Modern schooling in Korea, which was officially established by law in 1949, is well known for its function as an engine of economic success in modern Korea. Although this fact seems to be world-wid...

서문 제1장 언어적 공간 인식 비교 분석 1.서론 2.공간 인식을 통해 본 한국어와 영어의 차이점 3.두 언어의 차이점에 대한 영어 작문 분석 4.마무리 제2장 총칭성의 비교 분석 1.서론 2.명사구에서의 총칭성 3.동사의 내재적 분류와 총칭성과의 상관성 4.동사 시제-상의 반영으로서의 총칭성 5.총칭성의 해석 원리 6.마무리 제3장 수동구문과 어휘부에서의 행위성 비교 분석 1.서론 2.수동 구문 유형의 차이와 행위성 3.동사 어휘의 행위성과 유생성의 실현 4.마무리 제4장 지각동사 의미론 비교 분석 1.서론 2.지각 동사 보어 유형과 의미의 상호 작용 3.시각 동사의 다의성 양상 4.청각 동사와 활성역의 (...) 상호 작용 5.마무리 제5장 술어적 소유 구문 비교 분석 1.서론 2.국부주의와 소유의 원천 도식 3.술어적 소유구문 도식 비교 4.도식 선택 원리 및 번역 텍스트 분석 5.마무리 제6장 Tough 구문의 기능에 관한 비교 분석 1.서론 2.'tough'구문과 정보포장이론 3.'tough'구문의 총칭성 4.마무리 제7장 보문소 의미론 비교 분석 1.비교 2.'언술적/사실적'해석 구분과 보문소 3.IRH와 보문소 교체 4.의미 요소와 보문소 교체 5.마무리 제8장 유동 양화사 구문 비교 분석 1.서론 2.위치 제약과 초점 정보성 3.유동 양화사의 중의성 양상 4.마무리 제9장 사역구문의 함축성 비교 분석 1.서론 2.사역의 정의 및 분류 3.도상성과 사역성의 관련성 4.Cause의 함축성 위계와 ᅵ연속성 5.영어와 한국어의 우언적 사역 6.마무리 제10장 부사의 위치와 위치 유표성에 대한 비교 분석 1.서론 2.영어와 한국어의 부사 위치 및 거울상 효과 3.부사 어순의 유표성 논의 4.마무리 참고문헌. (shrink)

v.1. Yuhak ŭi parwŏn kwa wansŏng -- v. 2. Chungguk Yuhak ŭi chŏn'gae -- v. 3. Han'guk ŭi Yuhak (sang) -- v. 4. Han'guk ŭi Yuhak (ha) -- v. 5. Ilbon kwa Pet'ŭnam ŭi Yuhak.

1. Chosŏn sidae Kyŏnghak ŭi kwanchŏm kwa yŏnbyŏn -- 2. Han'guk Kyŏnghak yŏn'gu ŭi hoego wa chŏnmang -- 3. Han'guk Kyŏnghak ŭi chŏn'gae wa t'ŭkching -- 4. "Taehak" haesŏk ŭi yŏn'gu hyŏnhwang kwa hyangbang -- 5. Chosŏn sidae "Chungyong" haesŏk ŭi yangsang kwa t'ŭching : Tosŏl ŭl chungsim ŭro -- 6. Chosŏn chŏn'gi kyŏngsŏ haesŏk kwa Yi Hwang, Cho Sik ŭi Kyŏnghak -- 7. Chosŏn hugi Yŏngnam ŭi Kyŏnghak yŏn'gu wa sot'ong ŭi mosaek -- 8. Paekho Yun Hyu ŭi kyŏnghakkwan (...) -- 9. 18-segi ŭi haksul tonghyang kwa Yi Ik ŭi Kyŏnghak -- 10. Sŏngho Yi Ik "Taehak", "Chungyong" haesŏk. (shrink)

