The point of this paper is to show that one of the three traditional theories, namely, that usually attributed to Aristotle on the strength of the famous "sea fight" passage, is indefensible. To this end I will first present the traditional theories and some of the reasons which philosophers have given for holding them. Then I will show how proponents of two of these theories can develop an invincible argument against the third.

Noam Chomsky, the founding father of generative grammar and the instigator of some of its core research programs, claims that linguistics is a part of psychology, concerned with a class of cognitive structures employed in speaking and understanding. In a recent book, Ignorance of Language, Michael Devitt has challenged certain core aspects of linguistics, as prominent practitioners of the science conceive of it. Among Devitt’s major conclusions is that linguistics is not a part of psychology. In this thesis I defend (...) Chomsky’s psychological conception of grammatical theory. My case for the psychological conception involves defending a set of psychological goals for generative grammars, centring on conditions of descriptive and explanatory adequacy. I argue that generative grammar makes an explanatory commitment to a distinction between a psychological system of grammatical competence and the performance systems engaged in putting that competence to use. I then defend the view that this distinction can be investigated by probing speakers’ linguistic intuitions. Building on the psychological goals of generative grammar and its explanatory commitment to a psychological theory of grammatical competence, I argue that generative grammar neither targets nor presupposes non-psychological grammatical properties. The latter nonpsychological properties are dispensable to grammarians’ explanations because their explanatory goals can be met by the theory of grammatical competence to which they are committed. So generative grammars have psychological properties as their subject matter and linguistics is a part of psychology. (shrink)

The argument is offered as a challenge to ecumenical theologians such as John Hick. A consideration of the life and teaching of Krishnamurti gives rise to the following argument: (1) that the statement "K spoke from Unconditioned Insight" is a reasonable formulaic expression of K’s authority in soteriological matters; (2) that the statement is as intelligible as comparable statements about Jesus or Buddha; (3) that it is more reasonable to believe the statement about K; (4) that believing the truth of (...) the statement implies deep scepticism about the truth and the soteriological efficacy of established religions, and consequently renders an ecumenical theology irrelevant. (shrink)

THIS ARTICLE TRIES TO SHOW THAT NONE OF THE FOLLOWING CLAIMS ARE A PRIORI OR DEFINITIONAL TRUTHS: 1) MIRACLES ARE RARE, OR GO AGAINST UNIFORMITIES OBSERVED IN THE WORLD; 2) MIRACLES VIOLATE NOMIC LAWS, OR STATEMENTS THAT WOULD BE LAWS BUT FOR THE OCCURRENCE OF MIRACLES; 2) MIRACLES ARE OUTSIDE THE REALM OF NOMIC LAW, ARE EITHER PARTLY OR COMPLETELY UNEXPLAINABLE IN TERMS OF NOMIC LAWS; 4) SUPERNATURAL BEINGS ARE OUTSIDE THE REALM OF NOMIC LAWS; 5) IT IS ALWAYS RATIONAL (...) TO DISCOUNT ANY OSTENSIBLE EVIDENCE FOR MIRACLES; TO EXPLAIN IT IN SOME TERMS OTHER THAN BY SAYING GENUINE MIRACLES ACTUALLY OCCURRED. (shrink)

The question can be put whether Nostra Aetate is addressing dialogue between religions,as its title would suggest, or encounter among the followers of different religions. Attention is paid first to the way the Council, in its other documents, speaks of religions. When the text of Nostra Aetate is examined, it is seen that its approach to religions is by no means exhaustive. Only a few religions are mentioned, and only positive aspects of them referred to. As regards dialogue or encounter, (...) it is shown that this really takes place between individual followers of religions, but abstraction cannot be made of the religious systems to which they belong. (shrink)

In their introduction to the first volume of The Cambridge Translations of Medieval Philosophical Texts, Norman Kretzmann and Eleonore Stump—the founding editors of this series—noted the lack of access contemporary scholars have to medieval texts, commenting that “Most of the surviving philosophical literature of the Middle Ages is still unavailable in printed editions of the Latin texts, let alone translations into modern languages”. They then explained that both “this volume and its projected successors … have the broader aim of alleviating (...) a little the dearth of English translations of medieval philosophy”. Given that Pasnau’s Mind and Knowledge is only the third volume in the series to be published in fourteen years, one can hardly claim that the Cambridge Translations series is filling the gap in available English translations quickly. Fortunately, one can confidently claim that it’s being filled well. Volume 3, Mind and Knowledge, not only presents a well-chosen and well-translated selection of significant texts from the Christian Latin philosophical tradition, it presents them in a way that enhances the value of the translations themselves. The general introduction to the volume, the brief introduction to each text, the list of textual emendations, and the three-part bibliography will prove highly useful tools for both students and scholars interested in these topics and this period in philosophical thought. (shrink)

This book will be of interest to advanced students in philosophy, historians of logic and medieval philosophy, as well as logicians who wish to understand the significant contribution that Robert Kilwardby's thirteenth-century commentary on Aristotle's Prior Analytics made to those fields. Paul Thom's analysis treats Kilwardby's views on propositions, syllogisms, reduction, necessity, and contingency with depth and finesse, revealing what he takes to be the Aristotelian ontology underlying them. Helpful summaries remind the reader of the important formal and ontological results (...) of each chapter. The book is a genuine logical treat, despite a misleading typo of '' for '' at page 108, l.26, and the fact that most readers will need a good, strong magnifying glass for some of Brill's printed type and superscripts. I found only a couple of drawbacks. (shrink)

