Historical Essays. HISTORY OF A FALLACY The logical fallacy that I am going to discuss here is one that it is quite easy to see by common sense in simple ...

ACT, CONTENT, AND OBJECT THE TITLE I have chosen for this work is a mere label for a set of problems; the controversial views that have historically been ...

In this important contribution to the revived interest in McTaggart's philosophy, Professor Geach clearly expounds the main lines of his metaphysical thought. McTaggart has produced some immensely interesting and significant arguments; in particular, his rigorous reasoning against the trustworthiness of sense perception and the reality of time deserves serious consideration. McTaggart presents his mystical vision of love--the element of our experience that brings us closest to absolute reality--with lucidity and deep conviction. This study will make stimulating reading for all (...) students of philosophy and religion. (shrink)

Philosophy as now pursued in British universities (and many others) is a highly argumentative discipline. The philosophers most studied are not sages who ...

In this collection of essays, which were first delivered as lectures at the International Academy of Philosophy in the Principality of Liechtenstein in 1998, distinguished philosopher Peter Geach confronts some of the most difficult issues in philosophy with the precision of a logician and the grace and wit of an accomplished stylist. These essays constitute a significant addition to Professor Geach's esteemed body of work in philosophy, as he addresses not only problems of logic and analytic philosophy, (...) but also of epistemology and ethics. Geach's engaging discussions of human nature, truth, goodness, and love provide probing insight into perennial themes in an appealing, highly readable style which is nevertheless forceful and exacting. Geach knows the subjectivity of his own experience and belief and is able to illuminate that experience and belief by submitting it to a rational and philosophical inquiry. His avowed Catholic perspective is neither a weapon nor a shield. It is an integral part of the sustained, systematic, and constructive approach to philosophy demonstrated in these essays. They will certainly provoke serious reflection even in those inclined to disagree with Geach's conclusions. (shrink)

In G. K. Chesterton's story The Doom of the Darnaways, Lord Darnaway put on the spines of dummy books in his library such empty designations as The Snakes of Ireland and The Religion of Frederick the Great : I too might appear to have chosen a non-subject for this paper. My coming to the contrary conclusion was the unwitting work of the man whom Balliol College employed to give us tutorials in political philosophy. I soon noticed that his interpretation of (...) Hobbes seemed to be based on a few chapters of Leviathan ; desiring to get material for probing questions, and allured by Hobbes's style, I quickly devoured the whole of Leviathan. This reading left me with an abiding respect for the moral and political philosophy of Hobbes; his religious views, at this time, I found curious rather than impressive, but already I had no doubt that they were not mere hollow professions thinly cloaking an immoralist atheism, but were considered opinions sincerely held. (shrink)

Co-authored letter to the APA to take a lead role in the recognition of teaching in the classroom, based on the participation in an interdisciplinary Conference on the Role of Advocacy in the Classroom back in 1995. At the time of this writing, the late Myles Brand was the President of Indiana University and a member of the IU Department of Philosophy.

Thomas Aquinas was first and foremost a Christian theologian. Yet he was also one of the greatest philosophers of the Middle Ages. Drawing on classical authors, and incorporating ideas from Jewish and Arab sources, he came to offer a rounded and lasting account of the origin of the universe and of the things to be found within it, especially human beings.

Dies bietet einen knappen Überblick über Leben und Werk des britischen Philosophen P. T. Geach. Unter anderem wird vorgeführt, mithilfe welches Arguments Geach die Sein/Sollen-Schranke zu überwinden beanspruchte.

G.E. Moore said that rightness was obviously a matter of maximising plain goodness. Peter Geach and Judith Thomson disagree. They have both argued that ‘good’ is not a predicative adjective, but only ever an attributive adjective: just like ‘big.’ And just as there is no such thing as plain bigness but only ever big for or as a so-and-so, there is also no such thing as plain goodness. They conclude that Moore’s goodness is thus a nonsense. However attention (...) has been drawn to a weakness in their arguments. Mahrad Almotahari and Adam Hosein have sought to plug that weakness. If their plug holds, then there is no goodness. Doing most of their work is the following premise: adjective φ is predicative only if it can be used predicatively in ‘x is a φ K’ otherwise it is attributive. In this paper I argue that this premise is false, that their plug does not hold and that if one is to reject plain goodness it will have to be for other reasons. (shrink)

Peter Geach claims in Good and Evil that there can never be “just good or bad, there is only being a good or bad so-and-so” and thereby denies that goodness can ever be used in a non-relative sense. Although his rejection of absolute goodness might initially seem to be a startling and mistaken departure from the Thomistic understanding, I argue that an examination of Thomas’s texts reveal a strong agreement between them, one grounded in a common rejection (...) of univocal goodness. For both, “good” is relative to the nature of a being. To defend the relativity of goodness, I consider two objections: first, that relativizing goodness leads to subjectivism. Second, that divine goodness is absolute and non-relative. In answering these objections, I show that in both Thomas’s medieval and Geach’s modern accounts “good” is an analogical perfection relative to a nature. In this way, then, goodness is objectively relative. (shrink)

Peter Geach claims in Good and Evil that there can never be “just good or bad, there is only being a good or bad so-and-so” and thereby denies that goodness can ever be used in a non-relative sense. Although his rejection of absolute goodness might initially seem to be a startling and mistaken departure from the Thomistic understanding, I argue that an examination of Thomas’s texts reveal a strong agreement between them, one grounded in a common rejection (...) of univocal goodness. For both, “good” is relative to the nature of a being. To defend the relativity of goodness, I consider two objections: first, that relativizing goodness leads to subjectivism. Second, that divine goodness is absolute and non-relative. In answering these objections, I show that in both Thomas’s medieval and Geach’s modern accounts “good” is an analogical perfection relative to a nature. In this way, then, goodness is objectively relative. (shrink)

Planners increasingly rely on collaborative planning models that engage stakeholders to develop plans through consensus-based nego-tiations. While support for using collabora-tive planning models is growing, evaluation of their effectiveness is in its infancy. This paper reports on a case study evaluation, using a multiple criteria evaluation method, of an inno-vative collaborative planning process to pre-pare a strategic land use plan for a region in British Columbia, Canada. The study reveals that the collaborative planning process gen-erated important benefits, including improved relationships (...) and understanding, even though it did not result in consensus agreement on a plan. The outcome also shows that the plan did not result in consensus because some stakeholders were not sufficiently engaged in the process. In addition, an unrealistic timeline was imposed that led to a final offer selection process whose result was ultimately rejected by the government. (shrink)

Conflicts have arisen between communities and operators of confined animal feeding as farms have become bigger in order to maintain their competitiveness. These conflicts have been difficult to resolve because measuring and allocating the benefits and costs of livestock production is difficult. This papers demonstrates a policy tool for promoting compromise whereby the community gets reduced negative impacts from livestock while at the same time continues to benefit from livestock jobs, taxes, and related economic activity. Public economic benefits and public (...) economic costs of confined animal feeding operations are estimated for every farm and affected house in Craven County, North Carolina. The results show public economic benefits of $5.7 million and public economic costs of $2.2 million, but that the ratio of benefits to costs for individual farm-house pairs varies in important ways across the 26 hog farms in Craven County. (shrink)