Ni le potreba po logični samorazjasnitvi tista, ki duhoslovne znanosti povezuje s filozofijo. Gre predvsem za to, da ti. duhoslovne znanosti same predstavljajo problem za filozofijo: kar je bilo povedano in kar se da povedati o njihovi logični, spoznavnoteoretski utemeljitvi in o razlogih za njihovo znanstveno samostojnost v razmerju do naravoslovnih znanosti, daleč zaostaja za tem, kar duhoslovne znanosti so in kar pomenijo filozofiji.The need for logical self-explication is not the only thing that relates human sciences to philosophy. The primary (...) reason for it is that the so-called human sciences themselves represent an issue for philosophy: what has been and can be said about their logical, epistemological foundation and about the reasons for their scientific independence in relation to natural sciences is lagging behind what human sciences are and mean to philosophy. (shrink)

3. Han-Chung kŭnse chŏngch'i sasangsa pigyo.

이 글의 주된 목적은 최한기의 ‘측인’(測人)이 1) 고전의 상법적 판단에 의존하면서도, 유가적 도리(道理)의 실천 여부를 최종적 판단 근거로 제시한다는 점에서 ‘상법의 유가적 확장물’로 규정될 수 있으며, 2) ‘상호주의적 구조’를 함축, 타인과의 상관적 영향관계 속에서 수시변통할 수 있는 중요 계기로 읽힐 수 있음을 해명하는 것이다. 최한기는 ‘사람 헤아리는 법[측인]’의 단초를 열어준 고전 상법의 경험적 성과를 높이 평가하고 그것에 적극적으로 의존하면서도, 상법적 판단이 인간을 ‘관계로부터 규정되는 존재’임을, 그리고 활동변화하는 세계에 능동적으로 대응하는 행사상(行事相)을 감안하고 있지 않다는 점에서 새로운 탐구의 필요성을 제기한다. 상법적 판단이 (...) 신뢰를 얻기 위해서는 변화하는 세계에 적극적으로 대응하는 행사상의 검증이 수반되어야만 하며, 그 실천적 행위는 반드시 ‘오륜(五倫)의 실현에 부합되는 것’이어야 한다. 결국 형모(形貌)로 보는 상격의 귀천이 행사상에 드러나는 오륜의 실천 여부에 따라 최종적으로 확정될 수 있는 것이다. 이 점에서 측인은 유가적 관점에서 재해석된 ‘상법의 변용’으로 보인다. 다른 한편으로 최한기의 측인은 ‘상호주의’를 실현할 수 있는 수시변통의 중요 계기를 담고 있다. 최한기에게 ‘나’는 공동체 안에 존재하는 ‘관계-내-존재’로서 부단히 남의 호오(好惡)에 따라 내 행위를 지속적으로 ‘교정’해 가야 하는 ‘능동적 존재’로 이해된다. 결국 최한기에게 수신(修身)과 측인은 그 자체로 확정적인 내용을 담고 있지 않으며, 타인과의 상관적 영향관계 속에서 변통의 결정적 계기가 된다. 최한기의 측인이 인간을 읽는 유일한 지침은 될 수 없다. 그러나 측인은 1) 활동변화의 관점에서 세계를 인식하고, 2) 인간을 ‘세계-내-존재’ ‘관계-내-존재’로 규정, 끊임없이 상호작용하며 수시변통해야 하는 존재로 규정한다는 점에서 이전 상법과 구분되는 이론적 진전을 보여 준다. 인간이 타인을 인식하려 하는 것은 결국 ‘상호작용’을 위한 것이라는 점을 상기해본다면, 최한기의 측인은 인간의 삶에서 상호작용의 중요성을 환기시켜 준다는 점에서 의미를 지닌다. (shrink)

