Leo Strauss on Moses Mendelssohn.Martin D. Yaffe (ed.) -2012 - London: University of Chicago Press.detailsMoses Mendelssohn was the leading Jewish thinker of the German Enlightenment and the founder of modern Jewish philosophy. His writings, especially his attempt during the Pantheism Controversy to defend the philosophical legacies of Spinoza and Leibniz against F. H. Jacobi’s philosophy of faith, captured the attention of a young Leo Strauss and played a critical role in the development of his thought on one of the fundamental themes of his life’s work: the conflicting demands of reason and revelation. _ Leo (...) Strauss on Moses Mendelssohn_ is a superbly annotated translation of ten introductions written by Strauss to a multi-volume critical edition of Mendelssohn’s work. Commissioned in Weimar Germany in the 1920s, the project was suppressed and nearly destroyed during Nazi rule and was not revived until the 1960s. In addition to Strauss’s introductions,Martin D. Yaffe has translated Strauss’s editorial remarks on each of the passages he annotates in Mendelssohn’s texts and brings those together with the introductions themselves. Yaffe has also contributed an extensive interpretive essay that both analyzes the introductions on their own terms and discusses what Strauss writes elsewhere about the broader themes broached in his Mendelssohn studies. Strauss’s critique of Mendelssohn represents one of the largest bodies of work by the young Strauss on a single thinker to be made available in English. It illuminates not only a formerly obscure phase in the emergence of his thought but also a critical moment in the history of the German Enlightenment. (shrink)
Reorientation: Leo Strauss in the 1930s.Martin D. Yaffe &Richard S. Ruderman (eds.) -2014 - New York, New York: Palgrave-Macmillan.detailsReorientation: Leo Strauss in the 1930s seeks to explain the 'change in orientation' that Strauss underwent during a decade of personal and political upheaval. Though he began to garner attention in the 1950s, it was in the 1930s that Strauss made a series of fundamental breakthroughs which enabled him to recover, for the first time since the Middle Ages, the genuine meaning of political philosophy. Despite this being a period of marked output and activity for Strauss, his research in this (...) era remains overlooked. This volume is the first to assemble in one place an examination of Strauss' various publications throughout the decade, providing a comprehensive analysis of his work during the period. It includes, for the first time in English, five newly translated writings of Strauss from 1929-37, brought to life with insight from leading scholars in the field. (shrink)
Theologico-Political Treatise: Containing Some Dissertations by Which It is Shown Not Only That the Freedom of Philosophizing Can Be Granted in Keeping with Piety and the Peace of the Republic, but That It Cannot Be Removed Unless Along with That Very Piety and the Peace of the Republic.Martin D. Yaffe (ed.) -2004 - Focus.detailsA complete translation in English of this modern text, with substantive apparatus to allow the student and serious reader to grapple in a meaningful way with this seminal text. The text includes ample footnotes, Spinoza’s annotations, an interpretative essay, glossary and other indices. Focus Philosophical Library translations are close to and are non-interpretative of the original text, with the notes and a glossary intending to provide the reader with some sense of the terms and the concepts as they were understood (...) by Spinoza’s immediate audience. This is the paperback edition. (shrink)
Liturgy and Ethics: Hermann Cohen and Franz Rosenzweig on the Day of Atonement.Martin D. Yaffe -1979 -Journal of Religious Ethics 7 (2):215 - 228.detailsRitual atonement for Cohen aims exclusively at ethical repentance. Sins, or ethical failures, are regarded as unwitting misdeeds, corrigible once recognized. As individuals continue to vacillate, their need for repentance remains life-long. Rosenzweig, however, considers redemption from sin impossible without recourse to miracles. Individual failures are failures in wish, Rosenzweig implies, rather than failures in deed, as Cohen maintains; hence atonement requires above all the ongoing regulating of wishes through liturgical prayer. "Repentance" (t'shuvah), which for Cohen is the "return" to (...) ethical integrity, is for Rosenzweig the "return" to the daily, weekly, and yearly prayers of the Jewish liturgy. (shrink)
Resiliens mellem individ og livsform.Martin D. Munk -2016 -Slagmark - Tidsskrift for Idéhistorie 73:81-102.detailsIn this paper it is demonstrated how the understanding of resilience is enhanced and shaped when using the concepts of oikos and life-modes. Instead of applying a rather problematic welfare capitalism model, which partially provides a negative social reproduction and production, it is suggested to apply a household/family model. The household/family model outlines that positive social reproduction and production, including real and productive values, potentially creates an essential bond between viable household, family, work, socialisation, and network based communities, resulting in (...) socially, economically, mentally, and ecologically sustainable survival of families and livelihoods over generations. Furthermore, it is stressed that serious fallacies will occur if resilience is solely understood and explained in terms of individual resources and characteristics. Nonetheless, it is recognised that non-cognitive traits such as persistence are important. Offspring is more strongly socialised and positioned in intact and viable families by transmitting and practicing a set of long-term reproduction and production strategies, which compared to upper strata are less common in the lower and middle strata. Thus, resilience is unequal. (shrink)
No categories
Applying Rawls in the twenty-first century: race, gender, the drug war, and the right to die.Martin D. Carcieri -2015 - New York, NY: Palgrave-Macmillan.detailsJohn Rawls was the most influential political thinker of the twentieth century. This book applies his theory of justice to four perennial matters of concern that remain contested in the twenty-first century. Drawing surprising implications, this book deepens our understanding of these issues and points the way toward rational, just policy reform.
