ARISTOTLE'S PROGRAM Aristotle says outright that the law of non-contradiction cannot be demonstrated: you can't prove everything, and among the things you ...

A Brief Description of Neoplatonism R. Baine Harris Old Dominion University There are essentially three ways in which Neoplatonism may be considered to be ...

The surprise announcement in November 2018 that a Chinese researcher had implanted and brought to term two gene-edited embryos, resulting in the birth of twin girls, had the effect of galvanizing a debate that goes back decades. Should we make heritable changes in our children's DNA? Until recently, this was hypothetical only, and the easy response was to say it is too uncertain and too unnecessary to be tolerated. Suddenly, however, the possibility that there might be real uses for mitochondrial (...) DNA replacement or for germline editing has led to a more nuanced debate, ranging from calls to double-down on prohibiting this technology to discussions of how to permit it for a... (shrink)

The Random Number Generation task has a long history in neuropsychology as an assessment procedure for executive functioning. In recent years, understanding of human behavior has gradually changed from reflecting a static to a dynamic process and this shift in thinking about behavior gives a new angle to interpret test results. However, this shift also asks for different methods to process random number sequences. The RNG task is suited for applying non-linear methods needed to uncover the underlying dynamics of random (...) number generation. In the current article we present RandseqR: an R-package that combines the calculation of classic randomization measures and Recurrence Quantification Analysis. RandseqR is an easy to use, flexible and fast way to process random number sequences and readies the RNG task for current scientific and clinical use. (shrink)

In his article ‘A Cavalry Unit in the Army of Antigonus Monophthalmus: Asthippoi’, N. G. L. Hammond argues that the reading of the manuscript R at Diodorus 19. 29. 2 should be retained and that we should read ⋯π⋯ π⋯σι δ⋯ το⋯ς τε ⋯σθ⋯ππους ⋯νομαζομ⋯νους κα⋯ τοὺς ⋯κ τ⋯ν ἄνω κατοικο⋯ντων ⋯κτακοσιο⋯ς. The readings of F and its copy X, ⋯νθ⋯ππους, and the commonly accepted conjecture of Wesseling ⋯μɸ⋯ππους, should both be abandoned. Hammond's arguments for retaining this reading are that (...) between the variant readings of R and F, R ‘is the more often correct’ ; ⋯σθ⋯ππους, the reading of R, is preferable to F's ⋯νθ⋯ππους on the principle of ‘lectio difficilior’; the ‘difficulty’ of his lectio difficilior is made less by the arguments presented by A. B. Bosworth, 245 ff.), for the restoration at several places in the text of Arrian's Anabasis the word ⋯σθ⋯ταιροι, in place of the editorial emendation of πεζ⋯ταιροι. ‘For just as asthetairoi meant an élite group of Macedonian infantrymen,’ says Hammond, ‘so asthippoi should mean an élite group of Macedonian cavalrymen.’ He then proceeds to examine the passage and its context in an attempt to find confirmation of this proposition and comes to the conclusion that Diodorus' text says that there were 800 cavalrymen, broken into two groups, the asthippoi and ‘the men from the up-country settlers’; these, though having different names, had a close relationship to each other, as is shown by their being brigaded together. Following his derivation of asthetairoi as meaning ‘townsmen-companions’, i.e. companions recruited from the towns of Upper Macedonia, he argues that asthippoi were cavalry recruited from the towns of Upper Macedonia and that τοὺς ⋯κ τ⋯ν ἄνω κατοικο⋯ντων means ‘the sons of settlers in up-country Macedonia’. These 800, says Hammond, were both among Antigonus' best troops and ‘were Macedonians from Europe’. We thus appear, on Hammond's interpretation, to have here a group of 800 Macedonian élite cavalrymen, all of whom were recruited in Upper Macedonia's townships, but of whom some were chosen to be the cavalry-equivalent of the élite ‘townsmen-companions’ by their title of ‘townsmen-cavalry’, whilst the others, similarly recruited – but perhaps of a younger generation? – had no particular distinguishing title beyond ‘sons of settlers in up-country Macedonia’.Now, while it would be exciting to be able to add another one, possibly two Macedonian cavalry units to the Macedonian army of Philip, Alexander and the Successors, there are several aspects of Hammond's arguments that, it seems to me, are less than convincing. Thus, whilst it seems beyond reasonable doubt that ⋯σθ⋯ταιροι should be retained in the text of Arrian, appearing, as it does, six times, this is not an argument that ⋯σθ⋯ππους should be read in Diodorus' text. Both it and F's reading of ⋯νθ⋯ππους are hapax legomena and it is possible that both readings are wrong. But even if we retain ⋯σθ⋯ππους as the correct reading, Hammond's explanation of its meaning is open to objection on several counts. (shrink)

