Maria Heim’s Voice of the Buddha: Buddhaghosa on the Immeasurable Words is a rare example of sustained scholarly engagement with commentarial literature. The book introduces the reader to the literary world of the Theravāda Buddhist exegete Buddhaghosa, with the stated goal of learning to read as he did. Heim shows with a series of close readings how Buddhaghosa read scripture with a high degree of attention to context, and how he understood both the Buddhist canon and the Buddha’s knowledge to (...) be infinitely expansive. Heim’s thorough and accessible treatment makes her presentation an approachable case study of commentarial literature. (shrink)

This paper takes the form of a case study which examines to what extent a comment can be analyzed as a type of speech action. This study analyzed 507 replies to a post on a popular Chinese social media application, Xiaohongshu, which concerns feminist issues. A speech act analysis of these replies offers new insights on comments as a type of speech act by showing their constructive functions across intra-utterance, inter-utterance, and extra-textual contexts. Comments can facilitate the securing of hearer’s (...) uptake of an illocutionary act, may modify the actual hearer’s uptake of another illocutionary act, and may ultimately contribute to the construction of sisterhood within a redefined context. The performance of comments in this study is grounded in a particular circumstance and is highly context-dependent. Nevertheless, this finding leaves open the possibility that comments may display other effects in different contexts. (shrink)

Review of Tehilim.. Tehilim - Psalms. Commentary by Rabbi Shimshon Raphael Hirsch. Kyiv: Duh i Litera.

The stories in this issue of Narrative Inquiry in Bioethics demonstrate two important things. First these stories explore the space between bodily impairment and the social structures that both enable and constrain the flourishing of those who are differently embodied. The authors of these narratives resist the dominant biomedical interpretation of their impairments, but also demonstrate their dependency upon others—social, medical, or familial others. Second, in writing these narratives, the authors are also engaged in an act of identity formation, which (...) sometimes challenge and sometimes embrace the label of disability. By telling their stories in the middle of the action of their lives— in media res, taking up or resisting the label of disability—they also demonstrate the way in which lives can be lived open to new possibilities and interpretations. (shrink)

Bioethics, Volume 36, Issue 1, Page 18-24, January 2022.

Human cognition is not an island unto itself. As a species, we are not Leibnizian Monads independently engaging in clear, Cartesian thinking. Our minds interact. That's surely why our species has language. And that interactivity probably constrains both what and how we think.

We present English translations of two French documents to show that the main reason for the rejection of Semmelweis's theory of the cause of childbed fever was because his proof relied on the post hoc ergo propter hoc fallacy, and not because Joseph Skoda referred only to cadaveric particles as the cause in his lecture to the Academy of Science on Semmelweis's discovery. Friedrich Wieger, an obstetrician from Strasbourg, published an accurate account of Semmelweis's theory six months before Skoda's lecture, (...) and reported a case in which the causative agent originated from a source other than cadavers. Wieger also presented data showing that chlorine hand disinfection reduced the annual maternal mortality rate from childbed fever from more than 7 per cent for the years 1840–1846 to 1.27 per cent in 1848, the first full year in which chlorine hand disinfection was practised. But an editorial in the Gazette médicale de Paris rejected the data as proof of the effectiveness of chlorine hand disinfection, stating that the fact that the MMR fell after chlorine hand disinfection was implemented did not mean that this innovation had caused the MMR to fall. This previously unrecognized objection to Semmelweis's proof was also the reason why Semmelweis's chief rejected Semmelweis's evidence. (shrink)

Dharmapala's Yogacara Critique of Bhavaviveka's Madhyamika Explanation of Emptiness, The Tenth Chapter of Ta-ch'eng Kuang Pai-lun Shih Commenting on Aryadeva's Catuhsataka Chapter Sixteen. John P. Keenan. The Edwin Mellor Press, Lewiston, New York, 1997. 153 pp. $79.95. ISBN 0-7734-8615-1.

Bhagavadacharya was the central figure in the Renaissance of Ramanandi tradition in the 20th century. He dedicated his life to gaining independence for his school from Ramanuja Sampradaya, whose leaders regarded Ramanandis as “third-class” members of the movement mostly because of the lack of shastric scholarship and inter-caste commensalities among the latter. To achieve this goal, Bhagavadacharya wrote commentaries on most of the Prasthāna-traya as well as many other works popularizing the Ramanandi version of Vishishtadvaita. He widely used his knowledge (...) of philosophy in shastric debates with his opponents among whom were not only followers of Ramanuja but also a famous Advaitin guru and political activist Swami Karpatri whom he allegedly defeated in a dispute which concerned the rights of Harijans initiated into Vaishnava tradition to enter temples and share communalities with the so-called “pure Hindus”. In my paper, I will present key philosophical and practical ideas of Bhagavadacharya based on my research conducted in the library of Bhagavadacharya Smarak Bhavan in August 2021. It will include basic details related to the acharya’s background and activities as well as analysis of his teachings within the frames of his main scope of Vishishtadvaita’s propagation among Hindus in general and Ramanandis in particular. (shrink)

This is a response to Paul Boghossian’s paper: What is inference?. The paper and the abstract originate from a symposium at the Pacific Division Meeting of the APA in San Diego in April 2011. John Broome was a co-commentator.

This comment addresses opportunities for understanding the social functions of emotion by taking a developmental perspective. I agree that understanding emotions and their development will meaningf...

