A critical discussion of Aristotle's thoughts on moral weakness, or Akrasia, with a look at the contributions of other philosophers, such as, Socrates and Plato on this subject.

On the nature of Aristotle's Ethics, by R. A. Gauthier.--Reason, happiness, and goodness, by F. Siegler.--The nature of aims, by J. Dewey.--Thought and action in Aristotle, by G. E. M. Anscombe.--On forgetting the difference between right and wrong, by G. Ryle.--Aristotle and the punishment of psychopaths, by V. Haksar.--Suggested further readings (p. 121-123).

Most studies of Aristotle's Rhetoric center on the text itself, either dwelling entirely on the text or citing other Aristotelian works only to support a particular interpretation. However, since it is clear that most of Aristotle's works relate to each other as part of a systematic effort to describe the universe, it seems best to look at the Rhetoric in light of his whole range of work. This essay therefore discusses his "metarhetoric", or the whole range of knowledges necessary to (...) be rhetorical. The essay concludes with five examples of what can be learned about the Rhetoric from even a short treatise like his On memory and Reminiscence. (shrink)

Introduction The editors of this volume hope that it will prove useful for the study of philosophy in the Middle Ages by virtue of the comprehensiveness of ...

Both the psychology of perception and the philosophy of perception seem to show a new face when the process is considered at its own level, distinct from that of sensation. Unfamiliar conceptions in physics, anatomy, physiology, psychology, and phenomenology are required to clarify the separation and make it plausible. But there have been so many dead ends in the effort to solve the theoretical problems of perception that radical proposals may now be acceptable. Scientists are often more conservative than philosophers (...) of science. I end, therefore, as I began, with a plea for help. (shrink)

This is a book about how we see: the environment around us (its surfaces, their layout, and their colors and textures); where we are in the environment; whether or not we are moving and, if we are, where we are going; what things are good for; how to do things (to thread a needle or drive an automobile); or why things look as they do.The basic assumption is that vision depends on the eye which is connected to the brain. The (...) author suggests that natural vision depends on the eyes in the head on a body supported by the ground, the brain being only the central organ of a complete visual system. When no constraints are put on the visual system, people look around, walk up to something interesting and move around it so as to see it from all sides, and go from one vista to another. That is natural vision—and what this book is about. (shrink)

This special issue presents a selection of papers in Knowledge Representation in Artificial Intelligence , intended to illustrate the depth and breadth of current research in the area. It comes just over 25 years since a similar special issue of the Journal of Philosophical Logic appeared on the topic Philosophical Logic and Artificial Intelligence [15]. This latter special issue covered work addressing the use of logic, in one form or another, for representing and reasoning with knowledge. The papers of the (...) 1988 special issue give a good indication of major themes of research at the time: reasoning about belief and knowledge [5], tractable logical reasoning [10], nonmonotonicity [11], and reasoning about action [13]. These topics can be considered to be centrally in KR; the current issue then also serves to indicate how the field has broadened and evolved over the last 25 years.Traditionally the area of Knowledge Representation has been seen as “the field of study concerned w .. (shrink)