Kerekh 1. Toldot ha-adam, as̀arah maʼamarot.

1. Shaʻar ha-emunah. Shaʻar Erets Yiśraʼel. Shaʻar bet din. Shaʻar ha-geʼulah. Shaʻar derekh erets. Shaʻar ha-hashḳafah. Shaʻar ha-ḥesed. Shaʻar ha-musar. Shaʻar ha-moʻadim. Shaʻar ha-midot. Shaʻar ha-misṿot -- 2. Shaʻar ha-nevuʼah. Shaʻar ha-ʻavodah. Shaʻar ha-ʻaṿerot. Shaʻar ha-tsibur. Shaʻar ha-Torah. Shaʻar ha-talmid ḥakham. Shaʻar ha-teshuvah.

ḥeleḳ 1. Mivḥar penine musar, pirḳe hagut u-maḥshavah be-nośe ha-tefilah -- ḥeleḳ 2. Otsar sipurim ʻuvdot ṿe-hanhagot be-nośe ha-tefilah.

Shaʻar ha-ṭohorah. Liḳuṭim mi-Sefer ḥasidim -- Śiḥot u-maʼamarim.

El f in de este a r tículo es demostrar que las ficciones cartesianas no son necesarias en el ámbito del conocimiento, en pa r ticular del conocimiento económico, el cual se de r iv a del análisis de la red de intereses y decisiones de los sujetos, decisiones que son f r uto del pensamiento común que determina el pensamiento de cada in d i viduo. La secuencia ca r tesiana "pensarse para pensar", en realidad se realiza de modo (...) i n v e r so: "pensar para pensarse", que da lu g ar a un nu e v o concepto de racionalid a d , reflejo de la razón de los ot r os. Esto tiene trascendentes consecuencias: la primera es la r uptura con la idea de e xistencia de un "pensamiento oculto", con el principio de que cada in d i viduo posee unos pensamientos que no pueden ser conocidos por los ot r os ; la s e gunda es también de n e gación del pensamiento estratégico, afín con la competencia económica, pero i r realiza b le dentro del pensamiento común. F inalmente y como f r uto de la incertidumbre dete r minante de las decisiones se ll e ga a la conclusión de que no e xiste tampoco una racionalidad de los ot r os, sino que actúan i r racionalmente con la "i r razón" que promu e v e el futuro incierto. (shrink)

