This paper explores the work of Nicolas Rashevsky, a Russian émigré theoretical physicist who developed a program in "mathematical biophysics" at the University of Chicago during the 1930s. Stressing the complexity of many biological phenomena, Rashevsky argued that the methods of theoretical physics -- namely mathematics -- were needed to "simplify" complex biological processes such as cell division and nerve conduction. A maverick of sorts, Rashevsky was a conspicuous figure in the biological community during the 1930s and early 1940s: he (...) participated in several Cold Spring Harbor symposia and received several years of funding from the Rockefeller Foundation. However, in contrast to many other physicists who moved into biology, Rashevsky's work was almost entirely theoretical, and he eventually faced resistance to his mathematical methods. Through an examination of the conceptual, institutional, and scientific context of Rashevsky's work, this paper seeks to understand some of the reasons behind this resistance. (shrink)

This essay interview with Joan Tower is a meditation on the importance of composing, understood as a process larger than the making of new sound combinations or musical scores, suggesting that the compositional act is self-educative and self-forming. Tower's musical life, one of teaching and learning, one of composing and self-composing, is an exemplary model for a lifetime of risk, curiosity, and hard work. Her own struggles to balance the rich traditions that funded her growth as a composer with the (...) freedom to push against that tradition invite music educators to reflect upon the way that self-agency is found within this tension. (shrink)

The End of the Avant-Gardes : May 68 and the Situationists What emerges first and foremost from Debord’s writings in 1968 is that the situationists’ initial reaction to the May “events” was to interpret them as the first example of a spontaneous general strike in the context of what he called “overdeveloped capitalism”. Debord’s position on this question is linked to his questioning of the status of the avant-gardes. At the time, Debord and those close to him sought both to (...) conceptualise and to enact the end of the avant-gardes. And this included the Internationale Situationniste in its status as political, philosophical and artistic avant-garde. e article subsequently sets out to show that if the situationists did have any leverage on the events of May, it was insofar as they practised a maverick Marxism centred on the concept of alienation. is enabled them to conceptualise both the exploitation of the wage-earner and the condition of the consumer. Because they represent a comprehensive critique of capitalism and because, furthermore, they refuse to compromise on the revolutionary and worker dimension of the May-June 1968 moment, Debord’s writings of the period enable us to grasp what, in the strict sense, remains beyond any opportunistic recuperation in these events. (shrink)

El Repertorio bibliográfico sobre Martin Heidegger que se presenta a continuación, reúne la información obtenida de las más de 240 revistas de filosofía disponibles en la Hemeroteca de la Pontificia Universidad Católica del Perú. El Repertorio incluye referencias bibliográficas completas de los artículos, reseñas, estudios críticos, traducciones y otros documentos que abordan la obra del importante pensador alemán hasta el año 2010.

Some new ideas in medicine are unorthodox, maverick and extraordinary. Some of these will turn out to be wrong and be abandoned, while others will turn out to be right and will change the way we understand entire medical fields. Some will result in harm to patients and some will benefit millions of people. How can we tell the difference between a hero to be, like Barry Marshal or Robin Warren, and a scoundrel to be, like Andrew Wakefield? This paper (...) rejects some possible ways of making this distinction before concluding with a positive suggestion. I argue that we should make use of an Aristotelian account of assessing the reasonableness of the decision to take a risk. This account is uniquely suited to medical research and allows us to distinguish between heroes and scoundrels even before we see the full consequences of their research. (shrink)

In 2013 the Health Research Council of New Zealand began a stream of funding titled 'Explorer Grants', and in 2017 changes were introduced to the funding mechanisms of the Volkswagen Foundation 'Experiment!' and the New Zealand Science for Technological Innovation challenge 'Seed Projects'. All three funding streams aim at encouraging novel scientific ideas, and all now employ random selection by lottery as part of the grant selection process. The idea of funding science by lottery has emerged independently in several corners (...) of academia, including in philosophy of science. This paper reviews the conceptual and institutional landscape in which this policy proposal emerged, how different academic fields presented and supported arguments for the proposal, and how these have been reflected in actual policy. The paper presents an analytical synthesis of the arguments presented to date, notes how they support each other and shape policy recommendations in various ways, and where competing arguments highlight need for further analysis or more data. In addition, it provides lessons for how philosophers of science can engage in shaping science policy, and in particular highlights the importance of mixing complementary expertise: it takes a village to raise policy. (shrink)

