In each of Plato’s “dialogues of definition” (Euthyphro, Laches, Meno, Charmides, Lysis, Republic I, Hippias Major), Socrates motivates philosophical discussion by posing a question of the form “What is F-ness?” Yet these dialogues are notorious for coming up empty. Socrates’ interlocutors repeatedly fail to deliver satisfactory answers. Thus, the dialogues of definition are often considered negative— empty of any positive philosophical content. Justin C. Clark resists the negative reading, arguing that the dialogues of definition contain positive “Socratic” answers. In order to see the positive theory, however, one must recognize what Clark calls the "dual function" of the “What is F-ness?” question. Socrates is not looking for a single type of answer. Rather, Socrates is looking for two distinct types of answers. The “What is F-ness?” question serves as a springboard for two types of investigation— conceptual and causal. The key to understanding any of the dialogues of definition, therefore, is to decipher between them. Clark offers a way to do just that, at once resolving interpretive issues in Socratic philosophy, providing systematic interpretations of the negative endings, and generating important new readings of the Charmides and Lysis, whilst casting further doubt on the authenticity of the Hippias Major.
While common-sense attitudes towards the United States Supreme Court have been focused on what decisions they are likely to make, this book aims to focus on the impacts of other politicized elements of the Court. Through statistical modeling and other quantitative analyses, Justin DePlato examines the ability of the presidency and the Senate to influence and shape policy through the Court’s nomination process, docket selection, and judicial retirements. The Court operating as a political institution threatens to affect, where it hasn’t already outright intervened, civil liberties and social issues in the modern era and represents a controversial mechanic in the workings of American statecraft.
Dietrich Bonhoeffer is a celebrated and enigmatic figure in theology. Though he is known for advocating a concrete and worldly Christianity, Justin Mandela Roberts argues that his theology is in continuity with a participatory ontology, especially as seen in the ressourcement movement and Radical Orthodoxy. While critical of such "metaphysical speculation," Bonhoeffer displays similar inclinations that situate Truth, Goodness, and Beauty as transcendental aspects of divine being. His theology affirms the pervasive "rhetoric" of doxology, details the economy of reciprocal gift-giving, and celebrates the sacramentality of creation. Sacred Rhetoric contributes to the ongoing discussion of metaphysics, and also serves as a supplement to the debate between Karl Barth and Erich Przywara.
Many conservatives want to know: Where did the Right go wrong? Justin Raimondo provides the answer in this captivating narrative. Raimondo shows how the noninterventionist Old Right - which included half-forgotten giants and prophets such as Senator Robert A. Taft, Garet Garrett, and Colonel Robert McCormick - was supplanted in influence by a Right that made its peace with bigger government at home and "perpetual war for perpetual peace" abroad. First published in 1993, Reclaiming the American Right is as timely as ever. This new edition includes commentary by Pat Buchanan, political scientist George W. Carey, Chronicles executive editor Scott Richert, and the Ludwig von Mises Institute's David Gordon.
Thank you for visiting our website. Would you like to provide feedback on how we could improve your experience?
This site does not use any third party cookies with one exception — it uses cookies from Google to deliver its services and to analyze traffic.Learn More.