The modern American libertarian movement began in the mid-1960s. The surviving written resources from this early era are vanishing, unless converted to digital format. This article provides background for the development of this movement and presents currently available online digital publication platforms. Along with some relevant publications in need of digital preservation.
Many years before Adam Smith, numerous theologians associated with the School of Salamanca, such as Domingo de Soto, Juan de Lugo, Juan de Mariana, Luís Saravia de la Calle, Martin de Azpilcueta, Luis de Molina, Leonard Lessius, Thomas Cajetan, and Francisco Garcia had made great strides in the development of economics. Specifically, these theologians, otherwise known as the “Scholastics,” analyzed and argued against price and wage controls by explaining that the only “just” prices and wages are those that are set by the market, examined and pushed back against prohibitions on usury, understood the concept of time preference, and helped develop monetary theory in multiple ways. They also demonstrated that all of this was consistent with the Catholic religion. This paper analyzes the ways in which these early theologians contributed to the development of economics and reconciled it with their Catholicism.
What are Arabic and Islamic philosophy and sciences? How and where did they come about? I am trying in this preface to provide a short and brief answer to those two questions. Having done this, I sketch the contents of five papers trying to study Arabic and Islamic philosophy and sciences from its perspective to method and truth.
In the present paper, I assume that the notion of “truth” in philosophy would not have been clarified and tackled properly, if philosophers did not take into account earlier Arabic Medieval research contributions and build upon previous research findings. In the first place, I embark on the scrutiny of the rich aspect (or nature) of the Arabic Lexicon in terms of the “truth” meaning. In the second place, I take on the assumption that Arabic linguistic traditions imply different kinds of truths, depending on various spheres of human thoughts and actions based on the logical approach to “truth” (from Al-Kindi up to Averroes via Al-Farabi and Avicenna) and the term “al-haqiqha” as transliterated from Arabic, remain central. In conclusion, I take on an approach to “truth” that gives worth to logical perspectives at the very heart of Medieval Arab traditions in the light of what I would label as the “Omni-cultural Universality of Logic and Science”.
Alchemy is the art of transforming base metals into precious ones, usually silver and/or gold. The most important method conceived to reach this goal was the creation of the elixir, also called the philosophers’ stone, which, applied to the prime-matter, would lead to an accelerated process of ripening of metals, eventually ending in gold. How did Arabo-Islamic alchemists suppose that the transmutation worked? What were the conditions the adept had to fulfil in order to succeed? And what did they think would happen when one finally has created the philosophers’ stone? Will the economy collapse because gold and silver will lose their validity? Will the alchemist simply lean back and enjoy? Or will the world end, because man has finally attained the knowledge that should be God’s only?
The form of the conditional syllogism resembles that of the categorical syllogism, while its subject matter is at least a conditional premise, but its conclusion is always conditional conjunctive or disjunctive. This mixed structure to which we apply the rules of the categorical syllogism, is a structure of which Aristotle did not have an idea, and which the Stoics did not conceive, and which the non-Arabian logicians did not know until in modern times. But what we have to notice here is the putting of a conditional matter in the form of the categorical syllogism, and it is this kind of hybridization, if we dare to say, which generated this mixed structure which appeared for the first time in the history of logic in the treatise on the logic of Ibn Sina and which can be considered a discovery by this author until proof to the contrary, and that the ancient Arabian logicians have taken the habit of exhibiting in their treatises.
In this paper, we are trying to summarize the peak of achievement of the Arabian logicians of the fifteenth century by making a classification and sketching in familiar terms the conditional and subjunctive syllogisms in Muḥammad Ibn Yusūf al-SSinūsī’s (1426-1490) work, i.e. in his explanation of Kitāb al-Muḫtaşar fī al-Manṭiq of al-Imām Muḥammad Ibn ʿArafa (1316- 1401).
Most historians and philosophers of philosophy and history of mathematics hold one interpretation or the other of the nature of method of analysis and synthesis in itself and in its historical development. In this paper, I am trying to prove – through three points – that, in fact, there were two understandings of that method in Greek mathematics and philosophy, and which were reflected in Arabic mathematical science and philosophy; this reflection is considered as proof also of this double nature of that method. Thus, we have to rethink the nature of Arabic philosophy systems.