Thirty-four contributors address a variety of topics, from ancestral worship to transsexual masquerades, from metrical verse in the psalms to temples, poetic expression and linguistic performances. They bespeak the unique characteristics of Staal and his ability to break down barriers between academic disciplines. With contributors from around the world, this is a tribute to the forty years of scholarly work Frits Staal has invested in the foundation of a genuinely human science.

Polemisch essay tegen de strekking van het werk "Over zin en onzin in filosofie, religie en wetenschap" door Frits Staal.

Russkiĭ kosmizm v poiskakh absoli︠u︡ta : paralleli i peresechenii︠a︡ v muzykalʹnom, poėticheskom i izobrazitelʹnom tborchestve 1910-1920-kh godov -- Liki Moderna -- Putʹ k modernu : Georgiĭ Lʹvovich Katuar -- Stilʹ modern v tvorchestve Frederika Diliusa : kont︠s︡ert dli︠a︡ fortepiano s orkestrom do minor -- Stilʹ modern i tvorchestvo Bely Bartoka (na primere opery "Zamok gert︠s︡oga Sini︠a︡i︠a︡ Boroda") -- Frit︠s︡ Kreĭsler i stilʹ modern -- Klod Debi︠u︡ssi i Moris Ravelʹ : muzyka dli︠a︡ arfy -- Klod Debi︠u︡ssi : dvenadt︠s︡atʹ ėti︠u︡dov dli︠a︡ fortepiano (...) : ot ėkzersisa do installi︠a︡t︠s︡ii -- O dikhotomii "muzhskogo" i "zhenskogo" v Pi︠a︡toĭ sonate A.N. Skri︠a︡bina (na primere motivnoĭ metriki) -- Pod znakom moderna : A.N. Skri︠a︡bin i S.S. Prokofʹev v 1913 godu -- Avangard i modern v retrospektive -- O proi︠a︡vlenii︠a︡kh "modernizma" v ispolnitelʹskom iskusstve : F. Buzoni, M. I︠U︡dina, G. Gulʹd -- Sudʹba providt︠s︡a : fortepiannai︠a︡ muzyka Ėrika Sati v sovremennom akademicheskom muzykalʹnom mire -- Otgoloski ėpokhi modern : o nekotorykh smyslovykh osobennosti︠a︡kh sovremennykh fortepiannykh sochineniĭ (Ė. Denisov, S. Slonimskiĭ, G. Zaĭt︠s︡ev) -- Zapadnye pianisty - ispolniteli russkogo avangarda pervoĭ volny : Sh. Shleĭermakher, Kh. Khenk, M.-A. Amlen -- Muzyka k filʹmu "Kabinet doktora Kaligari" : mezhdu tvorcheskoĭ rekonstrukt︠s︡ieĭ i istoricheskoĭ imitat︠s︡ieĭ -- Podvodi︠a︡ itogi -- "Pozdniĭ modernizm" v muzyke kont︠s︡a XX - nachala XXI veka : nekotorye nabli︠u︡denii︠a︡ -- Po sledam konferent︠s︡ii "Ot moderna k futurizmu" (virtualʹnai︠a︡ beseda za kruglym stolom). (shrink)

In Landscapes and Labscapes Robert Kohler emphasized the separation between laboratory and field cultures and the creation of new "hybrid" or mixed practices as field sciences matured in the early twentieth century. This article explores related changes in laboratory practices, especially novel designs for the analysis of organism-environment relations in the mid-twentieth century. American ecologist Victor Shelford argued in 1929 that technological improvements and indoor climate control should be applied to ecological laboratories, but his recommendations were too ambitious for the (...) time. In the postwar period Frits W. Went, plant physiologist at the California Institute of Technology, created a new high-tech laboratory, dubbed a "phytotron", in the hope that it would transform plant sciences by allowing for unprecedented control of environmental variables. Went's aspirations, the research conducted in his laboratory, and its impact in initiating an international movement, are considered. Went's laboratory can be seen as a "hybrid culture" evolving in the laboratory, complementing and intersecting with some of the field practices that Kohler describes. It was also a countercultural movement against the reductionist trends of molecular biology in the 1950s and 1960s. By considering the history of the laboratory in relation to field sciences, we can explore how new funding sources and cross-disciplinary relations affected the development of field sciences, especially in the postwar period. (shrink)

