This work has been selected by scholars as being culturally important, and is part of the knowledge base of civilization as we know it. This work was reproduced from the original artifact, and remains as true to the original work as possible. Therefore, you will see the original copyright references, library stamps (as most of these works have been housed in our most important libraries around the world), and other notations in the work. This work is in the public domain (...) in the United States of America, and possibly other nations. Within the United States, you may freely copy and distribute this work, as no entity (individual or corporate) has a copyright on the body of the work. As a reproduction of a historical artifact, this work may contain missing or blurred pages, poor pictures, errant marks, etc. Scholars believe, and we concur, that this work is important enough to be preserved, reproduced, and made generally available to the public. We appreciate your support of the preservation process, and thank you for being an important part of keeping this knowledge alive and relevant. (shrink)

In C.Q. xliii , p. 126, Messrs. Klos and Minio-Paluello write: ‘Burnet's and Robin's collations of W… differ for the text of the Phaedo in about 130 readings of a more than orthographical interest. A new inspection of the manuscript has shown that Robin very often corrected Burnet, but added some twenty mistakes.’ As this may give a false impression of Burnet as a collator, it will be well to recall Burnet's own statement in C.Q. xiv , p. 132: ‘He (...) [Wilamowitz] says that my collations of W are inadequate, and have been shown to be so by Schoene for the Symposium, and by Hensel for the Theaetetus and Politicus. As he refers his readers to my Prefaces , he has presumably read them, and ought to have known that I never collated W at all or even saw it.’. (shrink)

This volume contains a new, literal translation of Xenophon's Hiero, Strauss's textual analysis of that dialogue, a translation of Alexandre Kojève's comment on Strauss's analysis, and Strauss's restatement. In his Introduction, Strauss clearly draws his usual battle lines between "all specifically modern political thought," which began with Machiavelli, and classical political science, which included value-judgments. Kojève, posing as a "modern" influenced by Hegel, argues against the notion of a politically inactive philosophical elite presumed to possess "wisdom." Strauss concludes with a (...) frightening vision of the end of philosophy in a homogeneous "modern" state under a "Universal Tyrant."--W. L. M. (shrink)

"Heretic, barbarian, parasite. That is the profane trinity that sums up the pacifist." This quotation also sums up one chapter of the book, the stated purpose of which is to draw the "battle-line" in the "war" between the egalitarian Left and American Conservatism. In the chapter on McCarthyism, it is alleged that Constitutional guarantees of free speech do not extend to freedom of thought. In the discussions of Locke and of Mill, we are occasionally reminded that the author was once (...) regarded primarily as a scholar. The thesis that free speech does not presuppose freedom of thought seems to have made this "Conservative Affirmation" into a very liberal negation.--W. L. M. (shrink)

The so-called "early Marx" comes in for sympathetic treatment from an Australian philosopher. Kamenka argues that Marx never lost his ethical vision of human dignity in future society, though "alienation" and related concepts are no longer relied upon in Das Kapital. Midway through the study an ethical position, based on the view that goods produce harmonious systems whereas evils cannot, is outlined and defended. Kamenka maintains that his "positive," non-normative ethic can be made compatible with a Marx purged of his (...) eschatology and of some Hegelian trappings. The concluding stigmatization of Soviet Marxist ethics as being "normative" is perhaps the weakest part of an uneven work. --W. L. M. (shrink)

SummaryThe Gainj of highland Papua New Guinea do not use contraception but have a total fertility rate of only 4·3 live births per woman, one of the lowest ever recorded in a natural fertility setting. From an analysis of cross-sectional demographic and endocrinological data, the causes of low reproductive output have been identified in women of this population as: late menarche and marriage, a long interval between marriage and first birth, a high probability of widowhood at later reproductive ages, low (...) effective fecundability and prolonged lactational amenorrhoea. These are combined with near-universal marriage, a low prevalence of primary sterility and a pattern of onset of secondary sterility similar to that found in other populations. Of all the factors limiting fertility, by far the most important are those involved in birth spacing, especially lactational amenorrhoea. (shrink)

Li Zehou , a former professor of philosophy at Beijing University and a member of the Chinese Academy for Social Sciences in Beijing, is widely recognized as one of the most important thinkers in post-Mao China and "the leader of the Chinese Enlightenment" of the 1980s.1 One of the signatories of a petition to the government during the 1989 democracy movement, he was castigated in the official press after the crackdown and accused of being a proponent of "bourgeois liberalism." Li (...) left China in 1992 and has lived abroad ever since, returning only for occasional visits. He has been a guest professor at various Western universities and continues to publish academic writings, adding to his already voluminous Collected Works published in Taiwan a few years ago.2 At present he teaches at Boulder University in Colorado. (shrink)

Hegel’s basic position so far on the various meanings of evil as necessary and thereby intelligible directly in the development of spirit might be summed up as follows. Evil is always a necessary moment of instability which gives impetus in the movement from various meanings of particularity to various meanings of universality; from the more abstract expression of potential unity and truth to the more actualized notion and unity.

Objectives—To study the attitudes of health care staff in four postcommunist countries towards taking gifts from their clients—and their confessed experience of actually taking such gifts.Design—Survey questionnaire administered to officials including health care staff, supplemented by focus-group discussions with the general public.Setting – Ukraine, Bulgaria, Slovakia and the Czech Republic.Participants—A quota sample of 1,307 officials including 292 health care staff, supplemented by stratified national random samples of 4,778 ordinary members of the public and in-depth interviews or focus-group discussions involving another (...) 323.Main measurements—Explicit justifications and willingness to accept offers, reported frequency of offers, and personal confessions to accepting “money and expensive presents” as well as smaller gifts.Results—Health care staff were far more inclined than the average official or public servant to accept “money or an expensive present” if offered, far more inclined to justify asking clients for “extra payments”, and far more inclined to confess that they had actually taken gifts from clients recently. Judged by their own confessions, hospital doctors were only rivalled by traffic police and customs officials for taking money or expensive gifts from their clients.Conclusions—Poor pay does not explain why doctors so often took large gifts from their clients. Moral self justification, opportunity, and bargaining power are much more effective explanations. (shrink)