Plutarch, Aet. Graec. 5, p. 292 B: “Τνεσ ο παρ' ‘Αρκσι κα δακεδσιμονοισ χρηοτο;” δακεδαιμνιοι Τεγεταισ διαλλαγντεσ ποισαντο συνθκασ κα στλην π' 'αλΑειι κοινν νστησαν, ν ι μετ τν γγραπται Μεσσηνουσ κβαλεν κ τσ χρασ κα μ ξεναι χρηστοσ ποιεν. ξηγομενοσ ον 'αριστοτελησ τοτο πησι δυνασθαι το μ ποκτιννναι βοηθενασ χριν τοσ λακωνιζονσιν τν Τεγεατν.

In the Antiatticista, as we call the scanty excerpt of a lexicon of the second century A.D., so abbreviated as to be often unintelligible, we find on p. 86. 20 the following article: Γενέσια оσης тε έоρтς &lsqbтς&rsqb δημотελоũς 〈έν &rsquoΑθήνααις, ΒоB7δρоγιѿνоς ΠέμΠтηι, Γενέσια καλоυένμς, καθόтι øησί Φιλόχоρоς καί Σόλων έν тоȊς &rsquoΑξоσι, καί тς тоũ όνόμαтоς χρήσεως оσης &rsquoΕλλ:ηνικς, тί κιλúει μή μόνоν έΠ тς δημотελоũς έоρтς á»á καί έΠί тςίδίας έκáσтоυ тáσσεσθα&iota. What rouses our interest in this note (...) is not the domestic quarrel between the Atticists of a stricter and of a more lenient observance about the meaning and the use of the word, but the facts themselves, which in the present case are fortunately clear enough. The lexicographer knows two entirely different facts: a material fact, the existence of a State festival in Athens called Genesia and celebrated on the 5th of Boedromion; a linguistic fact, the ’Ελλινικǹ χασις which denotes by Γενέσια not this State festival but some private celebration. For the latter, it is important to observe that by &rsquoΕλλνικ χασις the lexicographer does not mean Hellenistic Greek nor the usage of his own day, but the occurrence of the word in those authors whom the strict Atticists do not take as models of style, or who are not held to be Attic writers: it is to such authors, at least, that the lexicographer appeals in the preceding gloss: he there quotes ΕριΠίδης “Іωνι for γενέθλια and Herodotos for γενέσια. The latter passage could be the evidence for his linguistic fact, that ‘Hellenic usage’ applies the word γενέσια to a private celebration. (shrink)

In determining the time of Archilochos it is useless to begin with the eclipse—an event which strongly appeals to the modern mind, as it seems open to exact astronomical and mathematical computation. Even granted from the first and as a matter of course that Archilochos saw the eclipse and that it was total or nearly total in the place where he saw it, there are two objections: the astronomical data for the two eclipses of 711 B.C. and 648 B.C. are (...) as yet insufficient even for Paros and Thasos; we do not know for certain where the eclipse poem was written: probably it was in Paros, as the speaker is Lykambes, but it may be Thasos, not to mention Euboia, Crete, or Sicily. The whole thing is elusive, and Alan Blakeway, when he stated the case for 711—perhaps ‘too emphatically’, as he concedes—is quite clear in this respect. The most he affirms is that ‘there is nothing to choose between the two eclipses astronomically’; and what he asks for is a new examination of ‘the literary evidence without that unconscious bias in favour of the 648 B.C. eclipse which so far has influenced it’. That is quite a reasonable demand, and it is only with Blakeway's re-examination of the literary evidence that I find fault. (shrink)

For the life of the poet Ion we have more certain dates than for most of the Other writers of the fifth century. He produced his first tragedy in the 82nd Olympiad, 452after the death of Perikles and when the revolt of Lesbos was imminent7dgr; 'Aa fact which seems significant of the position which Athens had won for herself by the foundation of the Delian League. At the same time this fact clearly indicates that his father Orthomenes, whom they called (...) Xuthos, had whole-heartedly espoused the cause of Athens. He bequeathed his loyalty to his son Ion, who adhered to Athens through all vicissitudes of fortune, and he in his turn bequeathed it to his son Tydeus, who paid for it with his life. (shrink)

In determining the time of Archilochos it is useless to begin with the eclipse—an event which strongly appeals to the modern mind, as it seems open to exact astronomical and mathematical computation. Even granted from the first and as a matter of course that Archilochos saw the eclipse and that it was total or nearly total in the place where he saw it, there are two objections: the astronomical data for the two eclipses of 711 B.C. and 648 B.C. are (...) as yet insufficient even for Paros and Thasos; we do not know for certain where the eclipse poem was written: probably it was in Paros, as the speaker is Lykambes, but it may be Thasos, not to mention Euboia, Crete, or Sicily. The whole thing is elusive, and Alan Blakeway, when he stated the case for 711—perhaps ‘too emphatically’, as he concedes—is quite clear in this respect. The most he affirms is that ‘there is nothing to choose between the two eclipses astronomically’; and what he asks for is a new examination of ‘the literary evidence without that unconscious bias in favour of the 648 B.C. eclipse which so far has influenced it’. That is quite a reasonable demand, and it is only with Blakeway's re-examination of the literary evidence that I find fault. (shrink)

