1. Deductive and Inductive Inference. Within the traditional treatments of scientific method, e.g., in and, it was customary to divide scientific inference into two parts: deductive and inductive. Deductive inference was taken to mean the activity of deducing theorems from postulates and definitions, whereas inductive inference represented the activity of constructing a general statement from a set of particular “facts.” Deductive inference was relegated to the mathematical sciences, and inductive inference to the empirical sciences. As a consequence, the whole of (...) science was split into two quite distinct parts: deductive science was conceived to start with precise axioms, postulates, and definitions, and its method consisted in drawing inferences from these “givens” in such a way that if the original assumptions are taken as true, then the theorems must be taken as true also. The obligation behind this “must” of the mathematical sciences was an obligation based on strict rules of deductive inference; in the earlier analyses, it was supposed that these rules were all aspects of the general theory of the syllogism, as it was described in an almost complete form in but in later work the rules have been formalized in more general terms. Inductive inference, on the other hand, was supposed to start with observed facts; these facts, or “data,” were presumably given by the senses, and described particular aspects of the external world. If the facts were given in a certain way, then the empirical scientist could “infer” a generalized description; this generalization had the characteristic that if it were granted as true, then all the facts could be deduced as consequences. The inductive process admittedly does not lead to unique generalizations, and the philosopher of science searched for other defining characteristics of good inference, such as “simplicity” and “convenience.” These empirical generalizations were taken to be “descriptions of the phenomenal world of the scientist”; a further inductive step might be taken by constructing a set of very general principles out of the more specialized generalizations within specific research problems. These “higher” inductive inferences were regarded as “theories,” which could be studied by themselves within the method of deductive inference. The scientist was then described as “checking” theory by determining whether or not the predicted consequences deduced from theory actually hold in the phenomenal world. (shrink)

1. Outline of the Project. This paper is intended to be a progress report on a project in philosophy of science. The immediate stimulus of this report is the eightieth birthday of E. A. Singer, Jr., who was the inspiration of the project, and, needless to say, though responsible for the whole is not responsible for the misconceptions in the specific parts.

The boundaries of psychology have never been very distinctly defined and, as a consequence, science has witnessed frequent border incidents. But it obviously is not psychology alone which suffers from such lack of delineation, but its neighbors, the biological and social sciences, do as well. Cooperation between sciences becomes difficult under these conditions. All agree that psychology is the science of mind, but few agree to what “mind” is. At least within our century “mind” has been taken to be “behavior”, (...) for the present day outlook is that mind is behavior rather than that which is responsible for behavior. The metaphysical dynamism of a prime mover has been replaced by an experimental concept, i.e., one that is susceptible to scientific investigation. There is no need to review the complex history of behavioristic psychology in its many ramifications, ranging from Watson's mechanism to the various vitalistic teleologies. We turn instead to a fundamental problem on which there is little agreement: “What kind of behavior should be called mind?”. (shrink)

Mr. Wisdom, as a philosopher, wants to tell philosophers that they should not use an inductive schema to talk about science. Mr. Bridgman wants to tell scientists they should be more cautious in the use of concepts. Mr. Hempel wants to tell scientists, and I presume social scientists especially, that defining is a tricky matter and should not be indulged in lightly. And finally, Mr. Brain wants to tell philosophers how to talk a bit more sensibly about brains, sense data (...) and minds. Thus every combination of teacher and pupil in the philosopher-scientist domain seems to have been covered in these four efforts. (shrink)