In Landscapes and Labscapes Robert Kohler emphasized the separation between laboratory and field cultures and the creation of new "hybrid" or mixed practices as field sciences matured in the early twentieth century. This article explores related changes in laboratory practices, especially novel designs for the analysis of organism-environment relations in the mid-twentieth century. American ecologist Victor Shelford argued in 1929 that technological improvements and indoor climate control should be applied to ecological laboratories, but his recommendations were too ambitious for the (...) time. In the postwar period Frits W. Went, plant physiologist at the California Institute of Technology, created a new high-tech laboratory, dubbed a "phytotron", in the hope that it would transform plant sciences by allowing for unprecedented control of environmental variables. Went's aspirations, the research conducted in his laboratory, and its impact in initiating an international movement, are considered. Went's laboratory can be seen as a "hybrid culture" evolving in the laboratory, complementing and intersecting with some of the field practices that Kohler describes. It was also a countercultural movement against the reductionist trends of molecular biology in the 1950s and 1960s. By considering the history of the laboratory in relation to field sciences, we can explore how new funding sources and cross-disciplinary relations affected the development of field sciences, especially in the postwar period. (shrink)

G.E. Moore, more than either Bertrand Russell or Ludwig Wittgenstein, was chiefly responsible for the rise of the analytic method in twentieth-century philosophy. This selection of his writings shows Moore at his very best. The classic essays are crucial to major philosophical debates that still resonate today. Amongst those included are: * A Defense of Common Sense * Certainty * Sense-Data * External and Internal Relations * Hume's Theory Explained * Is Existence a Predicate? * Proof of an External World (...) In addition, this collection also contains the key early papers in which Moore signals his break with idealism, and three important previously unpublished papers from his later work which illustrate his relationship with Wittgenstein. (shrink)

Nowadays creativity is fashionable. Writers on management and organisation, for example, mention creativity as vital to entrepreneurship.1 They consider it to be as important as land, labour and capital, which form the traditional factors of production.2 And related terms such as ‘genius’ are in use again. An example of this is the widely read book Built to Last.3 Moreover, creativity and rationality are presented as alternatives. To be creative, managers are urged to put rationality aside: ‘being reasonable does not win (...) the day’ they are assured4 and ‘all progress depends on the unreasonable man’.5 This view that rationality and creativity oppose each other is, however, unsatisfactory involving, as it does, a form of epistemological schizophrenia. One excludes the other only if we adopt a simplistic concept of rationality and an esoteric view of creativity. This article, therefore, sets out to clarify the relationship between the concepts of creativity and rationality. Three ideal-type concepts of rationality will be introduced (algorithmic, judgemental, reflective) and their tolerance of novelty discussed. Then two modes of creativity (explorative and transcendentive) are distinguished, followed by a discussion of whether rationality can enhance creativity. I conclude by reviewing some factors involved in creativity, such as tolerance for ambiguity, playfulness and attentiveness, and with a short discussion of the relationship of creativity to power.6. (shrink)

Although Taylor’s scientific management is often severely criticised, his publications are seldom the subject of scrutinised, philosophical, reading. The latter is the aim of the present text. Attention is given to the idea of science, the role of extra-scientific values, the relationship of theory and practice, the societal meaning of management, presenting demarcations, presuppositions and unclarities. The conclusion notes several topics, implied by Taylor’s views and still worth reflecting upon. One example is efficiency as a seemingly context-independent concept.

Among the most outstanding discoveries of the last century is one that is not quite as momentous as the theory of relativity or cybernetics. It may even still be enigmatic. It has no one single author, it is not expressed in a single formula, conception, or invention. Nonetheless it is worth all the others combined.