Biometrics: body odor authentication perception and acceptance.Martin D. Gibbs -2010 -Acm Sigcas Computers and Society 40 (4):16-24.detailsOdor detection and identification by machines is currently being done to evaluate perfumes, wine, olive, oil, and even find people buried in rubble. Extending body odor detection to authentication may seem far-fetched and unrealistic. Yet such an application is plausible, given that like a fingerprint or iris, the human body odor is unique. Although such technology still has strides to make before being applicable as either a stand-alone or supplemental technology to existing biometric tools, it still warrants research, especially in (...) how the technology is perceived. Numerous studies have addressed the public perception of biometric technologies, although odor scanning is one that has been under-addressed. This exploratory study addresses perceptions and attitudes of odor scanning and recommends directions for future research and practice. This study has found that odor scanning is little understood, and its benefit to security and privacy are perceived as low. Should body odor scanning develop into a viable method of biometric authentication, issues of perception and acceptance will need further attention by both research and practice. (shrink)
No categories
On some claims aboutif-then.Martin D. S. Braine -1979 -Linguistics and Philosophy 3 (1):35 - 47.detailsThe paper has sought to show two things. One is that the apparent variety of Stalnaker and Lewis's counterexamples is misleading. Several of their examples are quite unsatisfactory because they depend on unguarded language behavior. There is in fact only one type of counterexample that is worth serious discussion, and that has the form of Barense's.For Barense's example, I try to show that it fails as a counterexample to transitivity because one of the premisses is false within the context of (...) the example. However, Barense's example is problematic for the Stalnaker-Lewis analysis, since their device for avoiding transitivity (rejecting the rule of conditional proof) does not in fact eliminate anomalous conclusions that can be drawn when both the premisses are taken as true.In sum, there appears to be no good reason to doubt thatif is transitive, that the antecedent of a conditional can be strengthened, and that the contrapositive can be inferred. And the rule of conditional proof does seem to capture a commonly accepted form of argument in support ofif-then statements. (shrink)
The Give and Take of Organ Procurement.D. K.Martin &E. Meslin -1994 -Journal of Medicine and Philosophy 19 (1):61-78.detailsScientific developments of the last 20 years have made the transplantation of cadaveric solid organs a viable and expected treatment alternative for patients suffering from various forms of End Stage Organ Disease. Of the number of organs that could be utilized for this, only a small percentage of them are actually made available. North American legislation explicitly categorizes the transfer of cadaveric organs as an anatomical or tissue “gift”. The concept of the gift is mediated by transculturally consistent unwritten, but (...) powerfully felt, rules of conduct. Among the most profound elements of the concept is the obligatory gift-exchange which is central to the gift-relationship. Obviously, neither of these are permitted by the organ transplant scenario. As a result, dissonance is created within the thought process of the individual which cannot be easily resolved, paralyzing many into inaction. We maintain that the present legal framework, designed to facilitate the transfer of organs, clashes with the human phenomenon of giving, and may actually prevent organs from being made available. In a search for a solution to this gift-relationship dilemma, giving organs is contrasted with taking organs as a basis upon which to ground ethically sound public policy. Liberty-limiting principles and the concept of harm are considered within this context. (shrink)