In lieu of an abstract, here is a brief excerpt of the content:American Journal of Philology 121.2 (2000) 320-324 [Access article in PDF] David M. Lewis. Selected Papers in Greek and Near Eastern History. Edited by P.J. Rhodes. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1997. xii 1 418 pp. 4 pls. Cloth, $89.95. David Lewis's death in 1994 deprived the world of scholarship of one of the leading ancient historians of our time. His books include a revision of Pickard-Cambridge, The Dramatic Festivals (...) of Athens (with John Gould, 1968), A Selection of Greek Historical Inscriptions to the End of the Fifth Century B.C. (with Russell Meiggs, 1969; 2d ed. 1984), Sparta and Persia (1977), Inscriptiones Graecae I3 (editor-in-chief), fasc. 1 (1981), fasc. 2 (1993), and Cambridge Ancient [End Page 320] History, 2d ed. (co-editor), IV (1988), V (1992), VI (1994). Many of his most original ideas are to be found in his articles and reviews, however, and so the Cambridge University Press planned, before his death, a book of his short papers.The volume under review presents a total of thirty-eight papers, four previously unpublished, ranging from the 1950s to 1993. The general contents, notes, and final editing by P.J. Rhodes were discussed with Lewis; some of the notes simply give references, but there is representation of Lewis's words in the longer ones. His passion for precision, reconciling the testimony of inscriptions with the literary references, shows him to care, like Thucydides, for "exact knowledge."The four previously unpublished papers perhaps deserve summary. "On the Dating of Demosthenes' Speeches," read to the Oxford Philological Society in 1970, evaluates critically the testimony of Dionysius of Halicarnassus. The dates for Orations 22 (Against Androtion) and 24 (Against Timokrates) given in Ad Amm., relied upon by scholars for Demosthenes' career (e.g., Cawkwell, Sealey), are shown to be unlikely. The dates from Dionysius would be 355/4 for 22 and 353/2 for 24. More likely, however, are 358/7 or 357/6 for 22 and 354/3 for 24. Lewis patiently assesses the evidence of inscriptions for Androtion's career and for the documents cited in Oration 24, which he does not believe to be forgeries. He shows reasons for not putting confidence in the dates of Dionysius. Principally, this involves an analysis of Deinarchos, where his statements can be checked. Dionysius cannot be checked on his Demosthenes, but Lewis argues that his statements cannot be accepted outright. The analysis of Deinarchos is new, but part of Lewis's view there is anticipated in his "Notes on Attic Inscriptions," ABSA 49 (1954) 32, 39-49. Rhodes cites a text from the Agora excavations, soon to be published by John Camp and M.B. Richardson, which will support the date 354/3 for Oration 24.In "The Financial Offices of Eubulus and Lycurgus" (written ca. 1957) Lewis addresses two questions: "When did Eubulus hold the office of treasurer of the theoric fund (), and, with it, control of Athenian finances?" and "When was Lycurgus officially made controller of Athenian finances?" Generally held opinions would be in the 350s and 340s for Eubulus, with specific dates variously suggested, in relation to Demosthenes' speeches. For Lycurgus, either 342-330 or 338-326 is the tenure previously accepted. The decree honoring Lycurgus in [Plut.] Vit. X Or. has Lycurgus serve as treasurer of the public finance for three penteterids. Lewis argues that specific evidence is lacking for Eubulus, but that his moral authority in the reorganization of finances is likely in the 350s and 340s. He examines closely Aeschines 3.25 in assessing Eubulus' authority and argues that the office of controller of the public finance was created in 336, its term defined by the law of Hegemon: hence the period 336-324 should be understood for Lycurgus' tenure."Aristophanes and Politics" was delivered to the Oxford Branch of the [End Page 321] Classical Association in 1957 and had been given earlier in France. Lewis seeks a position that is not so minimalist as that of Gomme (in CR 1938), who had argued that Aristophanes is a dramatist, seeking... (shrink)

The ideas of Reinhold Niebuhr about public ethics that were generated in his essays and books during the 1930s and early 1940s coexisted in the same Harlem neighborhood with ideas about public ethics generated by black women activists working for social change during this historical period. This essay explores an approach to constructing Christian ethics by placing these perspectives, by Niebuhr and the Harlem women activists, in "conversation." Highlighting their common quest for ideas that help to bring radical social change (...) to alleviate subjugating conditions, I specifically analyze the differing understandings of Marxist communism by Niebuhr and Harlem women Communist Party activists. I suggest that a dialogue such as this can fruitfully inform considerations of self-interest, political struggle, and the role of religion in building public ethics for a pluralistic society. (shrink)