Plutarch, Aet. Graec. 5, p. 292 B: “Τνεσ ο παρ' ‘Αρκσι κα δακεδσιμονοισ χρηοτο;” δακεδαιμνιοι Τεγεταισ διαλλαγντεσ ποισαντο συνθκασ κα στλην π' 'αλΑειι κοινν νστησαν, ν ι μετ τν γγραπται Μεσσηνουσ κβαλεν κ τσ χρασ κα μ ξεναι χρηστοσ ποιεν. ξηγομενοσ ον 'αριστοτελησ τοτο πησι δυνασθαι το μ ποκτιννναι βοηθενασ χριν τοσ λακωνιζονσιν τν Τεγεατν.

For the life of the poet Ion we have more certain dates than for most of the Other writers of the fifth century. He produced his first tragedy in the 82nd Olympiad, 452–448 B.C., another in the year of the archon Epameinon 429/428 B.C. —after the death of Perikles and when the revolt of Lesbos was imminent—and his death is fixed for us by a passage in the Peace of Aristophanes, which we may well call an obituary, in summer 422 (...) or even in winter 422/421 B.C. The approximate date of his birth we learn from his own words in a story preserved by Plutarch, and deriving no doubt from the book to which later librarians gave the title 'Επι7dgr;ημίαι or 'Υπομνήμαтα: 5 συδειπνσαι δè тι Κίμωνί ησιν Ἴων πανάπασιν μειράκιον ἢκων ες 'Aθήνας Χίου παρà Ααομέδονтι. Hence he was about fifteen years of age when he first came to Athens, apparently in order to get his higher education there—a fact which seems significant of the position which Athens had won for herself by the foundation of the Delian League. At the same time this fact clearly indicates that his father Orthomenes, whom they called Xuthos, had whole-heartedly espoused the cause of Athens. He bequeathed his loyalty to his son Ion, who adhered to Athens through all vicissitudes of fortune, and he in his turn bequeathed it to his son Tydeus, who paid for it with his life. (shrink)

In re-opening the case of the authorship of the Hellenica of Oxyrhynchus I am afraid I must state at once that you will find that there is not much in it, at least nothing new. The few pages, recently published by Vittorio Bartoletti, from a papyrus book which evidently contained the same work as P. Oxy. 842 have not changed the state of the problem. They confirm the two primary facts known about the author in question: that he is a (...) continuator of Thucydides—a fact which was inferred at once from the very exceptional use of Thucydides' war-year, and which, incidentally, does not allow of the further inference that he intended merely to complement Thucydides, ending his work with the fall of Athens, as it is often assumed that Xenophon originally did; that he was the main source of Ephoros for the period for which Thucydides was no longer available. But, unfortunately, they do not contain a title-page or subscription; and it does not help that in the remains of col. ii the anonymous author seems to quote Thucydides. Quotations of prose writers by name are extremely rare in the fifth and even in the fourth century, but they do occur: Herodotus quotes Hekataios for a special point, and Thucydides quotes Hellanikos for a special period, though it is worth while mentioning that both quotations are polemical. (shrink)

In re-opening the case of the authorship of the Hellenica of Oxyrhynchus I am afraid I must state at once that you will find that there is not much in it, at least nothing new. The few pages, recently published by Vittorio Bartoletti, from a papyrus book which evidently contained the same work as P. Oxy. 842 have not changed the state of the problem. They confirm the two primary facts known about the author in question: that he is a (...) continuator of Thucydides—a fact which was inferred at once from the very exceptional use of Thucydides' war-year, and which, incidentally, does not allow of the further inference that he intended merely to complement Thucydides, ending his work with the fall of Athens, as it is often assumed that Xenophon originally did; that he was the main source of Ephoros for the period for which Thucydides was no longer available. But, unfortunately, they do not contain a title-page or subscription; and it does not help that in the remains of col. ii the anonymous author seems to quote Thucydides. Quotations of prose writers by name are extremely rare in the fifth and even in the fourth century, but they do occur: Herodotus quotes Hekataios for a special point, and Thucydides quotes Hellanikos for a special period, though it is worth while mentioning that both quotations are polemical. (shrink)