儒學思想의 基底를 이루고 있는 것은 經學이다. 經學이란, 해석자가 경전이라는 권위에 기대어 자신의 시대적⋅사회적⋅사상적 입장을 투영하여 재해석하여 자신의 이상과 신념을 표현하는 학문이라고 할 수 있다. 우리나라에 儒敎經典이 유입된 후 조선시대에 이르러서는 주자학적 경학이 그 주류를 형성하여 17세기까지 지속되었는데, 17세기 말부터는 주자학적 이념체계에 대한 반성과 탐색이 시도되면서 탈주자학적 경전 해석 경향이 나타나게 되었다. 이 가운데에서 필자는 運化라는 세계관을 바탕으로 하여 사상 체계를 구축한 혜강 최한기(1803∼1877)에 대해서 주목하게 되었다. 최한기의 학문을 학계에서는 흔히 ‘탈경학’이라고 표현하지만, 그가 경학에 대해서 일정한 견해를 가지고 있었다는 사실은 그의 (...) 저서 『通經』과 기타 經典에 대한 언급에서 증명된다. 그러나 그동안의 연구에서 대부분의 선행 연구자들은 최한기의 철학에 미친 經典의 영향에 대해서는 간과하는 측면이 있다. 이 논문에서는 최한기가『大學』의 八條目 중 修身⋅齊家⋅治國⋅平天下에 대해서 논술한 부분을 참고하여 그의 이상사회론에 대해 분석한다. 현존하는 그의 저서에서 『大學』 조목에 대한 부분을 보면 그는 三綱領보다는 八條目을 주로 언급하였고, 그 중에서 특히 修身⋅齊家⋅治國⋅平天下에 대해서 주로 언급하였다. 이 부분은 최한기 이전의 조선 학자들과 다른 독창적인 해석으로써 주목할 만 하다. 그러나 그의 『通經』은 序文 이외에 현존하지 않으므로, 그의 저술 가운데에서 특히 『神氣通』, 『推測錄』, 『氣學』, 『人政』에서 그의 修身⋅齊家⋅治國⋅平天下 관련 논술을 三等運化의 구조를 차용하여 분석하고, 그의 이상사회론의 근거를 찾아보았다. (shrink)

혜강 최한기의 사상적 특징은 자연과 인간의 소통 관계를 해명하는 것이다. 또한 사회의 발전 논리를 기의 운동성에서 찾고, 그 논리적 구도를 재조직하여 사회적 발전 구도를 만드는 것이다. 곧 기의 본질적 특성인 형질성과 운동성을 자연의 전형 및 합리성으로 삼아 인간 사회의 합리성과 변화를 해명하는 것이다. 나아가 자연에 기초한 사회 발전의 논리를 확대하여 사회적 건전성의 조건이 무엇인지를 탐색한다. 그는 유가의 전통적 경세론에 기초하여 이 질문에 답한다. 그것은 기의 객관성과 운동성에 기초한 사무론의 전개이다. 그리고 다양한 사무에서 발생하는 사회적 이익을 소통시키는 논리의 제시이다. 곧 운화개념에 (...) 기초한 통공역사(通功易事)의 논리를 제시한 것이다. 통공역사는 사회적 재화의 소통, 즉 사회적 부의 분배 문제에 귀결되고, 사회적 공공성을 실현하는 논리가 된다. 이것은 현대 사회의 사회복지 및 사회정의에 연결시킬 수 있다. 이 점에서 우리는 사회적 재화의 소통에 따른 사회적 건전성의 확보와 사회 구성원의 행복을 말할 수 있다. 그리고 다양한 사회 구성원이 공존할 수 있는 근거를 말할 수 있다. (shrink)

Since the middle of the 19th century, East Asia, especially Korea, was oppressed externally by the imperialism of Japan and others while internally long-lasting political convention like in-law government was driving the country into troubles at home and abroad. Witnessing such a situation and building up scholarly capability through reading over nearly all spheres, a Confucian philosopher, Ch’oe Han-gi (崔漢綺, 1803-1877), philosophized about the clue to the solution of such a choking phenomenon. Ch’oe believed that there was movement, ki (matter, (...) material force, energy) of revolving transformation inherent in all things, people, or objects. Grasping even the principle and order of existence inherent in things from the viewpoint of ki, he tried to change the traditional theory on the law of existence of things that there existed an ontological reason lacking in motility, which was more dominant than anything existing in the universe and which ruled over the world. From this, he elucidated that the Way, an identity that rules over all affairs and things, was not simply one but diverse. This means, on one hand, that he tentatively accepted the relativity of things. On the other hand, he also taught us “oneness in all things” in which all including human beings exist in close connection to each other transcending the relativity or “agreement” in which they exist in harmony as one and “unity” in which they are united into one. (shrink)

