Scott F Aikin Poradie kníh

For those new to the Encheiridion of Epictetus, this book serves as a comprehensive guide to a complex philosophical text. It features a full translation along with clear commentaries that introduce readers to significant themes of Stoic philosophy. Aikin and Stephens explore essential concepts such as self-control, perceiving reality, living in accordance with nature, and fulfilling one's roles and responsibilities. The book is organized into five parts, offering a new translation by Stephens, an introduction to ancient Stoicism and its influential figures, and a fresh perspective on the challenging ‘Stoic paradoxes.’ Additionally, it provides an overview of the Encheiridion's historical context and detailed commentaries on each chapter, clarifying recurring themes and their interconnections. The authors pay careful attention to the arguments presented in Epictetus’s aphoristic style and engage with serious criticisms of his Stoicism, offering thoughtful responses. Written with clarity and authority, this guide equips teachers, students, and readers with the tools to understand and engage with the fundamental questions of Stoic philosophy and ethics.

This book analyses the straw man fallacy and its deployment in philosophical reasoning. While commonly invoked in both academic dialogue and public discourse, it has not until now received the attention it deserves as a rhetorical device. Scott Aikin and John Casey propose that straw manning essentially consists in expressing distorted representations of one's critical interlocutor. To this end, the straw man comprises three dialectical forms, and not only the one that is usually suggested: the straw man, the weak man and the hollow man. Moreover, they demonstrate that straw manning is unique among fallacies as it has no particular logical form in itself, because it is an instance of inappropriate meta-argument, or argument about arguments. They discuss the importance of the onlooking audience to the successful deployment of the straw man, reasoning that the existence of an audience complicates the dialectical boundaries of argument. Providing a lively, provocative and thorough analysis of the straw man fallacy, this book will appeal to postgraduates and researchers alike, working in a range of fields including fallacies, rhetoric, argumentation theory and informal logic.

Democracy is not easy. Citizens who disagree sharply about politics must nonetheless work together as equal partners in the enterprise of collective self-government. Ideally, this work would be conducted under conditions of mutual civility, with opposed citizens nonetheless recognizing one another's standing as political equals. But when the political stakes are high, and the opposition seems to us severely mistaken, why not drop the democratic pretences of civil partnership, and simply play to win? Why seek to uphold properly democratic relations with those who embrace political ideas that are flawed, irresponsible, and out of step with justice? Why sustain democracy with political foes?Drawing on extensive social science research concerning political polarization and partisan identity, Robert B. Talisse argues that when we break off civil interactions with our political opponents, we imperil relations with our political allies. In the absence of engagement with our political critics, our alliances grow increasingly homogeneous, conformist, and hierarchical. Moreover, they fracture and devolve amidst internal conflicts. In the end, our political aims suffer because our coalitions shrink and grow ineffective. Why sustain democracy with our foes? Because we need them if we are going to sustain democracy with our allies and friends.

We live in an era marked by political polarization, where beliefs on both sides have shifted toward extremes, resulting in social environments that discourage interaction with differing viewpoints. This polarization is exacerbated by companies and products appealing to our entrenched beliefs, reinforcing our choices—whether it's Starbucks or Dunkin' Donuts, Costco or Sam's Club—as expressions of our political identities. Such choices confine us to self-selected communities, further deepening our divisions. In overemphasizing democracy, we risk undermining the very social goods it aims to promote. A healthy democracy requires citizens to engage in collective activities that transcend political affiliations. To safeguard democracy's future, we must cultivate civic friendships in contexts where political loyalties are irrelevant. Drawing on extensive research, Talisse highlights the extent of our political polarization and how it shapes our perceptions. By limiting our interactions to those who share our views, we ultimately harm the core democratic principle of recognizing and respecting one another as equals.

The book presents a comprehensive and unified exploration of a unique version of pragmatism developed by Scott F. Aikin and Robert B. Talisse. It consolidates their arguments and insights since their initial collaboration in 2005, offering readers a clear understanding of their distinctive philosophical approach. This work serves as a foundational text for those interested in contemporary pragmatist thought.

Practical steps to repair our national conversation--