The integrity of critical ethnography requires engagement in reflexive practice at all phases of the research process. In this discussion paper, I explore the insights and challenges of reflexive practice in an ethnographic study of the recovery experiences of black trauma patients in a Philadelphia hospital. Observation and interviews were conducted with twelve patients who were admitted to trauma‐designated units of the hospital over the course of a year. During fieldwork, I learned the ways that my background as a professional (...) nurse structured my way of being in clinical space and facilitated a particular interpretation of clinical culture. In analysis, reflection on subjectivities through which I designed this ethnographic research allowed me to see beyond my preconceived and theoretically informed perspective to permit unexpected features of the field to emerge. Reflexive practice also guided my reconciliation of key practical and epistemological differences between clinical ethnographic research and the anthropologic tradition in which it is rooted. I conclude that with careful reflection to the subjectivities that influence the research process, interdisciplinary clinically relevant applied interpretations of critical ethnographic work can be used to generate detailed knowledge across contexts in clinical care, nursing practice, and patient experiences. (shrink)

L'essai de F. H. Jacobi Sur l'entreprise du criticisme de ramener la raison a l'entendement ouvre la voie a une comprehension differente du moment idealiste et a une lecture alternative, aussi eloignee des interpretations phenomenologiques que neokantiennes, de la Critique de la raison pure et des pensees qui en sont issues. De tous les commentaires que les contemporains de Kant ont pu donner de la premiere Critique, il est, malgre diverses incomprehensions, l'un des seuls qui conservent encore aujourd'hui une pertinence. (...) Avec la Lettre a Fichte, dont il est le prolongement, il offre en effet une premiere elaboration philosophique du concept de nihilisme. Le diagnostic qu'il etablit doit alors se comprendre non seulement comme le point d'aboutissement des querelles theologicophilosophiques qui, a la fin du XVIIIe siecle, ont mis aux prises la philosophie de la religion et la theologie speculative, mais aussi comme un jugement qui engage a lui seul tout l'avenir du postkantisme. Ecrits au moment de la querelle de l'atheisme et contemporains de la formation des grands systemes idealistes, ces deux textes constituent un document irremplacable pour qui veut comprendre le devenir de la philosophie moderne: apres l'injonction de Jacobi a affronter directement la question du neant, jamais plus une philosophie ne pourra faire l'economie de ce probleme. (shrink)

Cet ouvrage rassemble les oeuvres philosophiques de François Hemsterhuis, l'un des représentants les plus importants du mouvement d'idées appelé le siècle des lumières. Ses écrits portent sur des sujets variés tels que l'esthétique, l'éthique, la métaphysique, etc. Ils sont accompagnés d'une préface de Friedrich Heinrich Jacobi, autre figure marquante du mouvement. Cet ouvrage est un témoignage passionnant de la philosophie du XVIIIe siècle. 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 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. 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 light of an historical obsession with human error, Krueger & Funder (K&F) suggest that social psychologists should emphasize the strengths of social perception. In our view, however, absolute levels of accuracy (or error) in any given experiment are less important than underlying processes. We discuss the use of the process-dissociation procedure for gaining insight into the mechanisms underlying accuracy and error.

On the History of Modern Philosophy is a key transitional text in the history of European philosophy. In it, F. W. J. Schelling surveys philosophy from Descartes to German Idealism and shows why the Idealist project is ultimately doomed to failure. The lectures trace the path of philosophy from Descartes through Spinoza, Leibniz, Kant, Fichte, Jacobi, to Hegel and Schelling's own work. The extensive critiques of Hegel prefigure many of the arguments to be found in Feuerbach, Kierkegaard, Marx, Nietzsche, Heidegger, (...) and Derrida. This is the first English translation of On the History of Modern Philosophy. In his introduction Andrew Bowie sets the work in the context of Schelling's career and clarifies its philosophical issues. The translation will be of special interest to philosophers, intellectual historians, literary theorists, and theologians. (shrink)

In this paper we present a paradigmatic example of the use in knowledge management of techniques from other fields, namely mathematical analysis. We also highlight that the Jacobi method presented here takes precedence over the better known Hungarian method. Finally, we signify that the Jacobi method represents the first known or recognized case of serendipity in both knowledge management and operational research. This paper thus demonstrates the intersection between knowledge management, mathematical analysis and operational research and how taking historical perspectives (...) are important for recognising future applications of knowledge management. This results in a better understanding of knowledge management and how it can be applied in the future. It has been shown how knowledge management relates to historical mathematical principles. (shrink)

Jacoby supplements his description of a mystical religious experience with a random survey of favorable interpretations of supranormal experience.--F. E. B.