Ki Jeong-jin is the one of the most famous Neo-Confucian theorists of the late Joseon Dynasty, and he is well known as a proposer of the theory of statements that there is only one Principle although the phenomena vary. He particularly emphasizes the role and authority of Principle. His arguments related to the theory were mainly raised in the work of Napryangsaeui. He, in this work, explicitly reveals the intention to resolve the issues of the nature of humans and things (...) in the Ho-hak debate. But he has never directly participated in the debate. Instead, after his death, some debates over Napryangsaeui arose between his students and Jeon Woo. This paper aims to analyze Ki Jeong-jin’s theory by comparison with the view of Han Wonjin who represents the theory of nature of humans and things in the Ho-hak school, and with the issues of debate between Ki Jeong-jin’s students and Jeon Woo. Particularly, we focused on the matter of relation between ‘completeness and incompleteness’ and ‘original nature’. Through this analysis, we could expand the understanding of the aspects discussed in the theory on the similarities and differences in nature of humans and things, and the significance of Ki Jeong-jin’s theory. Furthermore, in the history of Neo-Confucianism in the Joseon Dynasty, we could shed light on the reconstruction process of the philosophical statements that there is only one Principle but the phenomena vary. (shrink)

In lieu of an abstract, here is a brief excerpt of the content:BOOK REVIEWS The Incarnation of God: An Introduction to Hegel's Theological Thought as Prolegomena to a Future Christology. By HANS Kii'NG. Translated by J. R. Stephenson. New York: Crossroad, 1987. Pp. 601. $37.50 (cloth bound). This is an imposing book (first German edition, 1970), not only in length, but in breadth of presentation. Kiing, in the introduction, outlines the philosophical, theological and cultural milieus out of which Hegel's theology (...) and philosophy emerged. In the next 400 pages (seven chapters), Kiing thoroughly articulates the historical development of Hegel's theological and philosophical thought as expressed in his successive writings, specifically examining and evaluating the christological elements. Kiing's final chapter interprets Hegel's Christology in light of recent biblical historical/critical methodology, by way of a prolegomenon to a future Christology. The book concludes with five integral historical/theological excursus which take up specific questions that arise out of this Hegelian enterprise, for example: "Does God suffer?," "The Dialectic of the Attributes of God," "Immutability of God?". In the preface to this English edition, Kiing states that the purpose of this work is to "provide theologians with an introduction to Hegel's theological and christological thought.... [It will be] a many-leveled 'invitation' into Hegel's life and 'thought, with particular reference to his religious world, and then into his theology and Christology " (p. ix). "Moreover,.this book is an introduction to Hegel's thought by way of 'prolegomena to a future Christology '. In ·these pages we endeavour to return... a provisional reply that will take us some way in the right direction" (p. x). Why did Kiing look to Hegel for the clue to a future Christology? His thesis is that "the biblical message concerning a God who is by no means separated from the world but rather operates within it, and who is by no means stuck immovable and immutable in an unhistorical and suprahistorical realm but rather performs living acts in hi&tory can be better understood [along the lines of Hegelian thought] than in terms of the metaphysics of either classical Greece or the middle ages" (p. xii). Any student of historical or philosophical theology/christology will be captivated by Kiing's treatment of.the development of Hegel's ilhought. Undoubtedly he has mastered Hegel's life, writings and 698 694 BOOK REVIEWS thought, and presents these in a clear, complete and engaging manner. Kiing notes that Hegel, beginning with his student days at Tiihingen, was influenced by three strong cultural and intellectual currents: the Enlightenment as it specifically culminated in the thought of Kant, the French Revolution, and the rise of the Romantic movement. Kiing shows that, while the young Hegel was acquainted with the Bible, and even,though he already displayed an interest in the role of religion (folk religion) as formative of society, nowhere was he "seized in a lively and inward fashion by the Christian faith, by the figure of Christ himself" (p. 54). To rthe contrary, Hegel's early experience of Christianity was lifeless and joyless. During his subsequent time in Bern, Hegel's evaluation of Jesus un· derwent a transformation. Hegel became fascinated with Greek religion, not because it was true, but because it embodied the culture and spirit of the people. Developing this train of thought, he stated that "The supreme end of man is morality, and his religious bent is pre· eminent among his aptitudes for promoting that end" (p. 69). In light of this, Hegel considered Jesus,to lack the humane and universal scope of Socrates, who was " the paradigm of a free, good and humane Hellenism and of harmony with nature, world and state " (p. 63). Jesus' teaching was too much an authoritarian imposition upon people rarther than, like Socrates', a nurturing of their inner spirit and life. Shordy, as reflected in his Life of Jesus, Hegel's view of Jesus was to change. Now he was placed above Socrates, not because he was acknowledged to be the eternal Son of God, nor because he reconciled mankind to God by his death on the cross, but rather because he per· sonified the divine ideal of virtue that is so necessary for social order. " Whart is... (shrink)