Online debates typically possess a large number of argumentative comments. Most readers who would like to see which comments are winning arguments often only read a part of the debate. Many platforms that host such debates allow for the comments to be sorted, say from the earliest to latest. How can argumentation theory be used to evaluate the effectiveness of such policies of sorting comments, in terms of the actually winning arguments displayed to a reader who may not have read (...) the whole debate? We devise a pipeline that captures an online debate tree as a bipolar argumentation framework (BAF), which is sorted depending on the policy, giving a sequence of induced sub-BAFs representing how and how much of the debate has been read. Each sub-BAF has its own set of winning arguments, which can be quantitatively compared to the set of winning arguments of the whole BAF. We apply this pipeline to evaluate policies on Kialo debates, where it is shown that reading comments from most to least liked, on average, displays more winners than reading comments earliest first. Therefore, in Kialo, reading comments from most to least liked is on average more effective than reading from the earliest to the most recent. (shrink)

In this chapter I comment on and give a number of replies to matters raised in the papers on my work on paraconsistency and dialetheism in this volume.

This comment on Main and Kho’s suggestion for “a relational framework for integrating the study of empathy in children and adults” takes a conversation analytic perspective. First, I will su...

Comment on A Fine: "Piecemeal Realism." Fine's critique of scientific realism derives its force from a selective focus on mechanics. But what does the antirealist have to say about evolutionary theory or astrophysics? Furthermore, the circularity objection to the "explanationist" defence of realism can be countered. Fine's own position (NOA) reduces either to instrumentalism or to an unargued-for realism, depending on where the stress is laid.

Commented Article: CHANG, Bingyu; LIU, Xiaodan; IAN, Chao. Research on countermeasures for the development of ecological civilization education in schools in the context of cultural diversity. Trans/Form/Ação: Unesp journal of philosophy, v. 46, Special Issue, p. 21- 36, 2023.

Professor Narveson's comments about my papers on equality are both penetrating and comprehensive. I cannot hope to discuss all the issues he raises in any detail. But there is a special problem: his main question is about what I have not said. He asks how I might defend equality of resources other than simply by describing a version of it, and of course this question will require some extended discussion. But he is right to say that this is his most (...) important question, and I should hate to lose the opportunity of encouraging discussion of it. So I shall begin with some general remarks about the defence of the idea of equality and then take up, in a very hasty and summary way, the other problems he discusses or raises. Please allow me, however, this apology and caution. I know that what I shall say about the defense of equality is at many points dogmatic and at others unmindful of very natural objections and replies. I want to answer Narveson only by showing in a rough and general way how far I think a defense of equality is possible, what kind of defense this can be, and what form it should take. (shrink)

Comment by Aaron L. Mackler on “‘Through Her I Too Shall Bear a Child’: Birth Surrogates in Jewish Law” by Elie Spitz Reply by Elie Kaplan Spitz Research Note by G. Scott Davis.

This comment is analysing the last section of a paper by Piotr Blaszczyk, Mikhail G. Katz, and David Sherry on alleged misconceptions committed by historians of mathematics regarding the history of analysis, published in this journal in the first issue of 2013. Since this section abounds of wrong attributions and denouncing statements regarding my research and a key publication, the comment serves to rectify them and to recall some minimal methodological requirements for historical research.

Agada’s new book has arrived at a time when contemporary African philosophers are gradually engaging one another’s work and participating actively in system-building. It is based on this “new wave” in contemporary African philosophy scholarship that I provide some critical comments over Agada’s book emConsolationism and Comparative Philosophy: Beyond Universalism and Particularism./em Whereas the originality and depth of Agada is not in doubt regarding his idea of Mood, the ultimate category of his ontology, I level four objections against the metaphysical (...) system. These shortcomings, I argue, set limits on the ontological framework that can mediate thought, theory, and practice both in Africa and beyond./p. (shrink)

A comment on “Editorial 37” Content Type Journal Article Pages 93-95 DOI 10.1007/s10698-011-9110-4 Authors Brian T. Sutcliffe, Laboratoire de Chimie quantique et Photophysique, Université Libre de Bruxelles, B-1050 Bruxelles, Belgium R. Guy Woolley, School of Biomedical and Natural Sciences, Nottingham Trent University, Nottingham, NG11 8NS UK Journal Foundations of Chemistry Online ISSN 1572-8463 Print ISSN 1386-4238 Journal Volume Volume 13 Journal Issue Volume 13, Number 2.

These comments are part of a book symposium on Karen Bennett's book, _Making Things Up_.

In this comment we critically review an argument against the existence of objective physical outcomes, recently proposed by Healey [1]. We show that his gedankenexperiment, based on a combination of “Wigner’s friend” scenarios and Bell’s inequalities, suffers from the main criticism, that the computed correlation functions entering the Bell’s inequality are in principle experimentally inaccessible, and hence the author’s claim is in principle not testable. We discuss perspectives for fixing that by adapting the proposed protocol and show that this, however, (...) makes Healey’s argument virtually equivalent to other previous, similar proposals that he explicitly criticises. (shrink)

This comment argues that appraisals result from the almost incessant predictive activity of the awake brain, using its incoming and stored information. It explores how appraisal operates when it does. It argues that the analysis of the processes that lead to appraisals currently is still at an early stage.