The studies contained in this volume range widely and include the following: K. Bormann, on the concept of truth and the doctrine concerning Nous in Aristotle and some of his commentators; K. Jacobi, on "good" and "evil" and their opposition in Aristotle, some Aristotelian commentators, and Thomas Aquinas; P.-B. Lüttringhaus, on God, freedom, and necessity in Boethius's Consolation of Philosophy; G. Vuillemin-Diem, a long study concerning William of Moerbeke's translation into Latin of Aristotle's Metaphysics; R. Wielockx, on Godfrey of Fontaines (...) as a witness in support of the authenticity of Albert the Great's Summa theologiae; R. Hissette, on Albert the Great and Thomas Aquinas and the Paris Condemnation of 1277; A. Zimmermann, on Thomas Aquinas's De veritate, qu. 1; C. Kopp, an edition and study of the fallaciae breves contained in a British Museum manuscript; I. Craemer-Ruegenberg, a study on the terminatio materiae primae as found in a commentary on Aristotle's Physics dating from the second half of the fourteenth century; H. G. Senger, a study of a question by Lambert of Heerenberg, concerning whether Aristotle's soul was saved. Limitations of space will force me to confine my remarks to only a few of these carefully researched investigations. In the first study Bormann seeks to determine Aristotle's views concerning the ultimate ground for universally valid propositions and Aristotle's justification for his belief that certain of these are valid for all men and at all times in spite of the differences in human language. This quickly leads him to consider Aristotle's views concerning mind as active and mind as passive, especially as found in De anima III, 5. Mind as active is not to be identified with Aristotle's Unmoved Mover of Metaphysics XII; it unites with the soul of the individual man during the latter's lifetime, is free from all potentiality, is never acted upon, and exists in separation from the individual human being with the death of the latter. Mind as passive passes away with the individual soul when a particular man dies. Bormann then examines subsequent efforts to clarify Aristotle's thought concerning this by Alexander of Aphrodisias, Themistius, John Philoponus, Averroes, Albert the Great, and Thomas Aquinas. Lüttringhaus introduces his discussion of Boethius's views on God, freedom, and necessity by drawing an interesting contrast between freedom as found in the One of Plotinus and freedom in Boethius. Given his Christian Neoplatonism, Boethius must reconcile human freedom with an omnipotent and omniscient God. His efforts to do so in the Consolatio are then carefully analyzed by Lüttringhaus. As Lüttringhaus points out, Boethius's distinction between absolute necessity and hypothetical necessity in Bk. V is crucial for his defense of human freedom, along with his distinction between divine eternity and human temporality. G. Vuillemin-Diem's study offers new and valuable information concerning Moerbeke's revision and translation of the Metaphysics. Contrary to the long held view that Moerbeke had only newly translated one book and had simply revised an earlier translation for the others, she shows that he newly translated Bks. XI, XIII, and XIV. Moreover, she reveals that a long overlooked surviving Greek manuscript may have served as the model for Morebeke's revision and translation, either directly or through a copy. R. Wielockx turns to three manuscripts from Godfrey of Fontaines' library which still survive in order to cast some new light on the disputed authenticity of Albert the Great's Summa theologiae. The manuscripts contain a number of excerpts taken from the first part of Albert's Summa; many of those contained in the two last-mentioned manuscripts are explicitly attributed to Albert by Godfrey's own hand, according to Wielockx. Given this and the relatively early dating Wielockx has established for the copying of these excerpts into the manuscripts in question, he has here discovered a valuable external and positive indication pointing to the authenticity of at least this earlier part of Albert's Summa. Having already published an important book in 1977 on the Paris Condemnation of 1277, R. Hissette here returns to the disputed issue whether some of these condemned propositions were directly aimed at Thomas Aquinas or at Albert the Great. Hissette acknowledges that a number of positions held by Aquinas and by Albert were in fact touched on by various condemned propositions. He also notes that the authors of the decree itself must have known that the condemned propositions were held by Aquinas and by various Masters from the Arts Faculty at Paris. But given the statement in the prologue of the decree to this effect that it was aimed at members of the Arts Faculty, Hissette continues to deny that either Thomas or Albert was a direct target of this condemnation; they were only indirectly implicated. Some may wonder whether this distinction defended by Hissette is real or only verbal. In his careful analysis of Thomas's De veritate, 1, 6, Zimmermann draws some interesting comparisons and contrasts between Thomas's views concerning whether any created truth is immutable and Anselm's De veritate, on the one hand, and Bertrand Russell's "Truth and Falsity," on the other.--John F. Wippel, The Catholic University of America. (shrink)

El presente artículo busca describir la crítica de F. H. Jacobi a la filosofía trascendental en torno al problema de la afección y la cosa en sí. Esta crítica atribuye al pensamiento de Kant un idealismo incompatible con toda noción de realismo. La interpretación de Jacobi, sin embargo, se apoya sobre un desconocimiento de la naturaleza metodológico-trascendental no solo de la terminología involucrada en el problema de la afección, sino de toda la reflexión kantiana acerca del conocimiento. El modelo exegético (...) de la two aspects view ha proporcionado instrumentos que nos permiten una reconstrucción hermenéutica del problema de la afección y ponen en evidencia el extravío metodológico en la crítica de Jacobi. (shrink)