In what follows I offer a parodic brief against analytic style philosophy just as it is that style characteristic of professional philosophy of science. I discuss the ad hoc resilience and sophisticated disdain variously operative in analytic discourse, including reviews of the maverick rhetoricism of the late Paul Feyerabend and others towards a critique of the postmodern condition in science and philosophy. What I name continental style philosophical thinking primarily regards the historical and expressly hermeneutic style of thinking found in (...) the reflections on science characteristic of Friedrich Nietzsche and Martin Heidegger. Other continental approaches to the philosophy of science growing out of the phenomenological critiques of Edmund Husserl and Maurice Merleau-Ponty may be expected to be more congenial to analytic sensibilities as suggested by the recent resurgence of interest in the common roots of continental and analytic style philosophic thinking in Husserl and Frege. An approach combining both hermeneutic and phenomenological styles with a sensitivity to the themes of mainstream or analytic philosophy of science is characteristic of the essays and books of, for one important example, Patrick A. Heelan, but also Joseph Kockelmans and Ted Kisiel, Robert Crease and Joseph Rouse, and so on - among rather not a lot of others. Although scholars advocating continental approaches to the philosophy of science routinely refer to traditional adherents of analytic style philosophy of science, there is no reciprocal recognition on the part of analytical philosophers of science. And as a result there is no received tradition of continental scholarship within the professional establishment of the philosophy of science. Thus the philosophy of science remains an analytic discipline, with continental perspectives excluded by the sovereign expedient of disregard, an absence of critical reference which effects the professional annihilation of scholarship. It is this factor that accounts for - that commands - the mixed style of the present essay. (shrink)

I focus on the types of philosophers Cavell and Williams embodied in their work, that is, as the chapter title goes, “The Outsider and the Maverick”. However, to succeed in this difficult task I follow a rather indirect route. I dwell on two different fictional accounts that both philosophers chose as representatives of their own philosophical style. In Cavell’s case, it is Edgar Allan Poe’s The Purloined Letter; in Williams’s case, it is Denis Diderot’s Rameau’s Nephew. I believe that, from (...) this analysis, the differences between the philosophical styles of Cavell and Williams emerge well. Moreover, the problem of what types of philosophers Cavell and Williams represent, precisely because of the way it is discussed, that is, through the analysis of two literary texts such as The Purloined Letter and Rameau’s Nephew, has links with the second and the third criteria of Emersonian perfectionist writing listed above: respectively, metaphorical and allegorical precision and the presence of embodied figures in the philosophical dialogue. (shrink)

Scouting for Boys (1908) is the original blueprint and 'self-instructor' of the Boy Scout Movement. An all-time bestseller, it is both a handbook and a philosophy for a way of living that replaces self with service, puts country before individual, and duty above all. As well as practical instructions on how to light fires and stalk men and animals, it includes sections on chivalry, self-discipline, self-improvement and citizenship. This new edition reveals its maverick complexity and explores its contradictions about sexuality, (...) the environment, and the empire. (shrink)

Zen Masters: A Maverick, a Master of Masters, and a Wandering Poet. John Stevens. Kodansha International, Tokyo 1999. 161 pp. £8.99. ISBN 4-7700-2385-5.

In response to the wonderful work of the editors and contributors to this special issue, we offer some combined reflections on the importance of place to the Thesis Eleven project, broadly defined, and including the textbooks that grew out of this field. We return to the impact and influence of two major intellectual resources in the work and thinking of Bernard Smith and George Seddon. These mavericks helped us to think our own sense of place, and to engage with (...) the other places that we encountered and also sometimes think of as home. Place here nestles with movement as central conceptual coordinates. (shrink)

Three aspects of the Everett interpretation of quantum mechanics are considered. It is first shown that the proof of the metatheorem is not complete—thus it is an open question as to whether or not it is true. Next, some difficulties for the Everett interpretation and the metatheorem, which arise from consideration of the physics developed by observers in maverick universes, are discussed. Finally, it is shown that the universal state description of an ever-branching universe with each branch corresponding to a (...) possible perceived universe fails completely in the limit of an infinite number of successive branchings. (shrink)

