That aristotle should have been inclined to think of women as defective men is, Perhaps, Overdetermined. But the psychological and sociological factors that contributed to his male chauvinism should not be allowed to obscure the role his metaphysics played in the way he conceived gender difference. Basic metaphysical constraints left aristotle with no entirely satisfactory way of understanding gender identity. Since we today are still so strongly influenced by aristotle's ways of thinking about essence and classification, His problem with gender (...) difference is also our problem. (shrink)

Logically, weighting is transitive, but similarity is not, so clustering cannot be either. Entailments must help a child to review attribute lists more efficiently. Children's understanding of exceptions to generic claims precedes their ability to articulate explanations. So agency, as enabling constraint, may show coherent covariation with attributes, as mere extensional, observable effect of intensional entailments.

William Albert Crawford-Frost was a Canadian born philosopher who developed a unique form of idealism that he called the Philosophy of Integration. This he presented in 1906 in a book by that title which he described in the subtitle as An Explanation of the Universe and of the Christian Religion. What I have taken the liberty of calling his Fusion Philosophy is the metaphysical theory outlined in this work as explained and developed further in his two other books, Old Dogma (...) in a New Light, and A New Theory of Evolution, as well as in a number of shorter pamphlets. I am using the term “fusion” rather than “integration” partly to avoid the social and political emphasis which the latter word has since acquired. However, I am not at all unhappy that my term “fusion” calls to mind our developing nuclear technology since, as will be seen, it is an implication of Crawford-Frost’s idealism that the development and application of nuclear fission, as opposed to fusion, is quite literally nothing less than the work of the Devil. This makes Crawford-Frost’s philosophy of some interest to us today, though I think that his unique form of idealism is, in many ways, interesting in itself. (shrink)

In their History of Canadian philosophy, The Faces of Reason, Leslie Armour and Elizabeth Trott introduce the concept “philosophical federalism” to describe a tendency shared by many of the early Canadian idealists, a willingness to attempt to understand and accommodate philosophical positions opposed to their own. In this paper I wish to examine the relationship this concept bears to another one, which many still regard as merely an Utopian ideal, that of world federalism.

Josiah Royce relates the following story concerning the writing and publication of Johann Gottlieb Fichte's first major work, the Attempt at a Critique of All Revelation.Fichte … called upon Kant at Königsberg, in July, 1791. The aged, prudent, and … highly economical philosopher regarded this reverent, fiery, but obviously impecunious young disciple with a certain suspicion, and received his confidences coolly. The rebuff only heated Fichte the more. He tarried in Königsberg two months, in order … to write, for presentation (...) to Kant, a work on religious philosophy, which, once finished, proved to be so thoroughly in Kant's spirit that, when in the spring of the next year the book was published anonymously, it was very generally hailed by Kant's admirers as a new production of the master's own genius. Kant himself had to correct this misapprehension, and in doing so named, and now with warm praise, the real author. (shrink)

Callicott’s basic mistake in his much regretted paper ”Animal Liberation: A Triangular Affair” is to think of the anthropocentric, zoocentric, and biocentric perspectives as mutually exclusive alternatives. An environmental ethics requires, instead, a polycentric perspective that accommodates and does justice to all three positions in question. I explain the polycentric perspective in terms of an analogy derived from the pioneering work of Canadian philosopher Rupert C. Lodge and distinguish it from both pragmatism and moral pluralism.

Callicott’s basic mistake in his much regretted paper ”Animal Liberation: A Triangular Affair” is to think of the anthropocentric, zoocentric, and biocentric perspectives as mutually exclusive alternatives. An environmental ethics requires, instead, a polycentric perspective that accommodates and does justice to all three positions in question. I explain the polycentric perspective in terms of an analogy derived from the pioneering work of Canadian philosopher Rupert C. Lodge and distinguish it from both pragmatism and moral pluralism.