With a scene-setting historical introduction, this newly translated and illustrated edition of a classic work is an essential addition to any home library. Written in 1512, The Prince is the masterpiece by Florentine political philosopher, poet, and playwright Niccolò Machiavelli. Although Machiavelli’s book has been frequently misunderstood as a manual for unprincipled manipulators and tyrants, careful reading reveals that it actually identifies freedom as an essential characteristic of a good society. In fact, much of Machiavelli’s republican thought can be identified (...) in the American constitution, and many of his ideas — such as the belief that life is subject to change and that the winners will be those flexible enough to adapt—remain as applicable today as they were half a millennium ago. (shrink)

"This is an excellent, readable and vigorous translation of _The Prince_, but it is much more than simply a translation. The map, notes and guide to further reading are crisp, to-the-point and yet nicely comprehensive. The inclusion of the letter to Vettori is most welcome. But, above all, the Introduction is so gripping and lively that it has convinced me to include _The Prince_ in my syllabus for History of Western Civilization the next time that I teach it.... Great price, (...) too! And lovely printing and layout." --Rachel Fulton, _University of Chicago_. (shrink)

Assessing the scientific status of theories of consciousness is often a difficult task. In this paper, I explore the dialectic between the Integrated Information Theory, e1003588, 2014; Tononi et al. Nat Rev Neurosci, 17, 450-61, 2016) and a recently proposed criticism of that theory: the ‘unfolding argument’. I show that the phenomenology-first approach in consciousness research can lead to valid scientific theories of consciousness. I do this by highlighting the two reasons why the unfolding argument fails: first, phenomenology-first theories are (...) grounded, not circular. Second, falsificationism does not provide an adequate demarcation criterion in philosophy of science. I conclude that this specific debate has significance for how, in general, consciousness researchers test and criticize theories of consciousness, and how dismissing the phenomenology-first methodology in favour of a third person-based methodology means endorsing a position in philosophy of mind that has already been challenged. (shrink)

This Is A New Release Of The Original 1814 Edition.

v. 1. 1819-1826. (It 68-Jan)--v. 2. 1827-1855. (It 68-Mar).

Enjoy two classics of tactical and strategic thinking together in one volume! Despite being separated by 2000 years and half a world, these famous works of Niccol Machiavelli and Sun Tzu have much in common. Both books were produced during times of great unrest and both have altered the course of political and military thought and practice for generations. This book contains the acclaimed English translations of W.K. Marriott for The Prince and Lionel Giles for The Art of War.

En este artículo consideraré los puntos de vista de Newton sobre el método matemático. Newton nunca escribió en extenso sobre este tema, sin embargo, en sus escritos polémicos contra Descartes y Leibniz expresó la idea de que su método era superior a los propuestos por el francés y el alemán. Considerar estos escritos nos puede ayudar a comprender el papel que Newton le atribuyó al álgebra y al cálculo en su pensamiento matemático.

Widely read for its insights into history and politics, The Prince is one of the most provocative works of the Italian Renaissance. Based on Niccoló̀ Machiavelli's observations of the effectiveness of both ancient and contemporary statesmen, the rules for governing set forth in his manual were considered radical and harsh by his contemporaries, and they have been thought shocking to many since then. William J. Connell's lucid introductory essay and translations of important related documents offer fresh insights into Machiavelli's life, (...) the meaning of his work, the context in which he wrote, and his book's influence over time. Document headnotes, maps, a chronology of Machiavelli's life and career, questions for consideration, a selected bibliography, and an index provide further pedagogical support. For this new edition, the translation has been revised from top to bottom to reflect recent advances in our knowledge of the text in the original Italian and the circumstances of its composition. (shrink)

This influential study contrasts the practices of ancient Rome with those of the author's 16th-century contemporaries. Machiavelli's The Prince offers advice on ruling a kingdom; this treatise explains the structure and benefits of a republic. Topics include establishing a republic's internal structure, conducting warfare, and exhibiting leadership qualities.

The received view says that possibility is the dual of necessity: a proposition is (metaphysically, logically, epistemically etc.) possible iff it is not the case that its negation is (metaphysically, logically, epistemically etc., respectively) necessary. This reading is usually taken for granted by modal logicians and indeed seems plausible when dealing with logical or metaphysical possibility. But what about epistemic possibility? We argue that the dual definition of epistemic possibility in terms of epistemic necessity generates tension when reasoning about non-idealized (...) agents and is a problem of concern for most hyperintensional epistemic logics that alleviate the problem of logical omniscience. The tension is particularly evident when knowledge is taken as a primitive to define other epistemic concepts, such as justification and belief, as done in the knowledge-first tradition. We propose a non-dual interpretation of epistemic possibility, employing a hyperintensionality filter similar to the one that makes the corresponding epistemic necessity operator hyperintensional. We employ the proposed semantics to model Stalnaker's belief as epistemic possibility of knowledge and provide a sound and complete axiomatization for a hyperintensional version of his bimodal logic of knowledge and belief. (shrink)