This research note examines the romanticised notion of misfit as a positive workplace identity. While misfit is typically understood as a negative, distressing experience of poor person–organisation alignment, a small subset of individuals describe their misalignment in celebratory terms, embracing labels such as “misfit” and “maverick” to signal creativity, rule-breaking, and a rejection of bureaucratic norms. Drawing on nine netnographic accounts extracted from a broader study of online narratives about misfit, this paper explores how self-identified mavericks conceptualise and articulate (...) their experience. The findings reveal a consistent portrayal of maverickism as a form of proud nonconformity grounded in high self-esteem, confidence, and disdain for conventional work structures. Rather than reflecting situational misalignment, these narratives suggest a fixed personality orientation that views most organisations as stifling. The romantic language, inflated self-perceptions, and references to aspirational figures raise questions about whether maverickism is a genuine form of fit misalignment or a self-constructed coping mechanism. The paper concludes by advocating for greater definitional clarity between social misfit and maverickism, and calls for future research to explore whether maverickism reflects an interactional dynamic or a dispositional stance. This distinction has implications for recruitment, organisational inclusion, and the valorisation of deviance at work. (shrink)

It all started in 2021 when we sparked a rather specific debate within Austrian economics in _Philosophical Problems in Science_ (_Zagadnienia Filozoficzne w Nauce_) – traditionally abbreviated as _ZFN_. The story unfolded as follows. First, Wysocki submitted a paper on the concept of indifference, as it is normally understood in the Austrian school of economics. To his astonishment and great relief, this then rising journal (now the one with well-established reputation, its Scopus ranking being as high as Q2 under the (...) rubric of philosophy) accepted the submission in question and published it promptly in ZFN 71 as (Wysocki, 2021). It was an honour and a privilege, especially given the fact that Austrian economics – with all due respect to its scientific achievements – is nowadays not a mainstream economic current, to say the least. Hence, being published in _ZFN_ only added to the strength of Wysocki’s belief that the journal is clearly unbiased towards any sort of philosophy of science. The very fact that Wysocki published a paper on indifference in Austrian economics and the fact that he spread the news about _ZFN_ being also open to publishing maverick (after all, as already observed, Austrian economics is not a branch of mainstream economics) papers related to philosophy of science prompted Walter Block (a prominent Austrian economist) to submit to _ZFN_ his rejoinder to Wysocki’s original paper on indifference, with the said response being ultimately published in ZFN 72 as (Block, 2022). (shrink)

Steven E. Landsburg, political economic maverick extraordinaire, and supposed advocate of free enterprise, has written a paper on theft and externalities entitled “Property Is Theft: When protecting your own property is stealing from others.” In it, he calls for greater government intervention into the economy, more taxing, regulating, and subsidizing; and he does so on the ground that only in this way may we become more economically efficient. Where was he when the Politburo needed commissars?

In lieu of an abstract, here is a brief excerpt of the content:Art and SelectionBrian BoydArt Instinct: Beauty, Pleasure, and Human Evolution, by Denis Dutton; 279 pp. New York: Bloomsbury Press, 2009, $25.00. Oxford: Oxford University Press, £16.99.In the interests of full disclosure: Denis Dutton, the author of The Art Instinct: Beauty, Pleasure, and Human Evolution, not only edits this journal but has also published here a number of my essays. We share enthusiasms and aversions, but we also now and (...) again disagree. And we both enjoy spirited discussion, which is why I asked him if I might review his book for this journal. Now can we begin?Ellen Dissanayake, the first to take a modern evolutionary approach to art, in her What Is Art For? (1988), doubts that sexual selection can explain much about art. After all, she notes, men can compete about anything, even about who can pee the highest.1 Denis Dutton, the first philosopher to take a sustained evolutionary approach to the arts, suggests that much in art arises from sexual selection—and he spends a good deal of time discussing and dismissing the kind of philosophy of art that orients itself around the urinal that Marcel Duchamp christened Fountain.Dutton begins by reporting recent research into the universality of human landscape preferences. Although these preferences explain little about art in the round, they vividly demonstrate the link between human emotions and preferences across cultures now and human survival [End Page 204] needs thousands of generations ago. In chapter 2, Dutton shows that although recent philosophers of art have not sought to ground art in human nature, that has been an aim of their predecessors from Aristotle to Hume and Kant.But Dutton really starts with the intuitions that art seems a fundamentally similar pursuit around the world, and that artworks like Duchamp's Fountain or Andy Warhol's Brillo Boxes should not be central to our thinking about art, even if they have been central for prominent philosophers of art like George Dickie and Arthur Danto. Dutton stresses that we can appreciate art across cultures. He did so himself when he lived in India while in the Peace Corps, and, an accomplished pianist, learned the sitar from a student of Ravi Shankar, or later, when he lived by the Sepik River in northern Papua New Guinea to ascertain whether "local criteria for beautiful art agree with what Western aficionados and connoisseurs of Sepik art call beautiful. My conclusion was unequivocal: Sepik standards of beauty closely match the opinions of Western experts, including curators and collectors who enjoy a wide experience with Sepik museum collections but who have never set foot in the country" (p. 11).As this passage makes clear, Dutton is not your average armchair academic analytical aesthetician—thank goodness. Unlike the typical professional philosopher of art, he does not hide behind the porcupine quills of philosophese, good for defense and a certain kind of bristly display but utterly rebarbative. Like that other maverick philosopher, Daniel Dennett, he instead engages with work, the world, and readers outside his discipline.Dutton argues convincingly for the need to focus first on indisputable examples of art rather than on problematic cases, just as discussions of murder should not begin with assisted suicide, abortion or capital punishment (p. 50). One of his best chapters offers a cluster concept of art, a dozen features shared by the most unequivocal art. Doubtful cases will satisfy fewer than the full checklist, but there is no fixed threshold, no necessary and sufficient number of criteria. And no criterion by itself distinguishes art from non-art. Indeed one of the most fascinating aspects of his cluster concept is that, for each criterion, he parenthetically notes examples elsewhere in human life that would satisfy that criterion but that nobody would consider art. Skill and virtuosity, for instance, he insists on as features of the indisputably artful, but he adds also: "High skill is a source of pleasure and admiration in every area of human activity beyond art, perhaps most notably today in sports. [End Page 205] Almost every regularized human activity can be turned competitive in order to emphasize the development and admiration of its technical, skill aspect. Guinness World Records... (shrink)

