First published in 1999. Routledge is an imprint of Taylor & Francis, an informa company.

This paper first appeared in Modern Theology, Vol. 6, No. 3, July 1989. Copyright (c) Basil Blackwell Publisher Ltd., Oxford. Reprinted by permission.

Contrary to what might be expected given a religious or other motivation, Pierre Duhem's interest in mediaeval science was the result of his surprise encounter with Jordanus de Nemore while working on Les origines de la statique in the late autumn of 1903. Historical assumptions common among physicists at that time may explain this surprise, which occasioned a frantic search for more mediaeval precursors for Renaissance mechanics. It also raised serious historiographical problems that threatened even his methodological views, until they (...) were resolved in his To save the phenomena of 1908. (shrink)

Writers on jurisprudence often stress that conflict between positive laws and morality does not invalidate the positive laws. A law which requires me to compensate another for an injury caused by a dangerous object kept on my property is not invalidated by the fact that I have not been negligent and have no moral obligation to compensate the injured person. And although I have a moral obligation to keep my promises, positive laws may validly imply that I need not keep (...) promises not made for a consideration or under seal. Thus positive law may permit acts not permitted by morals and may forbid acts permitted by morals. The lesson drawn from these thoughts is that to establish a positive law as valid we need not consider the relationships it bears to the rules of morals. A valid law is simply a law created in accordance with the constitutional conventions or ‘rules of recognition’ of the society in which it is to be applied. It is the manner of its establishment, not its relationship to morals, which makes a law valid. (shrink)

Three lectures on Jaina philosophy and ancient civilization.

Violent: Isn't his account of philosophy, however, rather strange?--not, I fear, in the sense that it is novel or quite unusual, but in the sense that it is oddly misguided? Part of the oddness comes out in its titular description--"the search for ultimate reality." We find that he views ontology as the center of philosophy, for "philosophy is that cognitive endeavor in which the question of being is asked". "The search for ultimate reality beyond everything that seems to be real (...) is the search for being-itself, for the power of being in everything that is. It is the ontological question, the root question of every philosophy". (shrink)