Many modern-day groups differ from prehistoric ones regarding the proportion of members who are related to any particular individual. From an evolutionary mismatch lens, an appreciation of this disparity could help better explain the potential dilution of group cohesion during peacetime and inform novel, more effective approaches to enhancing group unity – strategies that might enhance national security around the globe.

A previously unpublished manuscript found among Hartshorne's papers, the book was completed by Hartshorne in the mid-1980s and constitutes a vigorous and wide-ranging defense of his “neoclassical metaphysics” of creative freedom. Eight of the chapters are revisions of articles Hartshorne published between 1953 and 1986; the remaining five chapters and the preface were not published prior to the appearance of this book.

After comparing Fr. 6 with the literature of its day, Mansfeld concludes that Parmenides' poem is not a polemic against Heracleitus. Rather, the poem reflects an opinion of the low estate of human knowledge not uncommon in that day. This does not, of course, preclude any influence of Heracleitus on the poem. In a second chapter, Mansfeld analyzes the argument of Fr. 3 as a disjunctive syllogism and argues that Parmenides is the founder of a tradition of logic continued by (...) Zeno, the Megarians, and the Stoics. The final chapters are devoted to a discussion of the Doxa and the central place of the Proem in interpreting the poem as a whole. The book contains an extensive bibliography, topical index, and index of Greek texts.—O. J. L. (shrink)

The contents of Professor Hancock’s book are somewhat more modest than its title. Although the author begins by writing "the primary aim of this book is to give a critical presentation of the main types of ethical theory developed in the twentieth century", he immediately limits his undertaking: first to ethics in the Anglo-American tradition, then to the work of academic philosophers, as well as to meta-ethics. He offers several reasons for so limiting himself, including his own special interests in (...) ethics. (shrink)

This work is a study of Plato's ethical theory and in particular his paradoxical theses that virtue is knowledge and vice is ignorance and that no one voluntarily does evil. In the opening chapters O'Brien discusses Plato's debt to Homer and Hesiod and to the historians and tragedians. The succeeding chapters are devoted to an analysis of the ethical doctrines of over a dozen dialogues ranging from the Apology to the Laws. The principles of interpretation employed in the analysis are: (...) 1) each doctrine must be understood in relation to every other as well as to the whole, 2) we must give a literary analysis of the dialogues in addition to a textual and philosophical one, since Plato often prefers to suggest his view through his literary art rather than give them explicit statement, and 3) statements must be interpreted in context. From an application of these principles, Professor O'Brien concludes that Plato's ethical theory constitutes a unified set of doctrines. Elements which are often thought to be antithetic, i.e., the Socratic paradoxes and the partition of the soul, are seen to be complementary. The one affirms the rational unity of human nature and action and the other, the irrational multiplicity of both. In his words, they affirm "... virtue is knowledge, and it is more than knowledge." The book contains a long bibliography and an extensive index of topics discussed and texts cited. As a result, O'Brien's view on nearly every topic and text is readily accessible.—O. J. L. (shrink)