This chapter presents an interpretative study investigating how followers determine the authenticity of their leaders in the context of their formative managerial work relationships. The findings indicate that working for an authentic leader at an early career stage has a positive and enduring impact on followers’ own leadership identities and behavioural preferences throughout their ensuing employment. The study also identifies that, within these early career relationships, authentic leadership is perceived as a more flexible construct than is suggested by current theory. (...) These formative perceptions are oriented more around the leader’s ethical, prosocial, and sometimes maverick behaviours, which have a life-enhancing impact on followers by legitimising their own subsequent self-expression and non-conformity at work. (shrink)

The philosophy of mathematics of the last few decades is commonly distinguished into mainstream and maverick, to which a ‘third way’ has been recently added, the philosophy of mathematical practice. In this paper the limitations of these trends in the philosophy of mathematics are pointed out, and it is argued that they are due to the fact that all of them are based on a top-down approach, that is, an approach which explains the nature of mathematics in terms of some (...) general unproven assumption. As an alternative, a bottom-up approach is proposed, which explains the nature of mathematics in terms of the activity of real individuals and interactions between them. This involves distinguishing between mathematics as a discipline and the mathematics embodied in organisms as a result of biological evolution, which however, while being distinguished, are not opposed. Moreover, it requires a view of mathematical proof, mathematical definition and mathematical objects which is alternative to the top-down approach. (shrink)

Reuben Hersh is a champion of maverick philosophy of mathematics. He maintains that mathematics is a human activity, intelligible only in a social context; it is the subject where statements are capable in principle of being proved or disproved, and where proof or disproof bring unanimous agreement by all qualified experts; mathematicians' proof is deduction from established mathematics; mathematical objects exist only in the shared consciousness of human beings. In this paper I describe my several points of agreement and few (...) points of disagreement with Hersh's views. (shrink)

Sometimes we love and hate the same thing at the same time. Margaret Cavendish (1623-1673)—the maverick early modern materialist—appeals to this type of passionate conflict to argue that the mind is a material thing. When our passions conflict, the mind or reason conflicts with itself. From this Cavendish infers that the mind has parts and, therefore, is material. Cavendish says this argument is among the best proofs of the mind’s materiality. And yet, the existing scholarship on Cavendish lacks the kind (...) of detailed reconstruction required to evaluate this argument’s merits. In this paper, I provide just such a reconstruction. I also show that Cavendish’s argument is an effective intervention in her dispute with René Descartes and Henry More about the (im)materiality of the mind. (shrink)

