In Working Virtue: Virtue Ethics and Contemporary Moral Problems, leading figures in the fields of virtue ethics and ethics come together to present the first ...

First published in 1962, contains the William James Lectures delivered at Harvard University in 1955. It sets out Austin's conclusions in the field to which he directed his main efforts for at least the last ten years of his life. Starting from an exhaustive examination of his already well- known distinction of performative utterances from statements, Austin here finally abandons that distinction, replacing it by a more general theory of 'illocutionary forces' of utterances which has important bearings on a wide (...) variety of philosophical problems. (shrink)

Mimesis as Make-Believe is important reading for everyone interested in the workings of representational art.

This paper explores The New Rhetoric’s concept of universal audience in the contexts of philosophical and traditional rhetorical discourse. It argues that, since Perelman’s final English-language article, published in 1984 to clarify misunderstandings among rhetorical scholars about his theory, rhetorical scholars have persisted in three primary misconceptions of the concept of universal audience: appeals to the real are made only to universal audiences, only universal audiences are qualified to establish the reasonableness of arguments, and only universal audiences prevent The New (...) Rhetoric’s rhetorical theory from degenerating into relativism. It explains why each of these misconceptions is inaccurate and provides a corrected view of universal audience that places it exclusively in the province of philosophical discourse. Finally, it questions whether constructed audiences in general add explanatory power to rhetorical analyses or are merely unnecessary constructs that should be dispensed with for the sake of theoretical parsimony. (shrink)

In lieu of an abstract, here is a brief excerpt of the content:Echoes of Romanticism and Expatriate Englishness in Charlotte Brontë's The ProfessorDavid SiglerCharlotte Brontë's many debts to Romanticism, and especially Lord Byron, are a well-known feature of her fiction. Yet only recently has this become an important part of the discussion surrounding The Professor, her first-written and last-published novel. The novel, written between 1844 and 1846 and published posthumously in 1857, is increasingly seen to be in dialogue with William (...) Wordsworth and Walter Scott, in addition to Byron. Anna Barton, seeing Brontë as "the pupil of Wordsworthian Romanticism" and "a daughter of Romanticism," shows how The Professor develops "intertextual exchanges that perform the failure of the Romantic lyric within the Victorian novel."1 Tanya Llewellyn has argued that the protagonist William Crimsworth, seemingly influenced by Byron's Turkish tales, Orientalizes the women in his life as a way to manage sexual threats.2 Mandy Swann, meanwhile, sees in Brontë's early work an ambivalent response to the Romantic figure of the poet-prophet, as part of the author's general struggle, early in her career, to theorize female creativity.3Yet in other recent accounts, William Crimsworth seems to be as un-Byronic and un-Wordsworthian as possible. Crimsworth has been said to be a "particularly off-putting" narrator, "defensive and humourless," whose "dubious masculinity," passionlessness, and, in one reading, stiflingly repressed homosexuality render him a comically overliteral thinker.4 I will suggest that this incapacity in him for meaningful human engagement is what leads him to fixate on British Romantic poetry as a solution, however backhanded, to his erotic and professional difficulties. [End Page 30] Yet as the echoes of Romanticism that haunt his erotic and professional relations quickly take on lives of their own, they enable the story, and its ethical vision, to exceed William's control. Once the novel directs its protagonist's obsessive personality in the direction of Romantic poetry, it can become an intriguing meditation on ethics, expatriate Englishness, and time.William Crimsworth is a hardworking Englishman living and working in Brussels. The city, which William finds too "cosmopolitan," becomes the site of his zealous self-exploration as he mingles, ever defensively, with the locals.5 Approaching the city like "a morning traveller," as he puts it, William must analyze his foreignness if he is to survive his own residual and aspirational Englishness.6 The phrase "morning traveller" is drawn from Robert Southey's 1798 poem "The Traveller's Return," which describes love as an echo-effect. It is a very auditory poem: Southey's "morning traveller" spends the day listening to unfamiliar sounds, until, in the evening, he hears a "distant sheep-bell," which teaches him that "sweetest is the voice of Love / That welcomes his return."7 A sheep bell is, of course, a tracking mechanism, facilitating the free movement and eventual return of sheep to a shepherd. Southey's speaker learns to grasp the hidden similarity between love and the sheep bell. Just as the sound of the bell goes away and comes back, signifying the wandering and return of livestock, the human "morning traveller" must begin to identify with it. He himself, hearing the sound, gets interpellated by it, once it becomes his objective correlative. Brontë's The Professor, in matters of love, uses Romantic poetry, including Southey's, as a similar tracking device for William. The echo it produces constantly and ambivalently connects the protagonist to England and secures his place within the ideological apparatuses of the state.Judith Butler has observed that "my own foreignness to myself is, paradoxically, the source of my ethical connection with others."8 She explains that because there are aspects of oneself that remain forever baffling and inexplicable, we should suppose that other people—who can also seem foreign and inexplicable—contain similar aporias. If their accounts of themselves are difficult for us to understand, we should recognize, through our inability to sympathize, that we too are surely baffling and that they, like us, are likely also baffling to themselves. Thus, [End Page 31] through the sheer dubiousness of understanding other people, we can achieve a kind of negative shared humanity. We all probably confront an inassimilable kernel... (shrink)