1. Tan'gun sinhwa ŭi wŏnhyŏngjŏk segyegwan kwa p'ungnyu chŏngsin -- 2. Wŏnhyo ŭi hwajaeng sasang kwa muaehaeng ŭi silch'ŏn -- 3. Ŭisang ŭi 'Hwaŏm ilsŭng pŏpkyedo' e nat'anan Hwaŏm sasang -- 4. Chinul ŭi Tono chŏmsu wa Chŏnghye ssangsu sasang -- 5. Sambong Chŏng To-jŏn ŭi Pulgyo paech'ŏk ŭi naeyong kwa sŏngkyŏk -- 6. T'oegye Yi Hwang ŭi ch'ŏrhakchŏk ipchang kwa 'Kyŏng' sasang -- 7. Kobong Ki Tae-sŭng ŭi hangmun chŏngsin kwa ch'ŏrhak sasang -- 8. Ugye Sŏng Hon ŭi Tohakchŏk (...) sam kwa hangmun yŏnwŏn -- 9. Yulgok Yi I ŭi Taedong sahoeron kwa ch'ŏrhakchŏk chihyang -- 10. Sŏgye Pak Se-dang ŭi Sirhakchŏk sayu ŭi kich'o -- 11. Namdang Han Wŏn-jin ŭi yŏksa insik kwa Chosŏn chunghwajuŭi -- 12. Sŏngdam Song Hwan-gi ŭi 'T'aegŭk tosŏl' haesŏk ŭi kibon ipchang -- 13. Kanjŏng Yi Nŭng-hwa 'Chosŏn Togyosa' ŭi haksulsachŏk ŭiŭi wa han'gye -- 14. Manhae Han Yong-un i pon chuch'e ŭi munje wa minjok chagyŏl ŭi wŏnch'ik -- purok. T'algyŏnggye sidae ŭi Han'guk ch'ŏrhak ŭi inmunhakchŏk ŭiŭi wa chŏnmang: Yulgok ŭi ch'ŏrhak. (shrink)