In lieu of an abstract, here is a brief excerpt of the content:Journal of the History of Philosophy 41.2 (2003) 269-270 [Access article in PDF] Steven Harvey, editor. The Medieval Hebrew Encyclopedias of Science and Philosophy: Proceedings of the Bar-Ilan University Conference. Dordrecht: Kluwer, 2000. Pp. xi + 547. Cloth, $239.00. This fine volume, covering the proceedings of a conference at Bar-Ilan University (January, 1998), is the first book devoted to the medieval Hebrew encyclopedias of science and philosophy. According to (...) the editor, the talks at the conference "were arranged to fit together like a jigsaw puzzle," and that intention is also reflected in the current volume: It is extremely well-organized, the earlier essays provide useful background for the later ones, and the various parts of the book complement each other quite well. Though they contain much that is highly technical, the editor has succeeded in making the essays comprehensible to the non-specialist, as was his declared intention. [End Page 269]The editor's introductory essay draws the book together and makes it a coherent whole. The most important part of that essay raises the conceptual problem underlying the entire book, namely: what defines a medieval encyclopedia? The contributors do not always agree on how to answer this question, nor should we expect such agreement. Some of their criteria are: an encyclopedia must treat a subject comprehensively; it must be well-enough organized to facilitate retrieval; it is meant to be consulted, not read cover-to-cover; it is usually an eclectic collection of previously extant material, not an original composition, and certainly not a major source for new ideas. Finally, an important goal of the encyclopedist is popular enlightenment.The book's first two sections deal with the predecessors of the medieval Hebrew encyclopedias, the medieval Latin and Arabic works. Only the latter had heavy influence on the structure and content of later Hebrew works. Nevertherless, the Islamic author who had the greatest influence by far on Jews during the age of the encyclopedias under discussion, namely Averroes, is judged by Butterworth (as well as by Biesterfeldt) not to be an encyclopedist at all. The basis for this judgment is that Averroes had no interest whatsoever in popular enlightenment; his books are not introductory, and nowhere does he address himself to anyone but the expert.Nevertheless, when it comes to Averroes, it would be prudent to honor the editor's admonition that we not be too demanding with our criteria for what constitutes a medieval encyclopedia. Perhaps the corpus of Averroes's works does not make him an encyclopedist, as the essays contend. But we should not lose sight of how his works were actually used by later Hebrew writers: their Hebrew translations were copied and paraphrased extensively as state-of-the-art presentations of science on nearly every important topic. In other words, even if Averroes himself did not have the intentions of an encyclopedist for his works, later authors mined them for informative essays as if they were encyclopedias.Part 3 deals with Early Hebrew Encyclopedias. Despite the volume's otherwise outstanding organization, Woolf's fine article on Maimonides' Mishneh Torah seems out of place here, since it is by no means an encyclopedia of science and philosophy.Part 4 deals with the structure and organization of the three thirteenth-century encyclopedias that are the focus of the volume: Judah ben Solomon ha-Cohen's Midrash ha-Hokhmah; Shem-Tov ibn Falaquera's De'ot ha-Filosofim; and Gershom ben Solomon's Sha'ar ha-Shamayim. The descriptive essays are extremely useful for getting a balanced picture of these books, but perhaps of even greater value are the content outlines, which include pagination from the manuscripts to make them easier to consult.The most fascinating section of the book by far, and the most likely to become a productive model for future research, is part 5, which analyzes specific topics within the encyclopedias. These essays trace scientific problems from Aristotle to the medieval Aristotelians, especially Averroes, and then examine how they are dealt with in the Hebrew... (shrink)

[1] Sefer Orḥot Ḥayim leha-Rosh ʻim beʼur "ha-Shem orḥotenu" ... 2. Ḳunṭres Be-Shaʻar ha-melekh ʻal haḳdamat ha-Rambam, kolel tsiyunim u-meḳorim u-veʼurim be-divre ha-Rambam ṿeha-Raʼabad ... 3. Ḳunṭres Tashlum yefeh ʻenayim ʻal Seder Zeraʻim u-Ṭehorot, ʻeduyot, Tamid, Midot, Ḳenim ṿe-ʻod ṿe-hu tsiyunim ʻal mas. elu mi-Yerushalmi u-midrashim ... 4. Ḳunṭres Marʼot maḳom, ṿe-hu tsiyunim ʻal ha-meḳomot she-Rashi ṿe-Tos. meviʼim mirdrash o Yerushalmi ṿe-Tosefta ṿe-khu. ṿe-lo tsuyan meḳoro ... 5. Ḳunṭres Ṭeʻama de-ḳara, ṿe-hu ḳetsat ḥidushim ʻal ha-Torah ṿe-ʻal Neviʼim u-Khetuvim -- ḥeleḳ (...) 3. Heʻarot ʻal seder ha-Shas (ṿe-kholel gam ezeh ḳunṭresim). (shrink)

ʻInyene Orah ḥayim : ʻavodat H., tefilah, berakhot, Shabat, Rosh ha-shanah, Yom ha-kipurim, ḳiyum mitsṿot, teshuvah, ḥinukh -- ʻInyene Yoreh deʻah : Torah, tsedaḳah, ʻinyanim shonim, midot, biṭaḥon, yom huledet -- Heʻarot ʻal Talmud Yerushalmi -- Hosafot le-Sefer Derekh ʻavodato, Shaʻar ha-biṭaḥon -- Ḳunṭres Tsidḳat Ḥanah : ḥidushim ṿe-liḳuṭim ʻal hilkhot ḥag he-Pesaḥ ṿe-Hagadah shel Pesaḥ (Mahadurah 3) -- Ḳunṭres Tsemaḥ Yiśraʼel : ʻal ʻinyene minhagim (Mahadurah 2) -- Ḳunt̥res Ḥesed ṿe-emunah : heʻarot ṿe-ḥidushim ʻal Sefer ḥasidim (Mahadurah 2) -- (...) Ḳunṭres Mile di-hespeda : ʻal zeḳeni ha-r. he-ḥ. Rabi Shelomoh Ḥayim Haizler zatsal. (shrink)

