This paper is basically a presentation of the tenets of Pierre Bourdieu’s philosophy in a language and level that can be easily understood by Filipino students and scholars of philosophy, cultural studies and Philippine studies. The discussion of Bourdieu’s philosophy revolves around 1) his concepts of habitus, field and symbolic violence; 2) his critique of television; 3) his theory of capitals; 4) some implications of his theory of capitals; and 5) his being public intellectual. The ultimate aim of this paper (...) is to suggest some aspects and dimensions of Philippine society and culture that can be analyzed using some of bourdieu’s thoughts as interpretive frameworks, as well as to challenge the said Filipino students and scholars of philosophy, cultural studies and Philippine studies to creatively and effectively appropriate such theories for the enrichment of the theoretical corpus of Philippine studies. This paper is part of a series of similar works done by one of the co-authors that dealt with Adorno, Schleiermacher and Dilthey, Heidegger, Gadamer and Bultmann, and Lyotard. (shrink)

Abstract: This paper conceptualizes the interaction of three discursive paths: the history of science, scientific education, and the debate about the Filipinization of scientific education. The paper analyzes the form of scientific revolution in the field of medicine which is different from its counterparts in the fields of astronomy and physics; as such, the paper contributes a particular narrative of that provides proof that it is possible to tackle scientific issues using the Filipino language as medium. It assumes that the (...) Filipino language should be used in the teaching of science and in scientific research. The scientific revolution in medicine is seen as the eventual downfall of Hippocrates and Galen and the rise of the theories of Paracelsus, Vesalius, Fracastoro , and Harvey. (shrink)

Maraming paraan ang pagsusuri sa problema ng pulitika sa Pilipinas. Para sa mga moralista at ideyalista, halimbawa, maaari itong tingnan gamit ang perspektibo ng sistema ng pagpapahalaga at moralidad; para sa mga materyalista naman, maaari din itong himayin gamit ang perspektibo ng pagka-di-pantay-pantay ng kayamanan at kapangyarihan ng ating mga mamamayan; o hindi kaya para sa mga eksperto sa sistema at istraktura, maaari din itong dalumatin gamit ang perspektibo ng ating marupok na burukrasya. Susubukan ng papel na ito na pag-aralan (...) ang paksa sa pamamagitan ng pagsusuri sa konsepto ng pamumuno na hinihiling ng ating demokratikong sistema at sa kaparehong konseptong umiiiral naman sa kamalayan ng ating mga kababayan. Gagamitin ng pagsusuring ito, bilang teoretikal na balangkas, ang isang uri ng antropolohikal na teorya at pamamaraan na kilala bilang “kognitibong antropolohiya”. (shrink)

A well-known open problem in epistemic logic is to give a syntactic characterization of the successful formulas. Semantically, a formula is successful if and only if for any pointed model where it is true, it remains true after deleting all points where the formula was false. The classic example of a formula that is not successful in this sense is the “Moore sentence” p ∧ ¬ BOX p, read as “p is true but you do not know p.” Not only (...) is the Moore sentence unsuccessful, it is self-refuting, for it never remains true as described. We show that in logics of knowledge and belief for a single agent (extended by S5), Moorean phenomena are the source of all self-refutation; moreover, in logics for an introspective agent (extending KD45), Moorean phenomena are the source of all unsuccessfulness as well. This is a distinctive feature of such logics, for with a non-introspective agent or multiple agents, non-Moorean unsuccessful formulas appear. We also consider how successful and self-refuting formulas relate to the Cartesian and learnable formulas, which have been discussed in connection with Fitch’s “paradox of knowability.” We show that the Cartesian formulas are exactly the formulas that are not eventually self-refuting and that not all learnable formulas are successful. In an appendix, we give syntactic characterizations of the successful and the self-refuting formulas. (shrink)

This paper consists of three main parts. First, we give an introduction to Hill’s assumption A (n) and to theory of interval probability, and an overview of recently developed theory and methods for nonparametric predictive inference (NPI), which is based on A (n) and uses interval probability to quantify uncertainty. Thereafter, we illustrate NPI by introducing a variation to the assumption A (n), suitable for inference based on circular data, with applications to several data sets from the literature. This includes (...) attention to comparison of two groups of circular data, and to grouped data. We briefly discuss such inference for multiple future observations. We end the paper with a discussion of NPI and objective Bayesianism. (shrink)

