‘Incongruity is never superfluous’Thea Arbee (2016) Is the superfluous a (new) modality?11. Even if much has been written about ingredients that trigger laughter, researchers are still far from hav...

In this paper we present an interdisciplinary approach that concerns the problem of argument acceptance in an agronomy setting. We propose a computational cognitive model for argument acceptance based on the dual model system in cognitive psychology. We apply it in an agronomy setting within a French national project on durum wheat.

Le but de cet article est une critique de la philosophie politique de M. Eric Weil. Par opposition à M. Weil, l'auteur définit la „politique" ici comme l'art du réalisable, à préciser comme : l'art d'arriver à court terme à une organisation de la société qu'on estime meilleure, et cela en employant tous les moyens permis. L'homme politique n'est pas, ainsi que l'affirme M. Weil, un „saint de Vtmiversel”, qui, en ce qui concerne l'emploi de la violence, se trouve (...) au-dessus de la loi. Ce „politicien-éducateur” est en vérité l'appui des régimes totalitaires et est d'ailleurs inconcevable en dehors de ceux-ci. En outre la théorie de M. Weil contient un certain nombre de contradictions internes et, si on la mesure à la pratique, elle se trouve être déficiente à beaucoup d'égards. Contre la conception platonicienne de M. Weil l'auteur défend la thèse que la politique n'est pas une infraction, regrettable mais inévitable, à „la morale”. C'est la tâche de l'homme politique de supprimer toutes les absurdités, inconséquences et injustices qui entachent les structures de la société. Ce qui, concrètement, est absurde, inconséquent ou injuste n'est pas déterminé par „la morale”, mais par la conscience du droit et par le sentiment moral d'une époque donnée. Les „certitudes” d'où part l'homme politique ne sont pas des Idées platoniciennes, mais des hypothèses de travail, qui dérivent leur contenu non pas de la contemplation des Idées, mais d'une notion de ce qui est juste et désirable, notion qui est déterminée par les conditions matérielles et spirituelles et qui se trouve dans un changement continuel. (shrink)

What is the reality behind the famous phrase, in Demosthenes 2. 6? It is commonly spoken of as a secret treaty, pact, agreement, bargain, or understanding, or as a secret clause or article, between Athens and Philip II of Macedon, at some time between 359 and 357, whereby the Athenians promised to hand over their ally, Pydna, to Philip, in return for his promise to hand over Amphipolis to them.

Rarement oeuvre littéraire aura autant pâti de l'éclat ­ des éclats ­ de son auteur. En effet, si George Sand bénéficie aujourd'hui d'une cote de popularité exceptionnelle parmi les personnalités qui ont marqué le XIXe siècle, ce n'est certes pas en raison de la réputation peu flatteuse qui s'attache à une production romanesque riche de plusieurs dizaines de titres. Les romans de Sand demeurent pour une large part mal aimés ­ trop vite jugés fades ou simplistes ­ mais ils sont (...) surtout .. (shrink)

Sarah is a young deaf woman in revolt, refusing to speak. She marries James, an orthophonist who works in a special school for the deaf. However, what gradually emerges in the course of their relationship is the latent suffering caused by what each of the partners isn't getting. James, tired of acting as Sarah's interpreter, frustrated by the limits of what they can share, shouts out:You want to be independent of me, you want to be a person in your own (...) right, you want people not to pity you … then you [must] learn to read my lips and you [must] learn to use that little mouth of yours for something besides eating and showing me you're better than hearing girls in bed! Come on! Read my lips? What am I saying? Say what I'm saying … You always have to be dependent on someone, and you always will for the rest of your life until you learn to speak. Now come on! I want you to speak to me. Let me hear it. Speak! Speak! Speak! …. (shrink)

In lieu of an abstract, here is a brief excerpt of the content:BOOK REVIEWS 479 Saint Thomas au XXe siecle: Actes du colloque du Centenaire de la "Revue thomiste." Paris: Saint-Paul, 1994. Pp. 475 (paper). In March of 1993 the Revue thomiste marked its centenary by sponsoring a three-day colloquium at the lnstitut Catholique of Toulouse on "St. Thomas in the 20th century." The commemoration resumed the following month with a conference at the University of Fribourg (Switzerland), site (...) of the journal's foundation. This volume assembles the papers presented at the Toulouse colloquium and a selection of those read in Fribourg. All of the contributions are in French. The volume opens with a letter (dated 11 March 1993) that His Holiness John-Paul II addressed to the Prior Provincial of the Toulouse Dominicans, under whose aegis the Revue thomiste is now published. The Pope pays tribute to the "lucid discernment" that has guided this journal in a "critical and constructive reflection on the major problems of our epoch, assuring it a place of choice in Catholic intellectual life" (p. 7). Next follows an editorial introduction by Serge-Thomas Bonino, O.P., who examines the pertinence of the Revue's motto vetera novis augere. Acknowledging that the Thomistic revival of this century has largely proven to be unsuccessful, to judge by the extent of its cultural impact, he concludes nevertheless that this failure may pave the way for an eventual renewal, on condition that the past achievements and deficiencies of Thomism come to be adequately understood. The present volume thus aims to assess the efforts of Francophone philosophers and theologians to advance the thought of Thomas Aquinas; it thereby provides us with a valuable status quaestionis, enabling Aquinas's contemporary disciples to measure better the challenge that lies before them. The first of the volume's three sections is devoted to historical studies on the Revue thomiste's role in the formation of contemporary Neo-Thomism and its contribution to some of the important theological controversies in the first half of this century. Francesco Baretta narrates the vicissitudes of the journal's inception and first years (1893-1905). Not until the establishment in 1907 of the Revue des sciences philosophiques et theologiques by members of the Dominican order's Paris province (the reasons that motivated the foundation of a rival journal are taken up by Andre Duval in a paper wholly devoted to this topic [pp. 96108 ]) did the Revue thomi~te come to be closely affiliated with the Toulouse province. Prior to this time it enjoyed the active collaboration of the order's three French provinces: Lyon, Paris, and Toulouse. Inspired by the recently promulgated Aeterni Patris (1879), the founders of the Revue thomiste sought to implement the encyclical's recommendation that the doctrine of Thomas Aquinas be brought into fruitful dialogue with modern science. Yet in so doing the Revue thomiste encountered serious obstacles, both theoretical and practical. Theoretically, the journal's chief collaborators were unable to recognize the originality of the hypothetico-deductive method and thus persisted 480 BOOK REVIEWS in thematizing modem science according to the epistemological categories of Aristotle's Posterior Analytics. Practically, they were unable (some exceptions aside) to enlist the support of contributors competent in both experimental science and scholastic thought. Thomism's engagement with modernity is taken up anew by Henry Donneaud, who charts the Revue thomiste's role in the nascent modernist crisis. During this period (1900-1908) the journal's rapprochement with the physical sciences attenuated, giving way to a preoccupation with modernism and its attendant controversies: the evolution of Catholic dogmas, the nature and role of apologetics, etc. Far from presenting a united front in the face of these theological developments, the principal collaborators of the Revue thomiste diverged in the fundamental orientation of their responses. Gradually, two very different Thomisms emerged: one, markedly conservative, refused any compromise with the new trends, condemning them in toto by appeal to a literalist, a-historical reading of the master; the other, progressive, sought to confront the modernists on their own terrain by drawing on the resources of a Thomistic doctrine open to amendment. After a period of internal strife the latter orientation became the more dominant of the two. The very... (shrink)

