scholarly journals Philosophical background of the cosmological polemics in Contra Manichaeos by John of Damascus

Author(s):  
Vladimir Baranov

This article analyzes the philosophical arguments used by John of Damascus against the Manichaean dualist cosmological system in his Dialogue contra Manichaeos, showing some parallels with his Dialectica, and revealing a common Aristotelian background. The philosophical argument in the Dialogue seems to be a practical application of philosophical doctrines formulated in the Dialectica. From a wider perspective of anti-Manichean polemics used in part for instructional purposes for students of philosophy and theology in Late Antiquity, the conclusion is made that the purpose of the Dialogue was aimed not so much against the Manichaean cosmogony and cosmology, but against the Manichaean theodicy, which might have been attractive to some Christians of John’s times.

Traditio ◽  
2008 ◽  
Vol 63 ◽  
pp. 277-305 ◽  
Author(s):  
Christophe Erismann

During late antiquity, an interesting doctrinal shift can be observed: Aristotelian logic and its Neoplatonic complements, in particular the teachings of Aristotle'sCategoriesand Porphyry'sIsagoge, were progressively accepted as a tool in Christian theology. This acceptance met drawbacks and was never unanimous. Among the authors who used concepts that originated in logic in order to support their theological thinking, we can mention, on very different accounts, Basil of Caesarea, Gregory of Nyssa, Cyril of Alexandria, John Philoponus, Leontius of Byzantium, Maximus the Confessor, Theodore of Raithu, and John of Damascus, the author of an importantDialectica. In the Byzantine context, handbooks of logic were written specifically for Christian theologians, showing that logic was perceived to be an important tool for theological thinking.


Author(s):  
F. A. Heckman ◽  
E. Redman ◽  
J.E. Connolly

In our initial publication on this subject1) we reported results demonstrating that contrast is the most important factor in producing the high image quality required for reliable image analysis. We also listed the factors which enhance contrast in order of the experimentally determined magnitude of their effect. The two most powerful factors affecting image contrast attainable with sheet film are beam intensity and KV. At that time we had only qualitative evidence for the ranking of enhancing factors. Later we carried out the densitometric measurements which led to the results outlined below.Meaningful evaluations of the cause-effect relationships among the considerable number of variables in preparing EM negatives depend on doing things in a systematic way, varying only one parameter at a time. Unless otherwise noted, we adhered to the following procedure evolved during our comprehensive study:Philips EM-300; 30μ objective aperature; magnification 7000- 12000X, exposure time 1 second, anti-contamination device operating.


2000 ◽  
Vol 5 (6) ◽  
pp. 1-7
Author(s):  
Christopher R. Brigham ◽  
James B. Talmage ◽  
Leon H. Ensalada

Abstract The AMA Guides to the Evaluation of Permanent Impairment (AMA Guides), Fifth Edition, is available and includes numerous changes that will affect both evaluators who and systems that use the AMA Guides. The Fifth Edition is nearly twice the size of its predecessor (613 pages vs 339 pages) and contains three additional chapters (the musculoskeletal system now is split into three chapters and the cardiovascular system into two). Table 1 shows how chapters in the Fifth Edition were reorganized from the Fourth Edition. In addition, each of the chapters is presented in a consistent format, as shown in Table 2. This article and subsequent issues of The Guides Newsletter will examine these changes, and the present discussion focuses on major revisions, particularly those in the first two chapters. (See Table 3 for a summary of the revisions to the musculoskeletal and pain chapters.) Chapter 1, Philosophy, Purpose, and Appropriate Use of the AMA Guides, emphasizes objective assessment necessitating a medical evaluation. Most impairment percentages in the Fifth Edition are unchanged from the Fourth because the majority of ratings currently are accepted, there is limited scientific data to support changes, and ratings should not be changed arbitrarily. Chapter 2, Practical Application of the AMA Guides, describes how to use the AMA Guides for consistent and reliable acquisition, analysis, communication, and utilization of medical information through a single set of standards.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document