This essay examines Martha Nussbaum's prescription fortempering retribution with mercy in the capitalsentencing process. Nussbaum observes that theoperation of retribution in the ancient world resultedin harsh and indiscriminate punishment without regardto the particularities of the offender and his crime. In the interest of mercy, Nussbaum advocates the useof the novel as a model for a more compassionatesentencing process. An examination of Nussbaum's``novel prescription'' reveals that the retribution thatoperates in the modern criminal law, and in theSupreme Court's capital sentencing jurisprudence,already accommodates (...) the values of justice –individuation, particularization, and proportionality– that are characteristic of the mercy tradition. Moreover, the rich narrative approach that Nussbaumfavors is by no means congenial to mercifulpunishment. Because the particularistic detail of thenovel form is not confined to the sympatheticportrayal of the defendant, the emotionalism thatNussbaum urges encompasses as well emotional detailsabout the characteristics of the defendant's victim. Such victim impact evidence is consistent with thenovel form, but is unlikely to promote mercifuljudgment. Instead, the details of victim impactevidence can be expected to exacerbate a sentencingauthority's inclination to judge a capital defendantharshly. The novel thus provides a poor model for thecapital sentencing process because it fosters the sortof unchecked emotionalism that undermines the rationaldecision making that the Supreme Court has sought toachieve. (shrink)

Benjamin Buchloh’s two interviews with Gerhard Richter, which bookend this slim volume, are fascinating glimpses into the artist’s interior life, and thus rewarding. Unfortunately, jargon and proli...

This project explores the "contradiction" that critics contend lies at the heart of the Supreme Court's capital sentencing jurisprudence. The doctrine of "guided discretion," represents the Court's attempt to achieve both consistency and individuation in capital sentencing. Guided discretion rejects the unbridled sentencing discretion of an earlier era that resulted in sentencing decisions that were "arbitrary and capricious." At the same time, guided discretion requires juries to give individualized consideration to the facts and circumstances of individual defendants. Critics contend that (...) consistency and individuation are mutually exclusive, and that "guided discretion" is a contradiction in terms. ;The analysis first attempts to isolate the moral dimension of the capital punishment debate, arguing that such analytical clarity is essential to any defensible view of capital punishment. Second, it sets forth and defends the coherence approach to moral and legal justification, according to which the specific moral and legal principles relevant to capital sentencing are evaluated for their compatibility with the principles of the legal system more generally. Third, the analysis canvasses the traditional justifications for punishment, as well as the development of the Court's capital sentencing jurisprudence, and identifies retribution and deterrence as the most promising rationales for the death penalty. Fourth, the claim of contradiction is considered in the context of legal liberalism, which, contrary to critics, has ample resources to accommodate the doctrinal balancing act that guided discretion entails. Moreover, examination of a typical capital sentencing statute establishes that the doctrine of guided discretion is compatible with at least some forms of retributivism and with traditional principles of deterrence. Finally, the analysis recognizes the limits of philosophical consistency. The capital sentencing process presents daunting practical challenges that a theoretical defense of guided discretion cannot fully address. Substantial reforms are needed before the theoretical coherence of guided discretion can be translated into a constitutionally defensible capital sentencing process. (shrink)

To learn more about Rowman & Littlefield titles please visit us at www.rowmanlittlefield.com.

Volume 25, Issue 7-8, November - December 2020, Page 891-893.

The essays chosen for this anthology were taken from a conference held April 20–21, 2018, in Florence, Italy, at the Dutch University Institute of Art. All concern themselves with what editor Guy H...

Siblings Carol and Jordan Steiker come by their opposition to capital punishment honestly. As law clerks to Justice Thurgood Marshall, an inveterate abolitionist, they observed and participated in...

Peter Mack asserts a truism in the Preface of Reading Old Books: Writing with Tradition. He argues from the first paragraph that “literary tradition provides essential imaginative resources for wri...

Volume 25, Issue 7-8, November - December 2020, Page 893-896.

It was proposed that the data from Monte Carlo statistical investigations be subjected to analysis of variance methods rather than the conventional techniques of tabling, graphing, and inspecting the data. Two examples in which analysis of variance methods were applied to published Monte Carlo studies were presented. It was suggested that balanced factorial designs should be used whenever possible in Monte Carlo studies so that analysis of variance methods would be directly applicable. Finally, three advantages of analysis of variance methods (...) over conventional techniques were described and analysis of variance methods were contrasted with a possible alternative analytical method, multiple regression analysis. (shrink)

This chapter defends the property dualism argument. The term “semantic premise” mentioned is used to refers to an assumption identified by Brian Loar that antiphysicalist arguments, such as the property dualism argument, tacitly assume that a statement of property identity that links conceptually independent concepts is true only if at least one concept picks out the property it refers to by connoting a contingent property of that property. It is argued that, the property that does the work in explaining the (...) possibility of a posteriori identities need not be a first-order property of the referent in question. On his view, the property dualism argument requires only a weaker semantic premise, which allows that the property in question be a higher order property. A refined version of the property dualism argument is formulated, which uses the weaker premise, and defends the argument against various objections. (shrink)

Current sociological theories appear to have lost their general persuasiveness in part because, unlike the theories of the ‘classical era’, they fail to maintain an integrated stance toward society, and the practical role that sociology plays in society. The authors explore various facets of this failure and possibilities for reconstructing sociological theories as integrated wholes capable of conveying a moral and political immediacy. They discuss the evolution of several concepts (for example, the social, structure, and self) and address the significant (...) disputes (for example, structuralism versus humanism, and individual versus society) that have dominated twentieth-century sociological thought. Their ideas and analyses are directed towards an audience of students and theorists who are coming to terms with the project of sociological theory, and its relationship with moral discourses and political practice. The authors of these essays are sociological theorists from the United States, the United Kingdom and Canada. They are all established, but not ‘establishment’ authors. The book contains no orthodoxies, and no answers. However, the essays do contribute to identifying the range of issues that will constitute the agenda for the next generation of sociological theorists. (shrink)