Advertisement

The Balance of Reason

  • Marcelo Dascal
Part of the Logic, Epistemology, and the Unity of Science book series (LEUS, volume 2)

Keywords

Natural Reason Skeptical Doubt Root Metaphor Balance Metaphor Soft Reason 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. Barcelona A. (ed.) (2000). Metaphor and Metonymy at the Crossroads: A cognitive Perspective. Berlin-New York: Mouton de Gruyter.Google Scholar
  2. Bar-Hillel Y. (1970). “The Logicians’ Treason”. In Y. Bar-Hillel, Logic, Language, and Method. Tel Aviv: Sifriat Hapoalim, pp. 112–118 [Hebrew].Google Scholar
  3. Belaval Y. (1960). Leibniz critique de Descartes. Paris: Gallimard.Google Scholar
  4. Chappell V (ed.). (1999). Hobbes and Bramhall on Liberty and Necessity. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  5. Chuang Tzu [= BW]. Basic Writings. Translated by B. Watson. New York: Columbia University Press, 1964.Google Scholar
  6. Dascal M. (1978). La sémiologie de Leibniz. Paris: Aubier-Montaigne.Google Scholar
  7. ____ (1983). Pragmatics and the Philosophy of Mind, vol. 1. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.Google Scholar
  8. ____ (1990). “La arrogancia de la Razón”. Isegoría 2: 75–103.Google Scholar
  9. ____ (1991). “The Ecology of Cultural Space”. In M. Dascal (ed.), Cultural Relativism and Philosophy: North and Latin American Perspectives. Leiden: E. J. Brill, pp. 279–295.Google Scholar
  10. ____ (1996). “The Beyond Enterprise”. In J. Stewart (ed.), Beyond the Symbol Model: Reflections on the Representational Nature of Language. Albany, New York: State University of New York Press, pp. 303–334.Google Scholar
  11. ____ (1998). “The Study of Controversies and the Theory and History of Science”. Science in Context 11(2): 147–154.Google Scholar
  12. ____ (2000). “Epistemology and Controversies”. In Tian Yu Cao (ed.), Philosophy of Science [Proceedings of the Twentieth World Congress of Philosophy, vol. 10]. Philadelphia: Philosophers Index Inc., pp. 159–192.Google Scholar
  13. ____ (2001). “Nihil sine ratione → Blandior ratio” (‘Nothing without a reason → A softer reason’). In Nihil sine ratione (Proceedings of the VII. Internationaler Leibniz-Kongress), Poser H. (ed.) Berlin: Leibniz Gesellschaft, Volume I, pp. 276–280.Google Scholar
  14. ____ (2003). Interpretation and Understanding. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.Google Scholar
  15. Dascal M. and Fritz G (eds.). (2001. The Hobbes-Bramhall Controversy (= Technical Report 1, Research Group “Controverses dans la République des Lettres). Tel Aviv (available from e-mail: controil@post.tau.ac.il.Google Scholar
  16. Freudenthal G. (2000). Perpetuum-mobile — the Leibniz-Papin Controversy. Berlin: Max-Planck-Institut für Wissenschaftsgeschichte (Preprint 127).Google Scholar
  17. Gil F. (1985). “Leibniz et la charge de la preuve”. Revue de Synthèse 118–119: 157–173.Google Scholar
  18. Gil F. (1993). Traité de l’Evidence. Paris: Millon.Google Scholar
  19. Hesse M. (1966). Models and Analogies in Science. Notre Dame, Indiana: Notre Dame University Press.Google Scholar
  20. Hobbes T. [1740]. Dialogue Between a Philosopher and a Student of the Common Law of England. In The English Works of Thomas Hobbes (ed. W. Molesworth), vol. 6. London: John Bohn, pp. 3–160.Google Scholar
  21. Kitay E.F. (1987). Metaphor: Its Cognitive Force and Linguistic Structure. Oxford: Clarendon Press.Google Scholar
  22. Lakoff G. (1987). Women, Fire, and Dangerous Things: What Categories Reveal about the Mind. Chicago: The University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