Joseph de Tonquédec. CHEZ BEAUCBESNE ET SES FILS. Les principes de la Philosophie Thomiste. I. La Critique de la connaissance, 1 vol. in-8 carré (XXX- 595 pp.). Immanence. Essai critique sur la doctrine de M. Maurice Blondel.

« La violence s’oppose si peu à la faiblesse que la faiblesse n’a souvent pas d’autre symptôme que la violence ; faible et brutale, et brutale parce que faible précisément. »Dans son ouvrage de référence, La civilisation des mœurs, Norbert Elias explique qu’au fil des siècles l’agressivité aurait été « maîtrisée »...

In lieu of an abstract, here is a brief excerpt of the content:Journal of the History of Ideas 63.2 (2002) 225-237 [Access article in PDF] Did Bayle Read Saint-Evremond? Thomas M. Lennon Of course Bayle read Saint-Evremond—he quotes him. Moreover, he published one of Saint-Evremond's texts. But there is reading, and then there is reading. There is selective, inattentive perusal of excerpts or even secondary sources, with no attempt to penetrate beyond a superficial understanding; and then there (...) is comprehensive, close scrutiny of the best primary sources, with sensitivity to nuance, and attention to context. In short, there is a difference between skimming and studying. Did Pierre Bayle (1647-1706) skim or study the work of Saint-Evremond (ca.1614-1703)?This article argues that Bayle's first-hand knowledge of Saint-Evremond's work was superficial and dependent on a secondary source that gives that work a less than obvious, and hitherto unappreciated meaning for Bayle. This shift matters because it bears on the question of the status of Bayle's religious faith. With her classic Pierre Bayle (1963-64), Elizabeth Labrousse set aside the traditional view of Bayle as a religious skeptic whose professions of faith cannot be taken at face value. Such had been the view held by many in Bayle's own time, most notably by Pierre Jurieu, and near-universally from the Enlightenment into the twentieth century. Very recently, in a work that is no less impressive than hers on this and other topics in Bayle, Gianluca Mori has defended the traditional view, basing a part of his argument on Bayle's use of Saint-Evremond. 1 Thus the question above. Moreover, the matter of Bayle's religious belief is not a merely biographical one. First, there is the fact of his [End Page 225] influence, especially given his huge readership, although Bayle's influence may well be other than anything he intended. Secondly, in any case, the interpretation of Bayle's work as a whole depends on it, for virtually everything he wrote besides the Dictionnaire has a religious dimension.To appreciate the importance of the question, something must first be said about Charles de Marguetel de St. Denis, sieur de Saint-Evremond. He was known in his time, and still is, as a libertine. It is difficult, however, to define libertinage beyond a combination of hedonistic mores and dubious religious beliefs—Epicureanism in some loose and popular sense. 2 What is more important, in any case, is how Bayle might have thought the term applied to Saint-Evremond; and here it is clear that outright atheism may have been at issue. Bayle reports that it was publicly known that Saint-Evremond "ended his long life, just as he had lived it, en esprit fort." He seems certainly to have died without benefit of religion. When asked on his deathbed whether he wished to be reconciled, says Bayle, he answered yes, "with all my heart. I would like to be reconciled with my appetite. For my stomach is no longer functioning in its usual way." Bayle was often at pains to insist upon the ultimate inaccessibility of others' real beliefs (and of the inappropriateness of attempting to reach them). In this case, however, he was prepared to hold up Saint-Evremond as a counter-example to the widely-held belief that there were no speculative atheists, i.e., people who would sincerely deny the existence of God, but only practical atheists, i.e., people who live as if they did not believe in the existence of God, but who, try as they may, are at least occasionally aware of it. 3This view of Saint-Evremond is important because, when accused of irreligion himself, Bayle cited the libertine's work as indicative of his own beliefs. To understand how Bayle came to be accused, and the significance of this response to it, some of the historical background is first necessary. Bayle's Dictionnaire historique et critique sold better than any text in the eighteenth century, philosophical or otherwise; and it was a best-seller right from the publication of its first edition, in... (shrink)