Discursos de Machiaueli (Medina del Campo, 1552 & 1555) is Juan Lorenzo Ottevanti's Spanish translation of Niccolò Machiavelli's Discourses on Livy. This is the first critical edition of this text, whose aim is to reproduce not Machiavelli's but the translator's intention, thereby allowing scholars to examine the modes in which Machiavelli's political and military thought was made intelligible to Spaniards in the early modern period. In his Introduction, Howard demonstrates that its original publication engaged in fascinating ways the ongoing Spanish (...) imperial project in both the European and American contexts. (shrink)

Evandro Agazzi hat die Möglichkeit einer Versöhnung zwischen dem logischen Empirismus und dem Realismus aufgezeigt, indem er sein Konzept der wissenschaftlichen Objektivität vorschlug, das den Begriff der Entität durch den des Objekts ersetzt, das als strukturierte Menge von Eigenschaften verstanden wird. Diese Konzeption wurde einerseits aus einer eher empiristischen Perspektive entwickelt, der zufolge die Realität des Objekts auf eine seiner vorhersagbaren Eigenschaften verlagert wird, und hat andererseits seine fruchtbare Kritik an der orthodoxen Interpretation der Quantenmechanik und seine Forderung nach einer (...) realistischen Interpretation hervorgebracht, die auf der Einführung neuer nicht-klassischer Konzepte beruht. (shrink)

Machiavelli's famously controversial work, is a leadership classic. This was the first book of its type to promise secrets of time management, presentations, change management and interview skills. With simple prose and straightforward logic Machiavelli's study of attaining power is relevant for any modern reader seeking to make their way in the world.

Merker et al. argue that integrated information theory is not a theory of consciousness because the IIT formalism does not match phenomenology. I argue that the authors ultimately fail to articulate the problem of the inference of the postulates from the axioms. I suggest a different version of this problem, and argue that this can help rethink IIT's potential for consciousness science.

Rosenkranz (2021) devised two bimodal epistemic logics: an idealized one and a realistic one. The former is shown to be sound with respect to a class of neighborhood frames called i-frames. Rosenkranz designed a specific i-frame able to invalidate a series of undesired formulas, proving that these are not theorems of the idealized logic. Nonetheless, an unwanted formula and an unwanted rule of inference are not invalidated. Invalidating the former guarantees the distinction between the two modal operators characteristic of the (...) logic, while invalidating the latter is crucial in order to deal with the problem of logical omniscience. In this paper, I present an i-frame able to invalidate all the undesired formulas already invalidated by Rosenkranz, together with the missing formula and rule of inference. (shrink)

The aim of this paper is to show how the invention of imaginary logic by Nikolaj A. Vasil’ev, forerunner of various logical and metaphysical theories appeared in the 20th century, is grounded on a revaluation of Aristotelian ontology. I shall introduce the reason why Aristotle believes that the study of the principle of contradiction is part of ontology (§ 2); I shall explain why Vasil’ev considers the law of contradiction an empirical law, and not a logical one (§ 3.1). I (...) will show his conception of contradiction (§ 3.2) and I will discuss how he believes that it’s possible to renounce this law; (§ 3.3). I shall then explain the fundamental features of imaginary logic (§ 4.1 and § 4.2); and, finally I shall claim how, in spite of a convergence from the logical point of view (§ 5.1), the incompatibility of the two authors takes place on an ontological level (§ 5.2). In order to do so, I shall implement the analysis of the Aristotelian syllogistic conducted by the Polish logician and philosopher Jan Łukasiewicz, together with a crucial distinction between two concepts: the one of ‘law’ and the one of ‘principle’. -/- . (shrink)

The first edition of Newton’s Principia opens with a “Praefatio ad Lectorem.” The first lines of this Preface have received scant attention from historians, even though they contain the very first words addressed to the reader of one of the greatest classics of science. Instead, it is the second half of the Preface that historians have often referred to in connection with their treatments of Newton’s scientific methodology. Roughly in the middle of the Preface, Newton defines the purpose of philosophy (...) as a twofold task: to investigate the forces of the phenomena of nature and, once having established the forces, to demonstrate the remaining phenomena. Newton then introduces a distinction between the first two books, which deal with general propositions, and the third, where the propositions are applied to particular instances of celestial phenomena. From these phenomena, Newton claims, the force of gravity, thanks to which bodies tend toward the Sun, is derived. By assuming this force in mathematical propositions, other motions are deduced: the motions of the planets, the comets, the moon, and the sea. Newton then declares his hope that phenomena relative to small particles will also be explained, as per the celestial ones, thanks to the understanding of attractive forces hitherto unknown to philosophers. The Preface ends with a well-deserved laudatio of Edmond Halley and an apologetic passage concerning certain imperfections in the presentation of advanced subjects, such as the motions of the moon. It is these lines to which historians have given most attention in their various studies. (shrink)