How do we get new knowledge? Following the maverick tradition in the philosophy of science, Carlo Cellucci gradually came to the conclusion that logic can only fulfill its role in mathematics, science and philosophy if it helps us to answer this question. He argues that mathematical logic is inadequate and that we need a new logic, framed in a naturalistic conception of knowledge and philosophy - the heuristic conception. This path from logic to a naturalistic conception of knowledge and philosophy (...) explains the title, From a Heuristic Point of View, which recalls the celebrated collection of essays, From a Logical Point of View, by Willard Van Orman Quine, the father of modern naturalized epistemology. The word 'heuristic' points to Cellucci's favorite theme and the main difference between him and Quine: the emphasis on discovery and building a 'logic' for generating new knowledge. This book is a collection of essays from leading figures in this field who discuss, criticize, or expand on the main topics in Cellucci's work, dealing with some of the most challenging questions in logic, science and philosophy. (shrink)

If the opening sequence of a film is a microscopic 'event' that achieves far more than setting the tone and whetting the appetite for what we are about to see, then Todd Haynes' I'm Not There is exemplary. This paper works its way through the conceptually dense and intricately woven textual layers of the film's opening to stage a three-way dialogue between Haynes, Bob Dylan and Jacques Derrida: three mavericks who defy simple categorisation, by transgressing the boundaries of their (...) respective fields (song writing, cinema and philosophy). By introducing Derrida's deconstructive logic of hauntology as a strategy for reading Haynes' biopic on Dylan, the figure of the ghost is called upon to situate the quest for an identity's authenticity as a perennial, irresolvable problem in song, cinema and philosophy. Belonging to a time that is neither past nor present, a place that is neither here nor there, the ghost offers the perfect medium to join Haynes, Dylan and Derrida in (re)thinking identity in terms that respond to a call (in the name of art, justice and truth, among other things) that is not based on an unyielding conception of authenticity. (shrink)

In this volume, Lloyd Strickland makes the key philosophical writings of maverick Enlightenment philosopher André-Pierre Le Guay de Prémontval (1716-1764) available in English for the first time. His writings contain many provocative ideas and arguments, and anticipate modern developments such as open theism, process theology, and animal theodicy.

The Cold Case crime department of Derby Constabulary feels like a morgue to DI Damen Brook. As a maverick cop, his bosses think it's the best place for him. But Brook isn't going to go down without a fight. Applying his instincts and razor sharp intelligence, he sees a pattern in a series of murders that seem to begin in 1963. How could a killer go undetected for so long? And why are his superiors so keen to drive him down (...) blind alleys? Brook delves deep into the past of both suspects and colleagues unsure where the hunt will lead him. What he does know for sure is that a significant date is approaching fast and the killer is certain to strike again... (shrink)

The present work aims to analyse the dynamics between the concepts at stake within the transition from morality to ethical life in Hegel’s “Philosophy of Objective Spirit”. Our hermeneutical and conceptual resource consists in the complementary readings of the dialectical movements of “morality” in Hegel’s Philosophy of Right and in his Phenomenology of Spirit. First of all, we will examine the concepts of abstract good and conscience that appear in the Philosophy of Right. Secondly, we will examine the meaning of (...) such concepts in the Phenomenology of Spirit as complementary concepts. Finally, we offer a formulation and analysis of the meaning of the overall transition from morality to ethical life, starting from the dialectic articulation of both concepts, and the emergence of ethical freedom as an overcoming of moral freedom. (shrink)

This volume is the latest in a series of books and articles stretching back more than three decades on a theme quite startling in its claims and implications: that terrestrial life did not originate on Earth but arrived in the form of cells or bacteria from outer space. The idea of “panspermia,” that the seeds of life are spread from planet to planet, dates to the 19th century with the ideas of Lord Kelvin. It was championed by the Swedish physicist, (...) chemist, and Nobelist Svante Arrhenius at the beginning of the 20th century. Once scientists recognized the difficulties of life surviving in the conditions of interplanetary and interstellar space, by the 1960s a neo-panspermia became popular: not life itself, but prebiotic chemicals were the new seeds of life, made more likely by the discovery of numerous complex organic molecules in meteorites, comets, and interstellar molecular clouds. But the difficulties of synthesizing anything more complicated than amino acids in the wake of the famous Miller-Urey experiment in 1953 kept alive the idea that life itself may be spread throughout the universe. At the center of this work is Chandra Wickramasinghe, a research student of the maverick astronomer Fred Hoyle. In 1962 Hoyle became interested in the origin and nature of interstellar dust, in particular as found in dense molecular clouds, and he and Wickramasinghe set to work on the problem. They became convinced that dust could not form inside molecular clouds, but must have originated in the atmospheres of cool stars, protoplanetary discs, or supernova ejecta, a theory now widely accepted. It was the next steps that became increasingly controversial: that the spectroscopic signature of dust was best explained by complex biomolecules such as cellulose; that biomolecules were assembled into still more complex forms inside comets; and that the living cells and bacteria generated there were responsible for the origin of life on Earth. And not only that: Hoyle and Wickramasinghe argued that the delivery of bacteria from space continues, affecting both the origin and the ongoing evolution of life, and may even be responsible for certain diseases on Earth. These theories were not only reported in reputable scientific journals such as Nature, but also in popular books including Lifecloud (1978), Diseases from Space (1979), and Evolution from Space (1981). Biologists were not impressed; Lynn Margulis, not known for the timidity of her own theories such as endosymbiosis, called the first book “wanton, amusing, promiscuous fiction.”. (shrink)

