In this unique work, Professor G.A. Powell Jr. writes: "Thinkers are different from writers—writers are prostitutes. Thinkers desire to be prostitutes." Daily Conversations with My Interloper is first and foremost a celebration of the narrative paradigm, its evolution, latitude of expression, and radical subjectivity in the forms of aphorisms and feuilletons. Following in the literary tradition of Ralph Waldo Emerson, Albert Camus, John Cage, Emile Cioran, and Susan Sontag, et al., the text chronicles Professor Powell's reflections about the ongoing metamorphoses (...) of cultures, influential literary figures, travel, film, history, ennui, quotidian, and the mundane day-to-day existence in which all people participate. Daily Conversations with my Interloper, is a provocative read for the public and private intellectual interested in a panoply of ideas. (shrink)

La conception selon laquelle l'âme est la forme d'un sujet corporel semble rendre impossible pour Aristote d'admettre la survie de l'âme humaine. En fait, si la mort est aliénation de l'âme par rapport au corps, elle implique la perte de l'identité individuelle et l'âme qui survit devient une forme sans son sujet, ce qui est impossible dans le système d'Aristote. L'article rappelle qu'une distinction doit être faite entre le corps et la matière: la matière est le principe de multiplicité des (...) individus à l'intérieur de la même forme, et appartient à l'essence de l'homme; tandis que le terme de corps réfère aux propriétés et aux activités de l'homme liées à en vertu de l'accident ποσον, la quantité. De cette manière, l'aliénation entre corps âme ne touche pas l'essence de l'homme; elle ne nous laisse pas avec une impossible forme subsistant sans sujet. Cela permet une compréhension nouvelle du sens de la survie personnelle et explique pourquoi dans la génération humaine chose de survient en l'homme, d'en haut et en dehors de tout le cours de la nature. (shrink)

The influence of Nazism on German culture was a key concern for many Anglo-American writers, who struggled to reconcile the many contributions of Germany to European civilization, with the barbarity of the new regime. In _German Literature Through Nazi Eyes_, H.G. Atkins gives an account of how the Nazis undertook a re-evaluation of German literature, making it sub-ordinate to their own interests. All reference to Jewish writers and influence was virtually eliminated, and key writers such as Goethe and Lessing were (...) re-interpreted. What was left was a military history that was avowedly militant and propagandist. (shrink)

Reviewer gives a survey of the new phylogenetic theory of language recently published by Prof. Dr. G. Révész, founder and director of the Laboratory for experimental psychology of the University of Amsterdam ). The starting-point of the theory is the conception of "contact", defined by the author as the innate trend to be together or to co-operate, common to all socially living beings. This "theory of contact" is developed by the author in different directions and gives rise to the distinction (...) 1. of three degrees of communication: cry , call and word , 2. of three periods in the development of language: a pre-phase , a primevalphase and a final phase and 3. of three main functions of language: impelling , indication and interrogation , and leads to the conclusion that most probably the oldest form of human intercourse was restricted to the function of impelling . Prof. R. lays great stress on the in his opinion unsurmountable barrier between human and animal forms of communication. (shrink)

One finds throughout the history of philosophy repeated though apparently unsuccessful attempts to decide upon the nature or essence of language. This is not a trivial problem. When philosophers themselves have tried to resolve it they seem inevitably to postulate some nonovert level of linguistic form which is more basic to language than its overt grammatical forms. Now linguists have become involved in making similar claims. This is in large measure due to Noam Chomsky’s revolutionary work in transformational generative grammar, (...) research which has lead to a new conception of the goals and nature of linguistic theory. Whatever might be the ultimate fate of Chomsky’s own proposals concerning the nature of language, his insistence on descriptive precision and on theoretically sophisticated models in linguistics will remain paradigmatic. What is in fact most revolutionary about transformational linguistics is not the construction of precise and detailed grammars per se, but the parallel claim that there exist underlying realities of language which to a large extent dictate its overt form and content. For Chomsky these realities are part of the deep structure of language. Although other linguists do not share his view that there is an exclusively syntactically based deep structure, transformationalists generally do agree that there is some linguistic level underlying surface structure which accounts for it. Disagreement exists over the nature of this underlying reality, and it is on this issue that linguistics has a significant point of contact with philosophy. (shrink)

Il s'agit d'un problème combinatoire de logique formelle, formulé par Jevons; il sera expliqué en détails dans ce qui suit (voir no. 1). Jevona luimême n'a traité le problème que dans les cas les plus simples (n= 1, 2, 3); un cas plus difficile (n= 4) a été traité par Clifford; le cas général (nquelconque) a été à peine abordé.Le but de ce travail est de faire remarquer que ce problème de Jevons et de Clifford est contenu comme cas particutier (...) dans un problème combinatoire général que j'ai traité ailleurs. La méthode générale ramène le problème présent à l'étude d'un certain groupe de permutations d'ordren!2n, étroitement lié au groupe symétrique d'ordren!. J'ai fait les calculs nécessaires pourn= 1, 2, 3, 4. Mes résultats numèriques sont complètement en accord avec les résultats de Jevons, mais ils ne s'accordent qu'en partie avec les résultats de Clifford.Une proposition peut être vraie ou fausse. On peut exprimer la même chose en disant que nous pouvons attribuer à une proposition l'une ou l'autre des deux “valeurs logiques” qui s'excluent mutuellement: la “vérité” et la “fausseté.”. (shrink)