A well-known open problem in epistemic logic is to give a syntactic characterization of the successful formulas. Semantically, a formula is successful if and only if for any pointed model where it is true, it remains true after deleting all points where the formula was false. The classic example of a formula that is not successful in this sense is the “Moore sentence” p ∧ ¬ BOX p, read as “p is true but you do not know p.” Not only (...) is the Moore sentence unsuccessful, it is self-refuting, for it never remains true as described. We show that in logics of knowledge and belief for a single agent (extended by S5), Moorean phenomena are the source of all self-refutation; moreover, in logics for an introspective agent (extending KD45), Moorean phenomena are the source of all unsuccessfulness as well. This is a distinctive feature of such logics, for with a non-introspective agent or multiple agents, non-Moorean unsuccessful formulas appear. We also consider how successful and self-refuting formulas relate to the Cartesian and learnable formulas, which have been discussed in connection with Fitch’s “paradox of knowability.” We show that the Cartesian formulas are exactly the formulas that are not eventually self-refuting and that not all learnable formulas are successful. In an appendix, we give syntactic characterizations of the successful and the self-refuting formulas. (shrink)

Dr. Max Felix Silva, dean of the Graduate School of Philosophy and the senior students’ professor of critical theory, was still engrossed in discursively analyzing the transcripts of the peace negotiations between the government panel and the representatives of the Moro Islamic Liberation Front. He was trying to show his students the practical use of the German sociologist and philosopher Jürgen Habermas’ doctrine that in order to attain optimum results in a dialogue the participants should only use statements and actuations (...) that are truthful, sincere and appropriate all of the time. “Okay, class. You can be truthful but insincere, or you can be truthful and sincere but in an inappropriate way, or you can be appropriate and sincere but not truthful. The point of Habermas is simple: failing in just one of these triple criteria can already jeopardize the outcome of any consensus building. Ako ba ay nasusundan n’yo pa?”. (shrink)

While it is primarily a detailed, technical treatise on the principles of the technology of automata, this book does contain some philosophically interesting material. In Part II, devoted to the theoretical construction of robots with consciousness but which exhibit no behavior, Culbertson advances and develops the idea that we can analyze perceptual consciousness in terms of the four dimensional "world-lines" of the transmissions of impulses along neurons, or rather in terms of interconnecting networks of such world lines. In Part III, (...) he argues that consciousness, defined in physical terms, cannot cause behavior. He presents, as an alternative, a doctrine of "historical causation" in which whole extended time periods in the past affect the present—K. P. F. (shrink)

A compilation of all previously published writings on philosophy and the foundations of mathematics from the greatest of the generation of Cambridge scholars that included G.E. Moore, Bertrand Russell, Ludwig Wittgenstein and Maynard Keynes.

If we are to periodize the intellectual biography of Rolando Gripaldo into his Mindanaoan, Lasallian, and retirement periods, his Lasallian period would be a very significant one because this is the period where he produced the most important works that earned him a niche as one of the important Filipino philosophers. This paper exposed and analyzed the works of Gripaldo in this very significant period of his intellectual biography. This paper was able to identify four clusters of themes that recur (...) in Gripaldo’s Lasallian period writings: 1) his reflective thoughts on Filipino philosophy, 2) his studies of Filipino philosophical luminaries, 3) his critical Filipino philosophy, and 3) his efforts towards revisionist writing. This paper contributes towards the discourse of Filipino philosophy that studies Filipino philosophical luminaries, a discourse in which Gripaldo was a leading advocate. Contributions in this specific discourse can make Filipino philosophy more mainstream and easier to study, especially for beginners and undergraduate students. (shrink)

Quito published her book The State of Philosophy in the Philippines in 1983. When the book was already out for fifteen years, I undertook a re-reading of its identified four clusters of reasons for the underdevelopment of Filipino philosophy, and hope for development in 1999, through an article “Re-Reading Emerita Quito’s Thoughts Concerning the Underdevelopment of Filipino Philosophy.” Thirty-six years after the publication of Quito’s book, and twenty years after the publication of my re-reading, this paper looks back again on (...) Quito’s four clusters of reasons and hope, as well as on my re-reading of such reasons and hope, with the intention of sharpening our collective diagnosis on what continue to cause the underdevelopment of Filipino philosophy, as well as imagining more realistic pathways towards its more robust development. This paper, therefore, has two substantive sections: the first is an exposition of Quito’s four clusters of causes and hope, accompanied by my commentaries on such four causes and hope; and the second is my present critical reflection on Quito’s thirty-four-year-old diagnosis and hope, as well as on my twenty-year-old commentary. (shrink)