A monumental and riveting account of how a poet, a physicist, and a philosopher pursued truth to the very limits of human apprehension and revealed the fundamental nature of our place in the universe Spiraling in the wreckage of a failed love affair, Argentine poet Jorge Luis Borges channeled his devastation into his work, reassessing the slippery nature of our own identities and the way we perceive reality, ultimately securing his place in the literary pantheon. Doggedly fighting against the scientific (...) establishment for his controversial interpretation of quantum mechanics, German physicist Werner Heisenberg dared to accept the experimental evidence at face value, leading him to a principle that has been a guiding light for physicists ever since. Prussian philosopher Immanuel Kant, horrified by the possibility that all knowledge might rest on uncertain grounds, undertook to test the limits of reason, placing human understanding on a firmer footing than ever before. What these three thinkers shared, in addition to their uncommon intellect, was their skepticism-not only of the accepted wisdom of their culture, but also of their own reasoning. What set them apart was their willingness to submit their ideas to the same rigor they would bring to someone else's. In so doing, they made extraordinary leaps in answering some of the most enduring questions about the nature of reality-about the flow of time in human consciousness, about the origins and nature of the universe, but most importantly, about the possibility of coming to know reality as it is itself. In an era like ours, in which dogma of all kinds seems to rule the day, the story of these thinkers serves as a crucial reminder that maverick thinking demands submitting our intuitions and even our own deeply held beliefs to the cold light of reason. In their lives and work we recognize that the mysteries of our place in the world may always loom over us, not as a threat, but as a reminder of our humble humanity. (shrink)

This book will benefit readers by revealing how urban existence is a multifaceted affair that, once examined, will forever change the way they think about their place in the city and what it means to live in one. -/- Engaging in urban existentialism requires interrogating the idea of “The City,” delving into the facets of its conception. The lights, sounds, exquisite buildings, art, culture, and, most importantly, the endless possibilities entice people. They are where your wildest dreams of love, success, (...) and happiness can come true. Yet, reality can stymie those aspirations. However, if you can make it there, you can make it anywhere. The reason is that many urban places, as hypercompetitive networks of socio-material arrangements, test you at every turn. They mold urban dwellers into adaptable beings who can survive the torment of traffic, bad weather, displeasing persons, and grueling work—all before lunch. Despite such complexity, what we want is probably simple: people to love, to be loved, a safe place to call home, good food, acceptance of oneself, and the ability to pursue a fulfilling existence through work and recreation. Like cities, nothing is that simple. Examining the built environment reveals competing interests between several stakeholder groups, and how each person relates to others remains at the center of such an enterprise. Questioning one’s place among others is at the heart of this book, and it can help you find meaning in the metropolis. -/- Meaning in the Metropolis will interest philosophers, graduate students, maverick urban planners, and city lovers looking for meaning in the places they call home. (shrink)