In lieu of an abstract, here is a brief excerpt of the content:Reviewed by:The Athenian Agora: Results of Excavations Conducted by the American School of Classical Studies at AthensWilliam C. WestA. Geoffrey Woodhead. The Athenian Agora: Results of Excavations Conducted by the American School of Classical Studies at Athens. Vol. XVI, Inscriptions: The Decrees. Princeton: American School of Classical Studies at Athens, 1997. xx 1 531 pp. 1 plan. 32 pls. Cloth, $100.A. G. Woodhead characterizes his work as “a still (...) photograph, extracted from a process of discovery, discussion, and reevaluation constantly in motion... a representation of the status rerum... at the end of 1991” (viii). Nonetheless, this is a remarkable book. It reprints and discusses up-to-date texts of Athenian decrees from the Agora and classifies them in five sections: (1) to the fall of Athens in 404 B.C.; (2) from one restoration of democracy to another, 403/2-307/6 B.C.; (3) the “Macedonian Century,” 307/6-201/200 B.C.; (4) Athens and the Roman Republic, 200–86 B.C.; and (5) Athens in the Roman Empire, 86 B.C.-A.D. 203 (xi). The reader is thereby helped to an appreciation of Athenian diplomacy and bureaucracy within the framework of recognized historical periods. [End Page 458]A total of 342 inscriptions are presented: 28 in section 1; 78 in section 2; 149 in section 3; 76 in section 4; and 10 in section 5. Two phases of Agora excavation are represented: 1931–45 and 1946–67. After each section an appendix on material discovered after 1967 lists new discoveries with appropriate references. New studies and new texts are assimilated in the presentation of each item up to the end of 1991. Decrees of the Athenian state form the bulk of the collection, but decrees of other bodies, such as demes, gene, orgeones, etc., are also included. Excluded by intention (vii) are the decrees on councilors and their officers (Agora XV) and the decrees honoring ephebes.For each item Woodhead gives an extensive lemma, with brief description of the stone, dimensions of the letters, and bibliography of previous texts and works contributing to their understanding. Each text is followed by a commentary. He frequently comments on the lettering and style of engraving before entering upon discussion of individual lines.For section 1, the fifth century, the texts of IG I3 (1981) are printed, but for the others, in sections 2–5, the best available text is chosen. Where a new fragment of an old text has been discovered in the Agora, the full text of the entire inscription is given. As many decrees were set up on the Acropolis, it is clear that some material was “thrown or brought down from the citadel for reuse” (3). In the case of the Brea decree (no. 7), the contribution of the Agora fragment is slight, but in that of the treaty between Athens and Argos of 417/6 (no. 19) it is significant, providing the length of the line, 76 letters.When an archon is cited in the prescript of an Agora decree, Woodhead supplies a full discussion of the archonship, seeking to show how opinion was formed concerning the date of the office and the calendar. The earliest to be discussed is Polyzelos, 367/6 B.C. (section 2); the latest, Flavius Macrinus, A.D. 116/17 (section 5).In section 2, the fourth century to 307/6, Woodhead calls attention (41) to the spread of Athenian bureaucracy in the increased detail in the prescripts of decrees, the appearance of new formulae, such as that indicating hortatory intent (cf. A. S. Henry, ZPE 112 [1996] 105–19), and stock phrases enumerating the merits of laudandi in honorary decrees. The inevitable restoration of in the prescript of no. 101 brings in this formula for the first time in Agora decrees, although it is known from elsewhere “as early as 334/3” (154). The Agora contributes very significant decrees on the nomothesia (nos. 73, 75, 106C) and Athens’ regulation of the Eleusinian Mysteries (nos. 56, 57).The next section, 307/6 to 201/200, represents for Athens “the high-water mark of its bureaucracy” (167). The texts classified here attest the variety of documents... (shrink)

Niche construction refers to the activities of organisms that bring about changes in their environments, many of which are evolutionarily and ecologically consequential. Advocates of niche construction theory (NCT) believe that standard evolutionary theory fails to recognize the full importance of niche construction, and consequently propose a novel view of evolution, in which niche construction and its legacy over time (ecological inheritance) are described as evolutionary processes, equivalent in importance to natural selection. Here, we subject NCT to critical evaluation, in (...) the form of a collaboration between one prominent advocate of NCT, and a team of skeptics. We discuss whether niche construction is an evolutionary process, whether NCT obscures or clarifies how natural selection leads to organismal adaptation, and whether niche construction and natural selection are of equivalent explanatory importance. We also consider whether the literature that promotes NCT overstates the significance of niche construction, whether it is internally coherent, and whether it accurately portrays standard evolutionary theory. Our disagreements reflect a wider dispute within evolutionary theory over whether the neo-Darwinian synthesis is in need of reformulation, as well as different usages of some key terms (e.g., evolutionary process). (shrink)

To examine the institutional ethics of the church there must be a focus on how the mutually reinforcing interplay of cultural and political values of white supremacy and heteropatriarchy are so effectively perpetuated by Christians through their church bodies. Analysis of this institutional process includes an illustration from the United Methodist Church 2019 quadrennial global assembly and a moment of LGBTQI protest against the Church’s enactment of the “traditional plan” banning equality across sexual orientations and gender identities by limiting ordination (...) and full access to pastoral care to cisgender heterosexuals. A transformative vision of institutional ethics of the church requires disruption of the church’s commitment to preserving social domination. (shrink)