Albert of Saxony was one of the great logicians of the Middle Ages, on a par with William Ockham and John Buridan. The Twenty-Five Disputed Questions on Logic treat of central issues in logic, both then and now, such as the nature of meaning, of universals, of truth, and of tense and modality; and the quality and quantity of propositions, the role of negation, and the relations of contradiction and equivalence between them. Dr. Fitzgerald has studied Albert's work extensively, (...) and previously edited the Twenty-Five Disputed Questions from the original manuscripts. This translation makes available for the first time in English this careful and exemplary examination of logical notions by an outstanding medieval thinker.-Stephen Read, University of St. Andrews. (shrink)

Global reproductive landscapes and with them cross-border routes are rapidly changing. This paper examines the reproductive routes and choices of fertility travellers from China to Russia as reported by medical professionals and fertility service providers. Providing new empirical data, it raises new ethical questions on the facilitation of cross-border reproductive travel and the commercialisation of reproductive treatment. The relaxation of the one-child policy in 2014 in China, the increasing demand for ART exceeding the capacity of national fertility clinics and the (...) difficulty of accessing treatment with donor eggs concomitant with a growing economic power of the upper–middle class are shaping the ART industry in Asia in new ways. A new development is Chinese citizens increasingly seeking ART treatment in Russia, which has a long-standing practice of ART governed by a liberal legislation. Furthermore, as China prohibits the export of gametes, Chinese fertility travellers rely on acquiring donor gametes once starting treatment abroad. Clinicians in Russia report three strategies amongst their Chinese patients: One group is using donor eggs of women of Asian appearance living in Russia or is hiring women of resembling appearance from third-party countries to donate their eggs in Russia to create resemblance in their offspring. Another group is buying white donor gametes to create Eurasian mixed children and thus ‘enhance’ their offspring. Providing novel empirical data, this article informs ethical deliberation and raises imminent questions for further research in this understudied geographic region and on cross-border reproductive treatment. (shrink)

Microaggressions are a new moral category that refers to the subtle yet harmful forms of discriminatory behavior experienced by members of oppressed groups. Such behavior often results from implicit bias, leaving individual perpetrators unaware of the harm they have caused. Moreover, microaggressions are often dismissed on the grounds that they do not constitute a real or morally significant harm. My goal is therefore to explain why microaggressions are morally significant and argue that we are responsible for their harms. I offer (...) a conceptual framework for microaggressions, exploring the central mechanisms used for identification and the empirical research concerning their harm. The cumulative harm of microaggressions presents a unique case for understanding disaggregation models for contributed harms, blame allocation, and individual responsibility within structural oppression. Our standard moral model for addressing cumulative harm is to hold all individual contributors blameworthy for their particular contributions. However, if we aim to hold people responsible for their unconscious microaggressions and address cumulative harm holistically, this model is inadequate. Drawing on Iris Marion Young's social connection model, I argue that we, as individual perpetrators of microaggressions, have a responsibility to respond to the cumulative harm to which we have individually contributed. (shrink)

In recent years, most political theorists have agreed that shame shouldn't play any role in democratic politics because it threatens the mutual respect necessary for participation and deliberation. But Christina Tarnopolsky argues that not every kind of shame hurts democracy. In fact, she makes a powerful case that there is a form of shame essential to any critical, moderate, and self-reflexive democratic practice. Through a careful study of Plato's Gorgias, Tarnopolsky shows that contemporary conceptions of shame are far too (...) narrow. For Plato, three kinds of shame and shaming practices were possible in democracies, and only one of these is similar to the form condemned by contemporary thinkers. Following Plato, Tarnopolsky develops an account of a different kind of shame, which she calls "respectful shame." This practice involves the painful but beneficial shaming of one's fellow citizens as part of the ongoing process of collective deliberation. And, as Tarnopolsky argues, this type of shame is just as important to contemporary democracy as it was to its ancient form. Tarnopolsky also challenges the view that the Gorgias inaugurates the problematic oppositions between emotion and reason, and rhetoric and philosophy. Instead, she shows that, for Plato, rationality and emotion belong together, and she argues that political science and democratic theory are impoverished when they relegate the study of emotions such as shame to other disciplines. (shrink)

On 14 January 1999, the woman theologian Christina Landman published an article in the religious column, Godsdiens Aktueel, of the Afrikaans daily newspaper Beeld under the heading ‘Poligamie, ditsem!’ (Yes, for polygamy!). In the article, Landman pondered whether polygamy – which is allowed in South Africa for indigenous cultures – would not be an advantage for the Afrikaans society where extra-marital affairs were allegedly high. There was an immediate and long-running reaction to this article in the Afrikaans, as well (...) as in the English media, nationally and internationally, in the printed media, as well as on radio and television. This article will isolate themes in the responding letters of Afrikaans readers. The rejection of polygamy by Afrikaans readers rests on arguments that it is unbiblical, dehumanising to women and impractical. On the other hand, those Afrikaans readers who opt for polygamy argue that multiple-partner-relationships can save marriages from ending in divorce because of extra-marital affairs and can lighten the burden on overworked women. Contribution: This article contributes to the debate on polygamy and in particular from the Afrikaans population in South Africa whose culture and religion forbid polygamy. The discussion and findings as thematised in this article contribute to a body of knowledge not been dealt with in academic research. (shrink)

Freedom and the subject in Jean-Paul Sartre -- Freedom and necessity in Jacques Derrida -- Freedom and the subject in contemporary philosophy and theory -- Theorizing pathologies and therapeutics of freedom.