The Guggenheim’s spring retrospective of the seminal Swedish painter, Hilma Af Klint, has, naturally, evoked a multitude of art critics and visual culture scholars who laud her radical abstraction which, at the beginning of the 20th century, preceded Kandinsky, Malevich, Mondrian. Yet, where much attention has been given to the symbology and motifs riddling Klint’s work – bold, private, untethered and nonrepresentational as they are – there has been a modicum of nuanced thought on how, exactly, esotericism and theology fomented (...) Klint’s pedagogical projects. Jillian Steinhauer, for instance, has underscored Klint’s naturalistic watercolors; featuring flowers and lifelike drawings of women; Summer Landscape (1888) suggests Klint’s technical aptitude for rendering light. Jadranka Ryle, in a clever article titled “Reinventing the Yggdrasil,” invokes Klint’s motif of the Yggdrasil, or the holy tree of Norse mythology, as a political axle for Nordic romanticism. Ryle makes the claim that by redirecting the Yggdrasil towards androgynous abstraction, Klint’s engagement with Norse mythology subverts the nationalist and patriarchal romanticism that previously characterized the nineteenth century’s use of the Yggdrasil. Others have adroitly uncovered biographical fragments from Klint’s life, detailing how she and four friends formed De Fem (“the Five”), an exclusively female coven that met weekly, praying, meditating, and holding seances to commune with spiritual guides. Rather than poise the Swedish maverick within the cannon of abstraction qua a political praxis, feminist subject-being, or historiography – projects that have been exhaustively overwrought, to the point of rendering Klint’s work both mute and reductively technical– I would like to take this time to closely examine simply one of Klint’s paintings and foreground it as an axiomatic modernist injunction between metaphysics and epistemology. (shrink)

This well‐researched book will be of immense value to the person who will someday write the full story of broadcast regulation in the United States. That story still needs to be written; although in this book the facts are all presented, the story behind the facts is not.Well, actually, not quite all the facts are here either. For example, similar problems tackled in other countries such as Canada, even before the United States began looking into them, aren't even mentioned. True, (...) the title of the book specifies that it is limited to the United States, but to understand the regulations presented we should certainly have some knowledge of how others had attacked the same problem.More important, Hugh Slotten totally ignores the personalities of the people involved. This is a tremendously important consideration, for to understand what happened we must know something about the motives of the people who made the decisions, and since many of the motives were hidden under layers of varying complexity and political beliefs we would like to know something about the personalities of the players. Someone at the Johns Hopkins Press evidently noticed the problem, but the only attempt at fixing it was to lie blatantly on the bookjacket: “His [Slotten's] discussion of the early years of radio examines powerful personalities—including navy secretary Josephus Daniels and commerce secretary Herbert Hoover.” But there is no discussion at all of the personalities of these men. Daniels is mentioned in only two sentences, neither of which touches on him as a person, and although Hoover occurs in several more, nothing of his “personality” is thrown in.Lee De Forest is another example. On page 4 he is identified as the inventor of the audion . On page 61 we read of his “invention” [sic] of that device. Why the quotation marks around “invention”? Did he or didn't he invent it? Actually, there is a good story to be told about that, but you won't read it here. De Forest played an active role in the regulation controversies, and this role is made clear in the book. But precisely because of this, wouldn't it be interesting to know that De Forest was arrested and went to trial for crooked stock manipulation in connection with the audion? The only hint at such activities is Slotten's statement that De Forest was a “maverick.” Wouldn't that one word make you want to know more about him, if only to evaluate his quoted remarks on governmental interference and regulations?Other matters of interest are passed by, as when on page 48 we read: “Decisions about who should receive licenses … could … be based on such qualitative issues as the character of broadcasts … and the educational benefits.” What a can of worms this opens up! Or should open up. Is the government going to censor broadcasting by denying licenses to stations that publicize alternative methods of government, such as communism? How about religious or ethnic controversies: will these be deemed “educational” or subversive? Is the government, through its licensing powers, going to let the public hear only what it wants it to hear, à la Goebbels and Germany? Well, we'll never know, for this particular can is not opened by the author; after this one mention, the subject is never broached again.In summary, if you are actively researching this field, Slotten's book is a must for you. But the full story of radio and television regulation in the United States is still to be written. (shrink)

ABSTRACT As digital technology advances at a truly exponential rate, documentary filmmakers may be tempted to bypass standards of ethical conduct – like subject consent and disclosure of contrived reenactments to audiences – in favor of dramatic impact. Some may also seek to replace missing archival or historical material and manufacture seemingly authentic content with the assistance of “digital performers.” This commentary examines the use of artificial intelligence in Morgan Neville’s film, Roadrunner: A Film About Anthony Bourdain and places it (...) within an historical context. Comparisons to Flaherty’s Nanook of the North and Kosinski’s Top Gun: Maverick highlight the importance of managing and negotiating traditional audience expectations in order to preserve the unspoken agreement between viewers and makers. (shrink)