  23. Lakoff G. and Johnson M. (1980). Metaphors we Live By. Chicago: The University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
  24. Lakoff G. and Johnson M. (1999). Philosophy in the Flesh: The Embodied Mind and its Challenge to Western Philosophy. New York: Basic Books.Google Scholar
  25. Lakoff G. and Turner M. (1989). More than Cool Reason: A Field Guide to Poetic Metaphor. Chicago: The University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
  26. Leibniz G.W. [= A]. Sämtliche Schriften und Briefe. Berlin: Deutsche Akademie der Wissenschaften [1923–].Google Scholar
  27. ____ [= AC]. The Art of Controversies and Other Writings on Dialectics and Logic. Ed. M. Dascal et al. (in preparation).Google Scholar
  28. ____ [= A&G]. Philosophical Essays. Ed. R. Ariew and D. Garber. Indianapolis: Hackett [1989].Google Scholar
  29. ____ [= C]. Fragments et opuscules inédits. Ed. L. Couturat. Hildesheim: Olms [reprinted 1966].Google Scholar
  30. ____ [= GP]. Die Philosophischen Schriften von G.W. Leibniz. Ed. by C.I. Gerhardt. Hildesheim: Olms [reprinted 1965].Google Scholar
  31. ____ [= L]. Philosophical Papers and Letters, 2nd ed. Ed. by L.E. Loemker. Dordrecht: Reidel [1969].Google Scholar
  32. ____ [= P]. Textes sur les probabilités. Ed. M. Parmentier. Paris: Vrin [1994].Google Scholar
  33. Locke J. 1690 [1961]. An Essay Concerning Human Understanding, ed. J. Yolton. London / New York: Everyman’s Library.Google Scholar
  34. Marras C. (2001). “The Reception of the Hobbes-Bramhall Controversy According to Leibniz’s ‘Réflexions sur l’ouvrage que M. Hobbes a publié en anglois, de la liberté, de la necessité et du hazard”. In Dascal and Fritz (eds.).Google Scholar
  35. de Mora Charles M.S. (1992). “Quelques jeux de hazard selon Leibniz (manuscrits inédits)”. Historia Mathematica 19: 125–157.Google Scholar
  36. de Olaso E. (1990). “Sobre la filosofía leibniziana de las controversias”. In F. Gil (ed.), Scientific and Philosophical Controversies. Lisboa: Fragmentos, pp. 115–130.Google Scholar
  37. Ortony A. (ed.) (1979). Metaphor and Thought. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  38. Pepper S. (1928). “Philosophy and Metaphor”. Journal of Philosophy 25: 130–132.Google Scholar
  39. ____ (1935). “The Root Metaphor Theory of Metaphysics”. Journal of Philosophy 32: 365–374.Google Scholar
  40. ____ (1942). World Hypotheses. Berkeley: University of California Press.Google Scholar
  41. Popkin R.H. (1979). The History of Scepticism from Erasmus to Spinoza. Berkeley: University of California Press.Google Scholar
  42. Quine W.V.O. (1969). Ontological Relativity and Other Essays. New York: Columbia University Press.Google Scholar
  43. Reddy M. (1979). “The Conduit Metaphor”. In Ortony (ed.), pp. 284–324.Google Scholar
  44. Rescher N. Rationality: A Philosophical Inquiry into the Nature and the Rationale of Reason. Oxford: Clarendon Press.Google Scholar
  45. Rorty R. (1979). Philosophy and the Mirror of Nature. Princeton: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
  46. Rorty R. (1989). “Philosophy as Science, as Metaphor and as Politics”. In A. Cohen and M. Dascal (eds.), The Institution of Philosophy: A Discipline in Crisis? La Salle, Illinois: Open Court, pp. 13–33.Google Scholar
  47. Unger R.M. (1975). Knowledge and Politics. New York: The Free Press.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer 2005

Authors and Affiliations

  • Marcelo Dascal
    • 1
  1. 1.Tel Aviv UniversityTel Aviv

Personalised recommendations