The question of whether humans represent grammatical knowledge as a binary condition on membership in a set of well-formed sentences, or as a probabilistic property has been the subject of debate among linguists, psychologists, and cognitive scientists for many decades. Acceptability judgments present a serious problem for both classical binary and probabilistic theories of grammaticality. These judgements are gradient in nature, and so cannot be directly accommodated in a binary formal grammar. However, it is also not possible to simply reduce (...) acceptability to probability. The acceptability of a sentence is not the same as the likelihood of its occurrence, which is, in part, determined by factors like sentence length and lexical frequency. In this paper, we present the results of a set of large-scale experiments using crowd-sourced acceptability judgments that demonstrate gradience to be a pervasive feature in acceptability judgments. We then show how one can predict acceptability judgments on the basis of probability by augmenting probabilistic language models with an acceptability measure. This is a function that normalizes probability values to eliminate the confounding factors of length and lexical frequency. We describe a sequence of modeling experiments with unsupervised language models drawn from state-of-the-art machine learning methods in natural language processing. Several of these models achieve very encouraging levels of accuracy in the acceptability prediction task, as measured by the correlation between the acceptability measure scores and mean human acceptability values. We consider the relevance of these results to the debate on the nature of grammatical competence, and we argue that they support the view that linguistic knowledge can be intrinsically probabilistic. (shrink)

First analysis of the whole treatise On the sense by Theophrastus in the English language. Uses Aristotle's dialectic in its applied sense as analytical and heuristic tool to characterise the argumentative and polemical strategy on the Presocratic and Platonic views on perception and cognition.

In lieu of an abstract, here is a brief excerpt of the content:Kant's Critique of Berkeley HENRY E. ALLISON THE CLAIMTHAT KANT'S IDEALISM,or at least certain strands of it, is essentially identical to that of Berkeley has a long and distinguished history. It was first voiced by several of Kant's contemporaries such as Mendelssohn, Herder, Hamann, Pistorius and Eberhard who attacked the alleged subjectivism of the Critique of Pure Reason. 1 This viewpoint found its sharpest contemporary expression in the notorious (...) Garve-Feder review to which Kant responded at length in the Prolegomena. In subsequent times it has been championed by Schopenhauer, and most nineteenth century German commentators on the relation between the two philosophers. 2 In addition, it has been, and continues to be, the prevailing view of the vast majority of British writers on Kant, including, with significant qualifications, Norman Kemp Smith. 3 This tradition continues despite the fact that Kant specifically, and in no uncertain terms, repudiated this identification in the Prolegomena and the second edition of the Critique. In both works he responds to the charges of subjectivism, and in so doing distinguishes his position from that of Berkeley, who in the eighteenth century was commonly regarded as a solipsist and denier of the "external world." 4 In contra-distinction to Kant's own critical or transcendental idealism, which explains the possibility of synthetic a priori knowledge within the realm of possible experience, Berkeley is characterized as a "dogmatic" or "visionary idealist." He is judged guilty of "degrading bodies to mere illusion" (B69), of regarding things in space as "merely imaginary entities" (B274), and of holding with all "genuine idealists" that: "all knowledge through the senses and experience is i Cf. Hans Vaihinger, Commentar zu Kant's Kritik der Reinen Vernunft (Stuttgart, Berlin, Leipzig, 1892), II, 494-505. Cf. Friederich Fredericks, Der Phainomenale Idealisraus Berkeley's und Kant's (Berlin, 1871); Robert Zimmerman, "Ober Kant's Widerlegung des Idealismus yon Berkeley" (Sitzungsberichte der Akademie der Wissenschaften, Vienna, Philox.-hist. Kl.), LXVIII (1871); Gustav Dieckert, tiber dos Verhiiltnis des Berkeleyschen ldealismus zu Kantischen Vernun]tkritik (Konitz, 1888). Tiffs is a consequence of the general British tendency to view Kant in phenomenalist terms. A typical recent example is found in P. F. Strawson, The Bounds of Sense (London, 1966). Kemp Smith in his Commentary to Kant's Critique o[ Pure Reason (2nd ed., rev., 1923) takes greaZ pains to distinguish between the subjectivist strand in Kant's thought, which is essentially identical to Berkeley's position, and the genuine critical doctrine which stands side by side with it in the text. 9 Cf. I-I.M. Bracken, The Early Reception of Berkeley's Materialism 1710-1733, rev. ed. (The Hague: Martinus Nijhoff, 1965). [43] 44 HISTORY OF PHILOSOPHY nothing but sheer illusion, and only in the ideas of pure understanding is there truth" (374). 5 One of the chief reasons for the continuation of the Kant-Berkeley tradition is that these, and similar statements about Berkeley, which we find in these works and in Kant's correspondenc e with Beck, have not been taken very seriously by Kant's critics. They are usually dismissed as obvious misinterpretations, due to Kant's ignorance of Berkeley's actual writings, and of his reliance upon distorted second and third hand accounts of Berkeley's thought such as is to be found in Beattie. Furthermore, this view is often supported by the philological reflection that Kant did not read English, and that Berkeley's writings were not yet available in German translation. 6 The philological argument, however, loses much of its force when we consider that there was indeed a German translation of Berkeley's Dialogues, which although apparently unknown to nineteenth century scholars, was readily accessible to Kant. This is to be found, together with a translation of Collier's Clavis Universalis and critical analyses, in a work by the professor of philosophy at Rostock, Johann Christian Eschenbach, entitled: Samlung der vornehmsten Schri[tsteller die die tFirklichkeit ihres eignen K~rpers und der ganzen Ki~rperwelt leugnen (Rostock, 1756). Furthermore, in addition to this work, which was probably known to Kant, there is Berkeley's important Latin work, De Motu (1721), as well as French translations of many of... (shrink)