The current research investigates how religiosity can influence unethicality in a consumption context. In particular, considering the link between extrinsic religious orientations and unethicality, this research clarifies why and when extrinsic religiosity leads to unethical decisions. Across two studies, findings show that ethnocentrism is both a mediator and a moderator of the effects of extrinsic religiosity on consumers’ ethical judgments. This is because extrinsic religiosity leads to ethnocentrism, and in-group loyalty manifested through ethnocentrism increases support for unethical consumer actions, thus (...) establishing ethnocentrism as a mediator. At the same time, different levels of ethnocentrism can also influence how extrinsic religiosity leads to supporting unethical consumption via self-righteousness, thus establishing ethnocentrism as a moderator. The findings from this research have significant implications for diverse stakeholders who have an interest in religiosity and consumer behavior. (shrink)

Various studies on the impact of religiousness on consumer ethics have produced mixed results and suggested further clarification on the issue. Therefore, this article examines the effect of religiousness, materialism, and long-term orientation on consumer ethics in Indonesia. The results from 356 respondents in Indonesia, the largest Muslim population in the world, showed that intrinsic religiousness positively affected consumer ethics, while extrinsic social religiousness negatively affected consumer ethics. However, extrinsic personal religiousness did not affect consumer ethical beliefs dimensions. Unlike other (...) studies in developed countries, materialism and long-term orientation influenced only a few of the consumer ethical beliefs dimensions in this study. To date, the study is one of the first empirical studies to explore the impact of religiousness on consumer ethics in Indonesia. The study contributes to the debate on the impact of religiousness on consumer ethics and can assist managers and public policymakers in their effort to mitigate unethical consumer activities in Indonesia. (shrink)

The article focuses on the complex positioning of people from disempowered backgrounds with respect to liberalism and liberal dividends. The author offers the term liberal bargain, paraphrasing Deniz Kandiyoti’s “patriarchal bargain” and Cynthia Cockburn’s “ethnic bargain,” and dwells on the interconnections between the three. The liberal bargain indicates the particular consciousness and symbolic whitening that “colorized” people tend to adopt when they attempt to cash in on the liberal promise. Within the discourse of postcolonial feminism, the concept is intended to (...) promote the discussion of power differentials among women, through refining the analytically dissatisfactory color metaphors habitually used to address issues of hegemony and ethnocentrism. (shrink)

Contractualist work in business ethics as well as in economic organization theory views opportunistic behaviors as problematic since they create economic harm and are often considered to violate ethical norms. Yet, much of the empirical literature on opportunism has adopted a rather simplistic definition of opportunistic behaviors as behaviors that violate formal and/or relational contracts and assumed that instances of opportunism can be unequivocally defined by simply referring to the content of contracts. The consequence of this assumption has been a (...) disregard for factors other than the content of contracts that may influence whether exchange partners judge an unexpected behavior they face during exchange relationships as opportunistic or not. The present investigation explores the factors that shape exchange partners’ subjective opportunism judgments through two vignette-based laboratory experiments. Results from the first experiment, where subjects were asked to take the perspective of a harmed party, show that opportunism judgments are influenced by the type of the behavior, type of the causal account provided for the behavior, perceived type of the exchange, and personality traits of the actor making the judgment. The second experiment, in which subjects were asked to take the perspective of the transgressor, demonstrates the influence of perspective. In particular, victims are more likely to assess a given unexpected behavior as opportunistic than transgressors, and their judgments do not relate to the underlying factors in the same way as the victims’ judgments. I discuss implications in terms of the governance of interfirm exchange relationships. (shrink)