In lieu of an abstract, here is a brief excerpt of the content:American Journal of Philology 122.2 (2001) 296-297 [Access article in PDF] Michel Casevitz, ed. Pausanias: Description de la Grèce. Vol. 5: Livre 5:Élide (1). Trans. Jean Pouilloux, comm. Anne Jacquemin. Association Guillaume Budé for Collection des Universités de France. Paris: Les Belles Lettres, 1999. xxxix + pp. 1-82 (verso and recto double pp.) and 83-285. 2 maps. 1 plan. Cloth; price not stated. The fifth book of Pausanias (Elis (...) 1) is the third volume to appear in the Budé collection, following Attica (vol. 1, 1991) and Arcadia (vol. 8, 1998). Textual notes are by Michel Casevitz; archaeological notes are by Anne Jacquemin.The text is produced from a new recension of the manuscripts, based on the researches on Pausanias of Aubrey Diller, which were published in TAPA (67 [1936]: 232-39; 86 [1955]: 268-79; 87 [1956]: 84-97; 88 [1957]: 169-88). Diller showed that four manuscripts (V, F, P, Ma) were the only independent witnesses to the text of Pausanias, deriving from a lost exemplar of 1437 owned by Niccolò Niccoli and later in the Library of St. Mark in Florence. The Teubner edition of M. Rocha-Pereira (1973, 1977) was the first text produced on the basis of this recension. The Budé differs from it in various readings and in its excellent notes. Book 5, the first of Pausanias' books on Elis, contains the beginning of his description of Olympia. The notes take account of the German excavations of the site carried out since 1936, reports of which have appeared in the Jahrbücher des Deutschen Archäologischen Instituts and the Olympia Berichten.The collaboration of a philologist and an archaeologist as commentators is particularly fortunate, because of important developments in both areas since the extensive commentaries of the late nineteenth and early twentieth centuries (Frazer, Hitzig-Blümner). The wisdom accumulated in the earlier commentaries is not neglected, but in most cases the information has been brought up to date very well. For example, the comment on 10.2 (147), on the date of the Temple of Zeus, parallels that of Frazer in its dissociation of the building of the temple from the war between Elis and Pisa. There is a review of ancient texts, including Herodotus and Strabo and the Spartan dedication of a shield of the booty of Tanagra set atop the ridge of the roof, the inscription of which Pausanias quotes. A discussion follows of dedication bases set up nearby and the excavation levels at which they were found (the Praxiteles base, the dedication made by the sculptor Onatas of Aegina, the Mikythos dedications, etc.), suggesting that the temple was built in the general period 480-455. The Budé then takes note of a study by F. Krauss (Mélanges Bohringer, 1957) on the columns of the temple, suggesting that those of the east façade are the most beautiful examples of the Doric style of the temple.The comment on the Altis in 10.1 (146) is equally instructive. Frazer simply comments on Pindar's statement (Ol. 10.55) that the area was called Altis, and the comment of Hitzig-Blümner is also brief. The Budé, on the other hand, considers the etymology of from and cites several references in Pausanias to show that the Altis had limits within the larger area of the grove. [End Page 296]The discussion of the dating of the cult statue of Zeus by Phidias (in the 420s) in comment on 5.11 (156-57) is also good and follows in the tradition of Frazer, but here the Budé editor can call attention to excavation of the workshop of Phidias in 1954-58 and the monograph of Mallwitz and Schiering, which shows, because of pottery and other finds, that work on the statue was going on in the 430s. Consequently, the old controversy on the priority of the Olympian Zeus and the Athena Parthenos is settled in favor of the Athena statue, completed in 438.On 5.15.4, line 20: the reading of the manuscripts' which includes the... (shrink)

The problem. The model. Inventory models. Allocation models. Waiting-time models. Replacement models. Competitive models. Testing, control and implementation. Administration of operations research. Index.

Comments on Professor Feigl's very comprehensive review of the problem of existential hypotheses may take one of two forms. One may accept the problem in Feigl's own terms and either sympathize or criticize the realistic empiricism to which he subscribes. Or, one may feel that the entire approach is ill-founded, and hence that the distinctions in viewpoints which he draws are comparable to splits in a political party whose basic tenets are incompatible with one's own. This comment takes the second (...) course, and as a commentary can do little more than point out the more serious of the differences which separate Feigl's views from those of the writer. (shrink)

In Perceiving God, William Alston briefly suggests the possibility of perceiving God indirectly through the perception of another object. Following recent work by C. Stephen Evans, we argue that Thomas Reid’s notion of “natural signs” helpfully illuminates how people can perceive God indirectly through natural beauty. First, we explain how some natural signs enable what Alston labels “indirect perception.” Second, we explore how certain emotions make it possible to see both beauty and the excellence of the minds behind beauty. Finally, (...) we explain how aesthetic emotions can involve indirect perception of God via the natural sign of natural beauty. (shrink)

In his target article, Yarkoni prescribes descriptive research as a potential antidote for the generalizability crisis. In our commentary, we offer four guiding principles for conducting descriptive research that is generalizable and enduring: prioritize context over control; let naturalistic observations contextualize structured tasks; operationalize the target phenomena rigorously and transparently; and attend to individual data.

Genetic recombination involves the exchange of genetic material between chromosomes to produce new assortments of alleles. As such, it affects one of the most fundamental and important components of heredity – the genome itself. To understand the molecular basis of recombination, efforts have been directed to try to determine how simple organisms recombine their DNA. One approach involves the development of in vitro systems in which recombination reactions can be studied using purified enzymes. Detailed studies of these systems, using enzymes (...) isolated from bacteria and bacterial viruses, indicate the formation of unique protein‐DNA complexes. The structure of the DNA within these complexes has important consequences for the subsequent formation of recombinant products. (shrink)