Get 20M+ Full-Text Papers For Less Than $1.50/day. Start a 14-Day Trial for You or Your Team.

Learn More →

The Physicist and the Philosopher: Einstein, Bergson, and the Debate that Changed Our Understanding of Time by Jimena Canales

The Physicist and the Philosopher: Einstein, Bergson, and the Debate that Changed Our... in the classical repertoire, enabling a “popular cosmopolitanism” that helped to “construct public sanctuaries amidst hostile crowds.” — William Weber doi 10.1215/0961754X-4254072 Anthony Grafton and Glenn W. Most, eds., Canonical Texts and Scholarly Practices: A Global Comparative Approach (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2016), 388 pp. How is a canon formed and to what treatment is it submitted once it has been accepted? These are the main questions behind the fourteen fascinating articles in this book. The geographical and chronological areas covered are immense — from Europe to China and India, and from the ancient Babylonians to the Christian Hebraists of the sixteenth century — and the display of learning is impressive. Certain constant features, especially in the treatment of texts, emerge. The can- ons themselves tended to be formed by the sanction of an acknowledged autho- r ity, sometimes a ruler, sometimes even scribes or printers. The works were then submitted over the ages to various forms of interpretation. Commentators strug - gled with the problems of obscurity. In their endeavors to correct and improve the texts, or to make them acceptable to a contemporary readership, they often imposed on them a meaning very far from what was originally http://www.deepdyve.com/assets/images/DeepDyve-Logo-lg.png Common Knowledge Duke University Press

The Physicist and the Philosopher: Einstein, Bergson, and the Debate that Changed Our Understanding of Time by Jimena Canales

Harman, Oren
Common Knowledge , Volume 24 (1) – Jan 1, 2018
Download PDF
2 pages

Loading next page...
 
/lp/duke-university-press/the-physicist-and-the-philosopher-einstein-bergson-and-the-debate-that-2OR7qacyLH
Copyright
Copyright © 2017 Duke University Press
ISSN
0961-754X
eISSN
1538-4578
DOI
10.1215/0961754X-4254096
Publisher site
See Article on Publisher Site

Abstract

in the classical repertoire, enabling a “popular cosmopolitanism” that helped to “construct public sanctuaries amidst hostile crowds.” — William Weber doi 10.1215/0961754X-4254072 Anthony Grafton and Glenn W. Most, eds., Canonical Texts and Scholarly Practices: A Global Comparative Approach (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2016), 388 pp. How is a canon formed and to what treatment is it submitted once it has been accepted? These are the main questions behind the fourteen fascinating articles in this book. The geographical and chronological areas covered are immense — from Europe to China and India, and from the ancient Babylonians to the Christian Hebraists of the sixteenth century — and the display of learning is impressive. Certain constant features, especially in the treatment of texts, emerge. The can- ons themselves tended to be formed by the sanction of an acknowledged autho- r ity, sometimes a ruler, sometimes even scribes or printers. The works were then submitted over the ages to various forms of interpretation. Commentators strug - gled with the problems of obscurity. In their endeavors to correct and improve the texts, or to make them acceptable to a contemporary readership, they often imposed on them a meaning very far from what was originally

Journal

Common Knowledge – Duke University Press

Published: Jan 1, 2018

There are no references for this article.