[688/2197] In many economic matters there arises a paradox that may be related to what in logic courses is called the “sophism of the heap of wheat”. Among the sophisms bequeathed to us by the Greeks, none is worthier to have come down through the centuries than this “sophism of the heap of wheat”; indeed this no mere puzzle, but a topical example of a frequent difficulty, as much in practical life as in pure speculation.One grain of wheat does not (...) make a heap; neither do two grains; nor do three grains; \(\ldots \) on the other hand, if a million grains are gathered, we can agree that they constitute a heap. What is the exact limit? Should we say that 2,342 grains, for instance, do not make a heap, whereas 2,343 grains do? This is obviously ridiculous. There appears no logical way out of this dead-end; it is therefore not possible to know what a heap of wheat is.The expression of the sophism can be varied in many ways; a classification of these expressions will not be unhelpful. (shrink)

Résumé En 1975, la loi inscrit l’IVG dans la juridiction de la médecine, investie comme instrument du contrôle social dans la régulation des naissances. La demande d’IVG demeurait pensée comme phénomène relevant de la pathologie. Cependant, une normalisation de cette activité s’opère dans le système de soins avec l’évolution de l’encadrement réglementaire et des techniques de prise en charge. Notamment, les sages-femmes sont enrôlées dans le réagencement des formes de l’action publique en la matière. Leur champ de compétence est élargi. (...) Ces nouvelles définitions de l’expertise médicale en santé sexuelle et reproductive donnent lieu à des délibérations sur les conceptions de la pratique abortive. L’association nationale des sages-femmes orthogénistes (ANSFO) se saisit de cette opportunité pour renforcer la légitimité du groupe professionnel, en opérant un travail cognitif de « physiologisation » de l’IVG. (shrink)

Ever since Kant, the possibility of having objects of knowledge has been one of the most basic anthropological questions (“what can I know?”). For the logician, the linguist, or the semiologist who studies natural language, negation is one of these objects. However, as an operation and as a symbol, it has the paradoxical property of not being able to be objectivized in the discourse that treats it without being used in this construction. Of course, it is an entirely general problem (...) that it is not possible to have a “distant view” of symbolism without using a symbolism of some sort or another. Anthropology is essentially concerned with such objects. The descriptions of ethnologists are thus fertile ground for the epistemologist who believes, like Aristotle, that non-being is not and therefore that, even though in fact we speak only of things (otherwise, what good is speaking?) our discourse cannot be a copy of them. (shrink)

Book Reviews in this ArticlePaul GochetMaurice BoudotKlaus‐Henrik JacobsenLèon BrunschvicgAndrè Bièler.

Unsurpassed among books on space and time in terms of its insights and clarity, this volume by a world-famous mathematician can be appreciated by lay readers as ...