本書は、戦国時代の混乱を武力を以て終わらせた徳川家康の統治思想が、日本の公共哲学の原型であるという意表を突く主張から始まる。そして、家康に淵源し、以後250年に及ぶ平和と安定を支えた公共哲学を、鈴木正 三、『葉隠』、白隠慧鶴、太宰春台、海保青陵、そして福澤諭吉の思想に探ってゆくのである。西欧のヒューマニズムが基づく軍事と土地所有ではなく、軍事と商業。すなわち、武士と商人の相互性と、両者のバランス感覚 としてのヒューマニズム、そしてそれが育んだ自生的秩序が日本の公共性の核心にあることを、「慈悲」と「正直」を鍵語に解き明かす。現代の公共哲学に歴史からの再考を迫る、知的冒険の書である。.

「仁」と「天理」はどう語られてきたか―『春秋』三伝・『論語』をはじめとする経典類から二十四史まで、さらに「侯馬盟書」等の出土史料を渉猟して「仁」の原義とその変質、「天理」観との関わりを検討し、その観念 と暦・天文・度量衡・十二方位・楽・易との関係、建築物への數理的表象に説き及ぶ。.

後期水戸学の中心的存在で水戸学の本流であった藤田幽谷の青少年期の学問成果に注目し、その形成の一端を明らかにする。幽谷門下の吉田活堂を中心とする水戸の国学、そして『大日本史』や『扶桑拾葉集』の研究を経て 辿り着く、幽谷研究の決定版。.

Der Souveränitätsbegriff Immanuel Kants wird in diesem Sammelband aus drei unterschiedlichen Perspektiven beleuchtet. Zu Beginn werden seine rechtlichen Bedingungen untersucht: im Allgemeinen die Kantische Rechtsauffassung und im Besonderen der Prozess des Übergangs vom Naturzustand, in dem alle Individuen souverän sind, zum bürgerlichen Zustand, laut dem die Souveränität allein dem Staat gehört. Der zweite Abschnitt enthält eine ausführliche Analyse des Begriffes, sei es als innere (die staatliche Verfassung) oder äußere Souveränität (die internationalen Beziehungen). Der abschließende Teil beschäftigt sich mit dem Begriff (...) der Politik als praktische Durchsetzung des Rechtes - und deshalb indirekt auch der Souveränität - auf dem Gebiet der Wirklichkeit, mit enger Verbindung zur Moral und Geschichte. Durch diese Analysen schlägt das Buch eine sowohl wissenschaftliche wie unkonventionelle Darstellung des politischen Denkens Kants vor, die dem Leser zugänglich gemacht wird. (shrink)

In lieu of an abstract, here is a brief excerpt of the content:Bayle, Saint-Evremond, and Fideism:A Reply to Thomas M. LennonGianluca MoriIn a recent article published in this journal Thomas M. Lennon returns to the controversial question of Bayle's attitude towards religion. The point he debates is the particular use that, in expounding his conception of the relationship between faith and reason, Bayle makes of a passage from Saint-Evremond. In Lennon's view the correct interpretation of this point would show that (...) Bayle's fideism is to be "taken at face value" without any hint of irony and with no suspicion of dissimulation or insincerity.1 This would cast doubt on and greatly weaken the interpretation I proposed in my Bayle philosophe.2 My aim here is to respond briefly to Lennon's arguments and to clarify even more briefly what in my opinion is the right perspective in which to consider Bayle's position on this topic.The context in which Bayle quotes Saint-Evremond is to be found in the Eclaircissements he added to the second edition of his Dictionnaire historique et critique (1702) to counter the Dutch religious authorities' harsh criticism of the first edition. In particular the Walloon Consistory accused Bayle of taking a skeptical position that undermined the most important dogmas of Christian faith. In response Bayle wrote the Eclaircissement sur les Pyrrhoniens, a clumsy mosaic of quotations from the Scriptures and from patristic and profane texts, with which he sought to show that his skeptical fideism was not in the least heterodox but indeed the position that most closely reflected true Christianity. The quotation from Saint-Evremond, almost at the end of this text, is taken [End Page 323] from the Conversation du Maréchal d'Hocquincourt et du Père Canaye (written in about 1654).3 The final passage gives a clear idea of the general tone: after having disputed with a churchman the need to subject one's intellect to the yoke of faith, the marshal concludes by saying that he is ready to be crucified "without knowing why." Father Canaye replies: "No reason! That is the true religion. No reason! God has granted you a fine grace, mylord." So, and here Lennon obviously agrees (229), Saint-Evremond's is a text with no shadow of mystical inspiration, indeed strongly tending in the libertine direction, as is clear from the blatant way it pours scorn on the fideist approach.In my interpretation Bayle's use of this quotation does not at all demonstrate his atheism or unbelief, for in my view that question is undecidable. However, the quotation from Saint-Evremond is sufficient—and this is the onlyreason I mentioned it4 —to show that Bayle's approach to fideism is in no way innocent and naive as is sometimes claimed. On the contrary, his texts on this subject contain what amounts to provocations aimed at orthodox readers (to which they immediately reacted). This, together with other more important reasons, leads me to believe that Bayle's professions of Christian faith, though frequent, are generally far from being above suspicion: indeed, almost every line of them raises questions about their actual significance.The provocation contained in the quotation from Saint-Evremond appears in all its rhetorical weight if we associate this text with three other passages from Bayle's works. The first is from the Nouvelles de la république des lettres of December 1686, in which Bayle stresses the unedifying nature of the religious maxims contained in Saint-Evremond's Conversation (which, incidentally, he himself had just had printed in the collection Le Retour des pièces choisies).5 The second is taken from a letter by Jean d'Oulès to Bayle, written in 1696, in which the author deals with exactly the same passage from the Conversation that was later to be reproduced in the Eclaircissement. In this letter d'Oulès quotes the full passage which he considers to be a "naughty text" deliberately written to throw ridicule on the fanatical fideism of Pierre Jurieu.6 The third passage is from Bayle's Continuation des pensées diverses of 1704 in which, shortly after the death of Saint-Evremond, he publicly reveals the poet... (shrink)

