Joseph Novak

The modern tradition of informal logic has relied heavily on accepting, modifying, or criticizing the patterns of reasoning mentioned in Aristotle's Sophistical Refutations. However, already in 1971, Stachowiak focussed his attention on the muc h neglected Topics and enumerated in his work, Rationalismus im Ursprung some of the Aristotelian rules governing the formation of definitions and principles for correct reasoning. The paper will try to examine how these principles might ap ply to informal arguments today.

The purpose of this substantive volume is to familiarize English readers with the Tübingen interpretation of Plato’s thought. Although there are a few other works in English on the German school of Platonism—Catan himself had earlier translated a work of Krämer, the founder of the school— this is by far the most detailed. Moreover, the work also tries to be a systematic defense of the position of the school and to amplify the explanatory power of the position by exploring further implications of the basic ideas of the school.

The paper attempts to schematize, in the form of abductive inferences, the major changes in the developing picture of the atom during the modem period of scientific investigation. The aim of this presentation is to enable students in logic or the philosophy of science to see how a sustained application of abduction might be seen as operative in the development of changing conceptions of the atom, a development which may well be seen as a scientific revolution. The sustained example also illustrates, in pedagogic fashion, the role of images in abduction, the theory-observation distinction, and the analytic-synthetic distinction

Most students of Greek philosophy would probably find it difficult to recount significant features of Cynic philosophy from their undergraduate or graduate courses in philosophy; it would often be omitted from the treatment of Hellenistic or later philosophy. Such omission was due not simply to an oversight on the part of the instructor but also to the general lack of interest among the scholarly community. Of course, the scholarly community had little material to nourish its insights; Dudley’s work was about the only book easily to be found on the topic. However, evidence of a new interest in the Cynics is evidenced not simply by this book but by other works that have been emerging over the last while—even beyond the narrow confines of philosophy. Navia had recently published a detailed bibliography on the Cynics. Canadians can be happy that already years ago Paquet published at Ottawa an important sourcebook on the Cynics, with fragments pertaining to them translated into French. Recently a scholarly conference of CNRS in France put its proceedings into print on this topic, while somewhat earlier, a German anthology on the subject also appeared. All these stirrings of interest notwithstanding, there are other and even more provocative reasons to take note of the Cynics. Some theologians have been courting the idea that Jesus might have been a Cynic. The most serious work along these lines has been done by Downing, who has published a book of fragments as well as a monograph on the topic. In the more popular sphere, Crossan has been advocating the thesis that Jesus was a “Jewish Cynic.” Finally, given the many so-called “cynical” attitudes that have developed on the part of the general populace toward politicians, authority figures, sports heroes, and even entertainers, it seems worthwhile to pause for a consideration of the roots of cynicism and look at what is thought to be its ancient namesake.