Newton composed several mathematical tracts which remained in manuscript form for decades. He chose to print some of his mathematical tracts in their entirety only after 1704. In this paper I will give information on the dissemination of Newton’s mathematical manuscripts before the eighteenth-century printing stage. I will not consider another important vehicle of dissemination of Newton’s mathematical discoveries, namely his correspondence with other mathematicians or with intermediaries such as Collins and Oldenburg.In a first stage, Newton’s mathematical manuscripts were rendered (...) available to a group of acolytes, who copied and transmitted them, sometimes in mutilated form. The practice of scribal publication helped Newton to establish his mathematical reputation and to form around himself a group of followers.One can divide Newton’s mathematical activity into two periods: an early analytical and modernist period in which he developed a Cartesian and Wallisian ‘new analysis’, followed by a mature synthetic period, beginning in the 1670s, in which he distanced himself from analysis in favour of geometry, from infinitesimals in favour of limits, from the analysis of the moderns in favour of the geometry of the ancients. Newton came to the conclusion that the ‘new analysis’ was not a mathematical language fit for publication.Newton, however, could not restrict himself to scribal publication of his mathematical manuscripts for too long. The priority dispute with Leibniz, the new status of Newton as undisputed master of British mathematicians and the changing canons of mathematical publication introduced by the funding of scientific academies favoured Newton’s option for the printing of his mathematical manuscripts. However, when Newton decided to print his early analytical mathematical work, he tried to modify and present it to bring it in line with the values that characterise the methodological shift of the 1670s, values that he wished to promote among his followers.Author Keywords: Isaac Newton; Manuscripts; Scribal publication; Analysis; Synthesis. (shrink)

Robert Hooke’s theory of gravitation is a promising case study for probing the fruitfulness of Menachem Fisch’s insistence on the centrality of trading zone mediators for rational change in the history of science and mathematics. In 1679, Hooke proposed an innovative explanation of planetary motions to Newton’s attention. Until the correspondence with Hooke, Newton had embraced planetary models, whereby planets move around the Sun because of the action of an ether filling the interplanetary space. Hooke’s model, instead, consisted in the (...) idea that planets move in the void space under the influence of a gravitational attraction directed toward the sun. There is no doubt that the correspondence with Hooke allowed Newton to conceive a new explanation for planetary motions. This explanation was proposed by Hooke as a hypothesis that needed mathematical development and experimental confirmation. Hooke formulated his new model in a mathematical language which overlapped but not coincided with Newton’s who developed Hooke’s hypothetical model into the theory of universal gravitation as published in the Mathematical Principles of Natural Philosophy (1687). The nature of Hooke’s contributions to mathematized natural philosophy, however, was contested during his own lifetime and gave rise to negative evaluations until the last century. Hooke has been often contrasted to Newton as a practitioner rather than as a “scientist” and unfavorably compared to the eminent Lucasian Professor. Hooke’s correspondence with Newton seems to me an example of the phenomenon, discussed by Fisch in his philosophical works, of the invisibility in official historiography of “trading zone mediators,” namely, of those actors that play a role, crucial but not easily recognized, in promoting rational scientific framework change. (shrink)

Here are _The Prince_ and the most important of the Discourses newly translated into spare, vivid English. Why a new translation? Machiavelli was never the dull, worthy, pedantic author who appears in the pages of other translations, says David Wootton in his Introduction. In the pages that follow I have done my best to let him speak in his own voice.. Notes, a map, and an altogether remarkable Introduction no less authoritative for being grippingly readable, help make this edition an (...) ideal first encounter with Machiavelli for any student of history and political theory. (shrink)

Though better known today as a political theorist than as a dramatist, Machiavelli secured his fame as a giant in the history of Italian comedy more than fifty years before Shakespeare's comedies delighted English-speaking audiences. This bilingual edition includes all three examples of Machiavelli's comedic art: sparkling translations of his farcical masterpiece, _The Mandrake_; of his version of Terence's _The Woman From Andros_; and of his Plautus-inspired _Clizia_--works whose genre afforded Machiavelli a unique vehicle not only for entertaining audiences but (...) for examining _virtue_ amid the twists and turns of _fortune_. (shrink)

If Andrea knows that Biden won the last presidential election, then they also know that either Biden won the last presidential election, or Biden is a reptilian. This is the response that epistemic logics based on standard Kripke relational semantics provide, which is consistent with the fact that minimally rational agents can perform disjunction introduction. This is not the case in topic-sensitive semantics though. An agent might not grasp the concept of what a reptilian is, and therefore not be able (...) to know any proposition dealing with reptilians. By employing the concept of logical grounding, I propose a semantics that keeps the requirement of topic-grasping but weakens it, re-establishing a more standard treatment of disjunction, in line with the capacities of minimally rational agents. The paper is structured as follows. In Section 2 I introduce topic-sensitive semantics. In Section 3 I introduce the concept of logical grounding – focusing on the grounds of disjunction – and motivate some desiderata. The concept of minimal topic, the core of my proposal, is detailed in Section 4 and exploited in Section 5 to propose a new topic-sensitive semantic clause for knowledge. I conclude in Section 6. (shrink)