The objective of this study is to design a laboratory experiment to explore the effect of ambiguity on a subject’s search behavior in a finite-horizon sequential search model. In so doing, we employ a strategy to observe the potential trend of reservation points that is usually unobserved. We observe that subjects behaving consistently across treatments reduce their reservation points in the face of ambiguity over point distribution. Our result is consistent with the theoretical implication obtained by Nishimura and Ozaki.

意味の研究は、言語研究の中でも比較的歴史が新しい。はじめに、語や文の意味とは何か、意味をどう記述するかをめぐる基本的な問題を明らかにする。そして、意味の形式化を徹底したモンタギュー意味論の展開と、言語 現象を人間の認知過程の反映ととらえた認知的意味論の方法論について紹介する。その後、自然言語処理における意味と概念の表現とその計算機構について解説する。.

In lieu of an abstract, here is a brief excerpt of the content:A Short ReplyGianluca MoriWhile thanking Thomas Lennon for the interest he has shown in my work—and without going into details of interpretation which cannot bear discussion in this context—I would like to make a few remarks on factual questions raised by his response.1) Lennon's text (p. 338): "The text that Bayle and Mori erroneously take to be Saint-Evremond's is in fact from Jean-François Sarasin."While it is not certain (...) that Bayle and I "erroneously" take this text to be Saint-Evremond's, it is certain that Lennon erroneously takes it to be Sarasin's. In fact, the text quoted by Bayle is not taken from Sarasin's Discours sur Epicure, but, as Bayle explicitly points out ("Xénophanes," K, note 124), from a "Discours des ennuis et des déplaisirs." This "Discours" is chapter 5 of De l'usage de la vie, a text published in many editions of Saint-Evremond's works (see the Barbin 1692 in-4° ed., Seconde Partie, p. 326). The paternity of De l'usage de la vie is doubtful and controversial, but it possibly contains some passages taken from Saint-Evremond's unpublished manuscripts, especially in chapters 3-6, as reported by an important source quoted by Ternois in Saint-Evremond, Œuvres en prose, IV, 3-4, note 1.2) Lennon's text (pp. 338-39): "The significance of two of the other texts advanced by Mori is fully vitiated, for in them Bayle makes the same mistake."In my article, I did not fail to state that these texts (OD I, 158 and Dict., "Epicure," M) are taken from an apocryphal source. On page 329 I wrote: "[Bayle] mistakenly attributes to [Saint-Evremond] a text on Epicurus's morals [i.e., Sarasin's Discours] included in that volume." However, it was absolutely impossible, for seventeenth-century readers, to distinguish between Saint-Evremond's original and apocryphal texts: the author himself—as is widely known—did not want to clarify this point (with a few exceptions, including the Saint-Evremoniana, which, as we have seen, Bayle never attributed to Saint-Evremond). [End Page 343] And this is true for all editions: there is no significant difference between genuine and pirated editions, since no official edition, authorized and revised by the author, existed before Des Maizeaux's posthumous one. From this point of view, virtually nobody (before 1705) could "study" Saint-Evremond's texts. (On this connection it should be added that I never claimed that Bayle "studied" Saint-Evremond, but only that he read his available works and made up his mind on them, and particularly on the Conversation du Maréchal d'Hocquincourt—which should be at the core of the present debate—long before reading Cotolendi).3) Lennon's text (p. 336): "As Mori acknowledges elsewhere, Labrousse thinks Le Vassor was a left-wing Anglican who failed to understand Bayle's calvinist perspective."Concerning Le Vassor, I "acknowledge" Labrousse's opinion only to reject it with a detailed argument (Bayle philosophe, 262, note 341).Gianluca MoriUniversità del Piemonte OrientaleCopyright © 2004 The Journal of the History of Ideas, Inc.... (shrink)

A circadian clock, with physiological characteristics similar to those of eukaryotes, functions in the photosynthetic prokaryote, cyanobacteria. The molecular mechanism of this clock has been efficiently dissected using a luciferase reporter gene that reports the status of the clock. A circadian clock gene cluster, kaiABC, has been cloned via rhythm mutants of cyanobacterium, Synechococcus, and many clock mutations mapped to the three kai genes. Although kai genes do not share any homology with clock genes so far identified in eukaryotes, analysis (...) of their expression suggests that a negative feedback control of kaiC expression by KaiC generates the circadian oscillation and that KaiA functions as a positive factor to sustain this oscillation. BioEssays 22:10–15, 2000. ©2000 John Wiley & Sons, Inc. (shrink)

The necessity and opportunity for face-to-face contact with other colleagues is being increasingly reduced as a result of factory automation (FA) or office automation (OA). This means that human functions which are a result of human contact and relationships are substituted for by the function of machine systems. This “transfer of relations” from the human “system” to the machine system causes isolation of the individual in the process of work. This chapter considers some reasons for “isolation” with particular reference to (...) the computerisation of production systems. The paper addresses the serious consequences for the environmental situation in Japan and the fabric of Japanese society. (shrink)