct linguistic form. However, the author would not accept transformational theory itself as sufficient for a theory of illocutions because the former does not take into account contextual and nonlinguistic elements. (shrink)

This book surveys a wide range of structuralist theories, attempts to bring together features of those theories which are compatible with one another, and develops a general critique of the structuralist movement. Its analysis is not limited to a consideration of French structuralism, but includes earlier linguistic precursors and even Chomsky’s transformational theory. The author places his discussion of structuralism in a context which relates it to recent developments and discussions in the philosophy of science. The order of presentation is (...) not historical but conceptual, and for this reason some readers will be surprised to find Saussure and Chomsky, rather than Levi-Strauss, providing the basis for a structuralist model. (shrink)

The question asked by the title of this book is certainly one which haunts much philosophical inquiry in this century. It is a question worth asking, and Hacking warns us not to expect to find some one, general answer to it. Instead of embarking on an abstract consideration of this issue, the author undertakes a series of case studies dealing with particular philosophers to see how they have approached language and its relation to philosophy. His inquiry falls into three main (...) parts: part A, entitled "The Heyday of Ideas," which deals with philosophical work done in the seventeenth and eighteenth centuries; part B, "The Heyday of Meaning," which deals with early twentieth century atomist/positivistic approaches to philosophy and language; and part C, "The Heyday of Sentences," which considers contemporary philosophers who study theory construction and sentential systems. There are many philosophers whom Hacking examines: part A includes a discussion of Hobbes, Locke, and Berkeley, as well as the logic of the Port Royal school; part B discusses Chomsky, Russell, Wittgenstein, and Ayer; and part C discusses Feyerabend and Davidson, as well as introducing some of the ideas of Quine and Popper. (shrink)

A short and well balanced study of the early history and position of the lower castes of India, as seen in the code of Manu. Tiwari is to be commended not only on her clarity of expression and excellent diction—"avis rara" in Indian scholarship—but also on her broadness of vision concerning such a touchy question. The author's view is that "class-war" originated and maintained the Hindu class system; she discards race and ritual impurity as the prime causes of the caste (...) structures, but fails to present or refute all the evidence to the contrary. This book has little of interest for the student of philosophy, but, should be of interest to Indologists.—L. O. G. (shrink)

LANGUAGE NOTE | Document text in Chinese; abstract also in English. 在這篇與黑格爾乃至整個西方現代性訣別的力作中，唐文明教授為我們展現了一種立足於儒家自身的批判性視角，同時也指明了一條通往人倫重建的積極道路。著手閲讀這篇文章的第一個困難或者疑惑可能是：為什麼是承認理論 ？我們知道，自近代中國遭遇西方現代性的衝擊以來，儒學面臨的首要危局就是人倫的解體，而其解體的核心動力就是以平等為基本訴求的現代個體性的覺醒。因此，對於服膺儒學的現代學者來説，如何在現代性的處境中重新理 解與恢復人倫的意義就成了首要問題。(撮要取自內文首段) Professor Tang's article continues his previous research on the intellectual history of the normative reconstruction of human relationships in modern Confucianism and provides a thorough reflection of this reconstruction based on the recognition theory. Drawing on the concept of “Natality” in Augustine's thought, the article proposes a protological conception of original recognition as a reflection of Hegel's and Honneth's desire-based recognition theory. The question of how to properly understand (...) the concept of immortality in this original recognition theory is a crucial issue, and this paper argues that in Confucian tradition, the concept of immortality must be analyzed with a basis in human ethics rather than purely through the immortality of the soul. (shrink)

This is a lively and spirited discussion—perhaps more appropriately called one side of a debate—by Feyerabend against traditional views in the philosophy of science associated with such persons as Carnap, Hempel, and Popper. The central issue is whether or not there exists a neutral method for the construction of scientific systems and whether, more specifically, there is within that method some uniform, rational evaluation measure for arbitrating between competing theoretical models. Traditional positions, whether they be of a verificationist, conformationist, or (...) falsificationist sort, presuppose that there is some rational method for analyzing and evaluating scientific theories. Feyerabend maintains most emphatically that there is not. He rejects the distinctions between contexts of discovery and contexts of justification, between experience and theory, and between observation terms and theoretical terms. In the clash between traditional philosophies of science and the more historical and sociological approaches associated with the names of Kuhn and Hanson, the author sides with the latter. He goes even farther, however, and maintains what he calls an "anarchistic theory of knowledge" in which "anything goes." Within his approach it is not canons of rationality and logic which have dominated or ought to dominate scientific discussions. Rather, a proponent of a new theory utilizes persuasion and cunning rather than appealing to or using objective conditions for guiding choices between competing theories. New paradigms within science do not triumph because they are more rational; they depend on utterly new criteria of rationality. (shrink)