Our competitive, service-oriented societies are taking a toll on the late-modern individual. Rather than improving life, multitasking, "user-friendly" technology, and the culture of convenience are producing disorders that range from depression to attention deficit disorder to borderline personality disorder. Byung-Chul Han interprets the spreading malaise as an inability to manage negative experiences in an age characterized by excessive positivity and the universal availability of people and goods. Stress and exhaustion are not just personal experiences, but social and historical phenomena as (...) well. Denouncing a world in which every against-the-grain response can lead to further disempowerment, he draws on literature, philosophy, and the social and natural sciences to explore the stakes of sacrificing intermittent intellectual reflection for constant neural connection. (shrink)

This book begins with a survey of various readings of Locke as a materialist, as a substance dualist, and as a property dualist, and demonstrates that these inconsistent interpretations result from a general failure of modern commentators to notice the significance of Locke’s ‘mind-body nominalism’. By illuminating this largely overlooked aspect of Locke’s philosophy, this book reveals a common mistake of previous interpretations: that of treating what Locke conceives to be ‘nominal’ as real. The nominal symmetry that Locke posits between (...) mind and body is distinct from any form of metaphysical dualism, whether substance dualism or property dualism. It is a brand of naturalism, but does not insist that the material is ontologically more basic than the mental or that the former determines the latter. On this view, the material and the mental both relate solely to a certain set of functional roles, rather than to an intrinsic property that plays these roles. The term ‘matter’ is thus rendered vague, and materialism is conceived as a precariously grounded ontological doctrine. Elaborating on this interpretation of Locke’s Essay, this book examines the insightful readings of Locke developed by seventeenth- and eighteenth-century thinkers such as Richard Burthogge, William Carroll, and Joseph Priestley. This book also seeks to clarify what Locke’s position would look like in a modern setting by noting some significant parallels with the ideas of leading contemporary philosophers such as Donald Davidson, David Lewis, and Colin McGinn. (shrink)

although mostly known to specialists nowadays, Kenelm Digby was a remarkable figure on the intellectual scene of the early seventeenth century. He has been described as “one of the most influential natural philosophers” of his time,1 and corresponded with many of the great scholars of his days, including Descartes, and the French pioneer of atomism, Pierre Gassendi. In the later years of his life, Digby, alongside men like Robert Boyle, became one of the founding members of the Royal Society.2Digby authored (...) one major work of philosophy: the Two Treatises of 1644. This work consisted of a long First Treatise on bodies, and a shorter, Second Treatise on the human soul. In the First Treatise, Digby argued... (shrink)