Comment l'intention apologétique de Blondel dans L’Action est-elle compatible avec le caractère philosophique de l’œuvre ? Comment éviter le soupçon de préjugé, de pétition de principes ? R. Virgoulay montre comment le projet mis en œuvre dans L’Action et défini dans la Lettre de 1896, ouvrait la philosophie à l'examen du problème religieux par la détermination a priori de la notion de surnaturel. Après avoir exposé « la méthode de L’Action » pour faire passer d'une conviction subjective, d'un témoignage vécu, (...) à une « science », c'est-à-dire à l'exposé qui conjugue nécessité et universalité, il s'attarde sur la cinquième partie de L’Action. Celle-ci, après l'élaboration des quatre autres parties, peut être alors une philosophie de la religion qui porte sur le contenu même du Christianisme, et pour laquelle la notion décisive est celle du surnaturel. Les questions que pose cette notion amènent l'auteur à comparer la problématique blondélienne à celle de Laberthonnière, comparaison qui manifeste la différence entre la démarche théologique de ce dernier et celle, philosophique, de Blondel. Alors que laberthonnière tente de justifier théologiquement l'entreprise philosophique de Blondel, la Lettre distingue rigoureusement la théologie de la philosophie. How is the apologetic intention of Blondel in Action compatible with the philosophical character of the work ? How can one avoid the suspicion of prejudice, of begging the question ? R. Virgoulay shows how the project put to work in Action and defined in the Lettre of 1896, opened philosophy to the examination of the religious problem by the a priori determination of the notion of the supernatural. After discussing « the method of Action » in order to move from a subjective conviction, from a lived witnessing, to a « science », that is to say, to an analyses that conjugate necessity and universality, the author concentrates on the fifth part of Action. This latter, after, the elaboration of the four other parts, could be, then, a philosophy of religion that carries to the very content of Christianity, and for which the decisive notion is that of the supernatural. The questions that this idea brings up led the author to compare Blondel’s field of inquiry to that of Laberthonnière, a comparison that, manifests the difference between a theological approach of the latter and that, philosophical, of Blondel. While Laberthonnière tries theologically to justify the philosophical enterprise of Blondel, the Lettre rigorously distinguishes theology from philosophy. (shrink)

While Meinong makes scattered remarks about perception in various writings, the one text in which he makes a concentrated effort to work out a theory of perception is Über die Erfahrungsgrundlagen unseres Wissens (1905). This paper is a critical examination of the theory which is presented there, but also some other texts are taken into account. Special attention will be given to Meinong's views on the object (Gegenstand) of perception, both the propositional object (Objektiv) and the non-propositional object (Objekt) which (...) is allegedly "part" of the propositional object. Also, some contrasts and parallels between these views and those of other members of the Brentano School, e.g. Husserl's notion of categorial perception are discussed. (shrink)

R. A. Sharpe; VIII*—Art and Expertise, Proceedings of the Aristotelian Society, Volume 85, Issue 1, 1 June 1985, Pages 133–148, https://doi.org/10.1093/aristote.

Erasmus: rechtzinnig of vrijzinnig theoloog, door J. Coppens.--Erasmus: wereldburger en pacifist, door A. Gerlo.--Het humanisme van Erasmus, door J. N. Bakhuizen van den Brink.--Erasmus en de muziek, door R. B. Lenaerts.

Many have adopted the view that informal logic is importantly dependent on epistemology . Finocchiaro has raised this issue in the context argumentation theory, as perhaps distinguished from informal logic A recent pair of issues of Informal Logic , guest edited by Christoph Lumer, was devoted to epistemological approaches to argumentation. On the other hand, both Johnson and Blair and Johnson have expressed reservations. In this paper I want to take another look at the relationship between informal logic and epistemology. (...) I will argue that there are reasons for skepticism regarding the Received View that have not been taken into consideration and fully appreciated by those who advocate some form of this view. (shrink)

The time taken to react voluntarily to a stimulus is far longer than can be accounted for by ordinary processes of nerve conduction and synaptic delay, and varies unpredictably from trial to trial. Though random, the distribution of reaction times usually follows a relatively simple law, which in turn can be explained by the LATER model, in which a decision signal, representing belief in the existence of the target, rises in response to incoming sensory evidence from an initial value to (...) a criterion level at which action is initiated. But the rate of rise fluctuates randomly from trial, to an extent that cannot be explained by sensory noise at the input. These conclusions, confirmed by recording from neurons in the frontal eye fields, suggest that the randomness of reaction time is due to a deliberate, gratuitous, neural process which confers certain biological advantages as well as having implications for general ideas about the nature of ‘free will'. (shrink)