Arien Mack, Editor
[reprinted in 51:1 50th Anniversary Issue]
The faculty of judging particulars, the ability to say, “this is wrong,” “this is beautiful,” etc. is not the same as the faculty of thinking. Thinking deals with invisibles, with representations of things that are absent; judging always concerns particulars and things close at hand. But the two are interrelated in a way similar to the consciousness and conscience are interconnected.
Provides an assessment of religion in the 1960s and highlights rejection of God-centered theology, Revival of liberalism, emphasis on ethical structures, revolt against authority (especially in the Catholic Church), and secular optimism in religious writings.
Our insatiable curiosity for history is perhaps nothing more than a sublime play. Possibly it is not true that we must know our whole antecedent history, and in addition that of all the other parts of mankind, in order to understand ourselves. Or, if this is true, then it is perhaps not true that we must understand ourselves in this sense in order to be true men.
The author presumes the primary sense of the word “hermeneutics” concerns the rules required for the interpretation of the written documents of our culture. In assuming this starting point the author remains faithful to the concept of Auslegung as it was stated by Wilhelm Dilthey; whereas Verstehen relies on the recognition of what a foreign subject means or intendeds on the basis of all kinds of signs in which psychic life express itself. The paper is then devoted to answering two questions: (1) To what extent may we consider the notion of text as a good paradigm for the so-called object of the social sciences? (2) To what extent may we use the methodology of text-interpretation as a paradigm for interpretation in general in the field of human sciences?
Is Present-Day Higher Learning "Relevant"? First, the author asserts that what is submitted is anything but a systematic treatment of the topic. It is not a scientific paper that is offered, but only some loosely connected thoughts on a none-too-well defined problem. Second, the question as to the relevance of higher learning will be mainly concerned with the social sciences, in the widest meaning of the term, including what used to be known as moral philosophy and now goes by the name of social philosophy. The third qualification concerns the challenge of the contemporary world-wide student protest.
This article clarifies Thomas Hardy's definition of representative government, based on the writings of Thomas Paine and Edmund Burke, as the constitutional power of a collection of individuals acting as an electorate, combined with the machinations of Parliament.
Review of book by George Pitcher. Princeton, N.J.: Princeton university Press, 1971.
Review of book by Rexford G. Tugwell. New York: Praeger, 1971
Review of book by John C. Eccles. New York: Springer-Verlag, 1970,