During the nineteenth century period of intensive European Expansion into Canada, place was experienced with dis-ease by indigenous people. Not only was there less land available for people of the First Nations to live on as in the past centuries, but their intimate relationship with the land was disturbed causing a dis-ease, as their ability to experience place through ceremony was denied. The effects of this process of Euro-Canadian invasion within Canada created a sense of dis-ease, a sense of being (...) out of place for indigenous people. It is my contention that in order to understand health, an awareness of the dynamic connection between a people and their land is needed, recognizing that a quintessential human quality is to imbue the world with meaning in the creation of sense of place. Through examination of a variety of published and unpublished material, archival sources, memos, letters, official documentation, I explore the effects of control of the place of First Nations, on the health and healing practices of the indigenous people. (shrink)

A selective history of the benzene problem is presented, starting with August Kekule's proposal of a hexagonal structure in 1865 and his hypothesis of 1872 that the carbon-carbon bonds oscillate between single and double. Only those theories are included that were accepted or at least discussed by a significant number of chemists. Special attention is given to predictions, their empirical tests, and the effect of the outcomes of those tests on the reception of the theories. At the end of the (...) period covered by this article, chemists generally accepted the valence bond (resonance) theory proposed by Linus Pauling; some of them considered this a more sophisticated version (and thus a vindication) of Kekule's oscillation hypothesis. The sequel (to be published in the following issue) describes the replacement of the valence bond theory by the molecular orbital theory in the period ending around 1980. (shrink)

In my previous article on the benzene problem, I described how Pauling's valence bond (resonance) theory, sometimes regarded as a modernized version of Kekule's oscillation hypothesis, came to be accepted by chemists by the end of World War II. But the alternative molecular orbital theory, proposed by Mulliken, had already been developed and was regarded as quantitatively superior by many quantum chemists, though it was not as easy to visualize and did not seem to harmonize as well with traditional chemical (...) concepts. During the 1950s and 1960s, thanks to the efforts of Charles Coulson and many other theorists, the molecular orbital approach not only dominated theoretical discussions but also started to be accepted by the chemical community as a whole and became the preferred description for benzene. Possible reasons were: its greater calculational convenience when applied to large molecules; better expository methods directed toward chemists; the spectacular success of the Woodward-Hoffmann rules for pericyclic reactions and Fukui's frontier orbital theory; and the development of a general theory of aromaticity, which predicted properties of similar molecules such as cyclobutadiene (C4H4). The relative importance of these reasons is explored through a mail survey of chemists. (shrink)

The purpose of Donald Winch’s "historiographic revision" is to show that most recent interpretations of Smith have distorted his meaning because they have misread the intention of Smith’s work, treating it either as the first great justification of the nascent liberal capitalist polity, or as such a justification infiltrated by intimations of the Marxian notion of alienation. In Winch’s view, either account of Smith’s project is misleading by virtue of imposing nineteenth-century perspectives and categories upon "what is quintessentially a work (...) of the eighteenth century." The problem, then, is to determine the historically appropriate context or problematic within which the complex and at times paradoxical thought of the Wealth of Nations, the Theory of Moral Sentiments, and the Lectures on Jurisprudence can reasonably be situated. As Winch notes, his study is an application of the contextualist methodological principles of Quentin Skinner and J. G. A. Pocock, and is similar in design to recent works on Locke by John Dunn and on Hume by Duncan Forbes. (shrink)

Lévy was a left-wing student leader during the events of May 1968; Barbarism With A Human Face is a fiercely polemical transvaluation of his former values, proclaiming that what seemed to be the hope of the world is really its destruction and that what seemed to be progress is really the approaching and inevitable triumph of all the forces of darkness. This is a book of iconoclastic prophecy, whose central intention is to show that behind the mask of revolutionary benevolence (...) hums the motor of absolute evil. (shrink)

The title of this interesting study may be misleading; Crocker's subject is not Rousseau's or Hegel's conception of liberty considered in contradistinction to, say, Locke's or J. S. Mill's. The philosophy of Positive Liberty is strictly English-speaking and its intention is to argue against those within the Lockean tradition who would claim that personal liberty can only be limited by deliberate human action. Crocker is in full agreement with his opponents in holding that passion or irrationality is in no way (...) an obstacle to liberty, but he wants to persuade negative libertarians that disabilities like poverty, powerlessness, physical handicap, and manipulative information management are conditions as seriously preventive of liberty as are forcible coercion and legal prohibition. His argument is that increasing liberty requires maximizing the range and desirability of opportunities and choices rather than simply minimizing deliberate or overt restraint. The consequence for political philosophy of this position, which Crocker calls left-libertarian, is that a social commitment to personal liberty may require extensive and costly positive redistributive policies. According to Crocker, positive liberty is not a new conception of liberty, but rather a novel and more inclusive sense of the obstacles to freedom: "the emphasis shifts from the constraints to the alternatives and such matters as their range and desirability. The absence of interference by other persons appears as but one feature of liberty among several". (shrink)

Della Volpe was a professor of philosophy, one of the leading theoreticians of the Italian Communist Party in the 50s and 60s, and one of the few prominent intellectuals to retain party membership following the Hungarian revolt. Nonetheless, his Marxism is distinctly heterodox. The main thrust of Rousseau and Marx, which contains an essay of that name as well as several short papers on Soviet legality and "materialist methodology," is to establish certain continuities between Marx’s thought and earlier philosophy. Marx (...) is here depicted as attempting to solve a problem first stated by Rousseau, the problem of egalitarian liberty, and as applying the logic of modern experimental science to moral and political questions. (shrink)

J. G. Merquior is a moderate democrat and a moderate empiricist. As a democrat, he holds that political authority is legitimate only when it is controlled by widespread and egalitarian political participation; but such participation must not be allowed to obstruct individual freedom. As an empiricist, he holds that the business of the social scientist is to develop causal explanations and not only to interpret cultural significance; but such explanations must not be expressed as deductions from universal laws. In this (...) book, a "slightly different version" of a London School thesis written under Ernest Gellner, Merquior attempts to show that Rousseau and Weber, properly read, both support, or at any rate do not oppose, his own political and methodological preferences. (shrink)

Fishkin defines tyranny as all acts of public policy which impose severe deprivations upon individuals in circumstances in which such deprivations are avoidable. His argument is that "virtually all of the principles currently prominent in political theory" will in some instances support or legitimate policies which tend to tyranny understood in this way. However, his parochial conception of what counts as currently prominent political theory makes his indictment considerably less universal than he apparently takes it to be. The style, questions, (...) and sources for the book are drawn entirely from the works of the liberal or public choice school in political philosophy. Fishkin’s critique is thus directed only at the kinds of principles developed by writers like Rawls, Nozick, and Buchanan and Tullock; but precisely because it is so wholly within the tradition it criticizes, the book provides a challenge to that tradition which manages to be both fundamental and free from tendentiousness. (shrink)