Keith Thomas: Gerald Edward Aylmer, 1926-2000 Adrian Hollis: William Spencer Barrett, 1914-2001 Bruce Williams: Charles Frederick Carter, 1919-2002 Malcolm Mackintosh: John Erickson, 1929-2002 J. H .R. Davis: Raymond William Firth, 1901-2002 F. M. L. Thompson: Hrothgar John Habakkuk, 1915-2002 A. W. Price: Richard Mervyn Hare, 1919-2002 Hugh Lloyd-Jones: Geoffrey Stephen Kirk, 1921-2003 Michael Lapidge and Peter Matthews: Vivien Anne Law, 1954-2002 Ann Moss: John Lough, 1913-2000 Terence Cave: Ian Dalrymple McFarlane, 1915-2002 Ludwig Paul: David Neil MacKenzie, 1926-2001 Peter Birks: John (...) Kieran Barry Moylan Nicholas, 1919-2002 Jonathan Shepard: Dimitri Dimitrievich Obolensky, 1918-2001 David Cannadine: John Harold Plumb, 1911-2001 Daniel Waley: Nicolai Rubinstein, 1911-2002 Ian Wood: John Michael Wallace-Hadrill, 1916-1985 R. G. M. Nisbet: William Smith Watt, 1913-2002 G. W. Bernard: Richard Bruce Wernham, 1906-1999. (shrink)

Hominization theory speculates on the process and chronology of a human embryo’s ensoulment. Aristotle, a key ancient Greek thinker, presented his own hominization theory based on his hylemorphic metaphysics and pioneering researches in embryology. Thomas Aquinas, a medieval philosopher and theologian, built his Christian and Catholic hominization theory on the foundations laid down by Aristotle. The contemporary Roman Catholic Church, with its own prolife, anti-abortion and anticontraception agenda, modified the Aristotelian and Thomistic hominization theories by allegedly benchmarking on recent developments (...) in human embryology. This paper uses the archeological and genealogical methods, as developed by the French poststructuralist and postmodernist philosopher Michel Foucault, in reexamining these three hominization theories as discourses, in comparing and contrasting their epistemic contexts, and in peering into their respective genealogies. Contrary to common assumptions, these three hominization theories have very few elements in common and are actually divergent. The underpinning intention of this paper is to demonstrate the strengths and weaknesses of the contemporary Roman Catholic Church’s hominization theory. (shrink)

This volume brings together a number of important studies by leading scholars on ritual and law, philosophy and religion, literature and entertainments in Qin and Han China. A few contributions deal with the Han legacy to later Chinese culture.

In our reflections upon the view of Leibniz on the many religions and their relations we elaborate three points. In the first place, Leibniz appears to be a faithful Christian, nominally a Lutheran, but not exactly bound to just one confession. He tried to be a real ecumenist. During all his career he made efforts to come to one, universal church , on a dogmatic as well as a practical level. For this aim he corresponded on these topics with many (...) influential catholics of his time, e.g. with Arnauld, Bossuet and Pellisson . Leibniz saw the other forms of monotheism as preliminary stages of Christianity. For him the remaining religions were paganism and therefore they should be suppressed. But Christianity would be enriched by an exchange with the three other forms of monotheism. In the second place, we may conclude that Leibniz understood toleration as a recognition of the other and as an expectation for exchange. But in the third place, we have to take into account his final religious perspective: natural religion . This is an almost philosophical religion with Christian features, usually called deism. With the help of his natural religion Leibniz wanted to combat what he called the atheism and materialism of the philosophy of his time, i.e. the ideas of Hobbes, Descartes and Spinoza. But his own position is rather close to them. (shrink)

The accurate pricing of securities in the capital markets depends upon the markets being both efficient and fair. In management buyout transactions (MBOs), the price bid by inside managers enhances the efficient pricing of securities but raises a reasonable doubt about the fairness to existing shareholders. This study addresses this fairness question in MBOs and offers short-term and long-term legal alternatives which allow both the efficiency and fairness criteria to be met. In the short-term the case law established in the (...) Basic v. Levinson decision for merger negotiation disclosures should be applied to MBO transactions. Over the longer horizon, legislative changes should be made to existing securities laws. Applying the investor protection principles of the 1933 and 1934 securities acts to MBO transactions will suppress the temptation of managers to extract shareholder wealth for their personal gain. (shrink)