Reasoning that leads to delusions—especially in schizophrenia—appears beyond the bounds of sense, profoundly inaccessible. By analyzing empirical research on reasoning that supports delusions in schizophrenia, I demonstrate that such reasoning can be made intelligible at the personal level. Specifically, I propose that these empirical findings can be positively characterized as reflecting a distinctive epistemic style—a unique implementation of reason rather than its absence. Delusion-supporting reasoning in schizophrenia can be understood as expressing epistemic values and preferences characteristic of a maverick epistemic (...) personality. As such, it is substantially intelligible in light of these underlying values. Further, I argue that the presence of this epistemic style in individuals with schizophrenia can itself be understood in light of their anomalous experiences and social exclusion. This view contributes to reducing stigma and provides new resources for theorizing non-standard interactions with evidence within the neurodiversity paradigm. (shrink)

In lieu of an abstract, here is a brief excerpt of the content:Philosophy and Literature 27.2 (2003) 255-268 [Access article in PDF] The Tree of Knowledge and Darwinian Literary Study Jonathan Gottscha I THE BRANCHES OF KNOWLEDGE are not strewn randomly on the ground; they are part of a coherent, interconnected tree. Physics is the most fundamental of all the sciences, so it is the trunk of the tree. The branch of chemistry emerges from physics, because the laws of chemistry (...) depend on the laws of physics: chemical reactions occur the way they do because of the physical properties of atoms. Biology's branch splits off from chemistry's: the molecules that comprise living things are bound by the rules of chemistry. Scientists, while grasping this fundamental interconnection of the broad boughs of the natural sciences, 1 have rarely craned their necks sufficiently to glimpse the upper reaches of the tree of knowledge: the green canopy of human culture that is the traditional jurisdiction of the social sciences and humanities. In fact, scholars from all disciplines have mostly proceeded as though the greenery above was the outgrowth of a neighboring tree from a fundamentally different species.Since the 1960s, however, a maverick band of Darwinian neck-craners have been demonstrating that the stuff of human culture, studied in the humanities and social sciences, is a contiguous part of the tree of knowledge: human culture and behavior grow out of human biology. 2 These scholars and scientists continue to define themselves by different names depending on subtleties in their particular approaches: Darwinian psychology, sociobiology, Darwinian anthropology, biosociology, human behavioral ecology, human ethology, and evolutionary psychology. 3 However, sacrificing some precision on the alter of clarity, I will refer to all of the above approaches with the umbrella term of human [End Page 255] behavioral biology, understood in its most expansive sense as the study of how millions of years of evolution shaped the human mind, and thus human behavior, and thus human culture. No matter how human behavioral biologists define their work, they all share the conviction that human behavior, psychology, and culture cannot be fully understood separate from human bio-evolutionary history.Darwinian excavation of the foundations of human nature has inspired a revolutionary movement in the social sciences that proceeds to this day. Like most revolutions, this one has seen its share of rolling heads and intellectual bloodshed. Starting with the "sociobiology debates" of the late 1970s through mid-80s and continuing through the "science wars" of the early-mid 1990s allegations and recriminations of the most serious sort have been almost casually poured into the air: racism, sexism, Social Darwinism, biological determinism, disciplinary colonialism, disciplinary xenophobia, and "biophobia." 4 However, despite entrenched, sometimes zealous opposition, evolutionary thinking has firmly established itself in the social sciences. Thumbing through leading social science journals, it is no longer a shock to encounter articles exploring traditional topics with shiny new Darwinian tools. This stands in stark contrast to the situation in the decades immediately following World War II, where applying biology to human behavior and culture was virtually taboo. In fact, the UNESCO statement of 1952 explicitly tabooed human behavioral biology as scientifically and politically incorrect. Moreover, this phenomenon is in marked contrast to the mainstream social science of the late 1970s and early 1980s, which was in the midst of a wicked backlash against the resurgence of biological inquiry into behavior represented in sociobiology.Currently, while human behavioral biology retains many social scientist critics, and while certain social science fields remain largely hostile or indifferent, invoking biology to explain social behavior is moving toward the mainstream. Almost thirty years after E. O. Wilson made, in Sociobiology (1975), his first call for a merger of disciplines under a new biological synthesis, biology-savvy social scientists and social-science-savvy biologists have provided startling new insights into a host of topics traditionally examined in isolation from biology: gender differences, criteria for mate choice, resource acquisition and allocation, aggression, cooperation, xenophobia, ethnocentrism, sexual politics, religious sensibilities, social hierarchy, moral codes, etc. 5Though one must be careful not to overstate the progress, we are [End Page 256] witnessing... (shrink)