A Practical Approach to Eighteenth-Century

A Practical Approach to Eighteenth-Century Counterpoint Robert Gauldin
Publisher: Waveland Press

This was true through the 18th century and even into the 19th, when medical doctors “learned as they went” and were allowed to treat patients with about as much practical training as many translators have today. While you may be correct in the eyes of lawyers, it is of little practical use. Adler and his mid-twentieth-century community of discourse. Needless to say, the most appropriate approach is to have both linguistic prowess and subject field expertise, but in specialized fields subject matter expertise is most important, I think. So from this perspective Thomas .. Jul 7, 2011 - In my last post here on common sense in American history, I promised to connect the serious intellectual foundations of common sense with the philosophy of Mortimer J. Mar 31, 2014 - A 16th – 18th century deistic approach used human reason to consider what we knew about nature, a deist back then could still use reason to also conclude the existence of a providential god and not be disqualified as a deist. Mar 17, 2006 - Why, in a supposedly secular and modernist society that is heir to the anti-religious Enlightenment of the 17th and 18th century, do we not see more outright attacks on particular religions, or religion as an institution in general? Jan 7, 2013 - Tragically, this approach has, in part, led to our modern-day crisis of saints being unable to process historical issues that do not conform to our compartmentalized historical approach. It seems to me a pessimistic rationalist might well conclude religion is the most practical impediment to totalitarianism, if the alternative is relativism (which it very often seems to be). Luckily, that seems to be changing, but from the end of the eighteenth century to the beginning of the twentieth, and still in most of the English-speaking world, theological reflection on scripture almost entirely disappeared from the academy. Nov 18, 2013 - Kevin, I definitely see your point, but here's a counterpoint. But the counterpoint is still valid: saying its a learned behavior does not (necessarily) make it incorrect or irrational.