scispace - formally typeset
Search or ask a question

Showing papers on "Surprise published in 1972"


Journal ArticleDOI
TL;DR: In a social situation that seems to force the individual to be on his own, it is no surprise that the subject matter of ethics is centered around "problems/' i.e., situations in which it is difficult to know what one should do as discussed by the authors.
Abstract: No ETHIC is formulated in isolation from the social conditions of its time. The contemporary emphasis in Christian ethics on the dynamic and self-creating nature of man is a reflection of the kind of society in which we live. Perhaps our ancestors were born to pre-established roles in a world where faithfulness to those roles guaranteed the fulfilment of moral duty. But we are born into a social world that forces us to be free, to be autonomous; for now the moral imperative is to actually fashion our lives by choosing among the numerous alternatives our social world presents to us. In such a world it is not surprising that current moral discourse employs the language of freedom and responsibility to focus on man as self-creator. The moral life is not constituted by correspondence to an objective moral order; rather it is to be constantly readjusted to the nuances and ambiguities of our ethical choices and experiences. Modern ethicists recognize that there is often more to our moral situation than our principles and rules contain; so much of our significant moral experience and life simply does not fall within the areas marked off by clearly defined roles or principles. "Responsibility" names the fact that often we are simply forced to fall back on ourselves in order to make decisions that have no relationship to objective standards of right and wrong. In a social situation that seems to force the individual to be on his own, it is no surprise that the subject matter of ethics is centered around "problems/' i.e., situations in which it is difficult to know what one should do. Ethical discussion then focuses on the best way to respond to such "problems": Should an ethical decision be determined primarily in relation to principles and rules, or by a loving response to the peculiarities of the immediate situation? Those who argue for "principles" suggest that only their approach assures objectivity in morals, or that love is sentimentalized if it is not "imprincipled." Contextualists maintain that adherence to principles results in a false security that makes one insensitive to the complexity of modern moral issues. 1 For a much fuller account of the idea of responsibility and its use in contemporary theological ethics, see Albert Jonsen, Responsibility in Modern Religious Ethics (Washington: Corpus, 1968). 2 For an extraordinarily perceptive article that makes this point in a philosophical context, see E. Pincoffs, "Quandary Ethics," Mind 80 (1971) 552-71.

12 citations


Journal ArticleDOI
TL;DR: The American Historical Association as mentioned in this paper was founded by a small band of zealous young scholars fresh from German seminars to propagate and give new direction to "American history and history in America." In one sense, these self-conscious professionals institutionalized a fundamental element of nineteenth-century thought; they shared with many Americans a deep commitment to historicism.
Abstract: IN 1884 "A SMALL BAND of zealous young scholars fresh from German seminars" organized the American Historical Association "to propagate and give new direction to 'American history and history in America.'" (1) In one sense, these self-conscious professionals institutionalized a fundamental element of nineteenth-century thought; they shared with many Americans a deep commitment to historicism and its two central tenets: the belief that all human life is in a process of continual growth and transformation and the related conviction that facts and events can be explained only by reference to earlier facts and events. (2) In a century in which change and process were bywords, "the historical method" was a highly respected thought tool. "To know a thing properly," as William Torrey Harris expressed it, "we must study it in its history." (3) The study of history satisfied an almost compelling psychic need of nineteenth-century Americans to reexperience time, to analyze it, to capture it conceptually, and thereby in a personal way to control it. They found great psychological comfort in tracing a modern institution or trend to its very roots. It should be no surprise, then, that a profound sense of the continuity of human

10 citations


Book
27 Jul 1972
TL;DR: Bastani et al. as mentioned in this paper describe a party that Rabbit will be having tomorrow, and Owl tells Squirrel, he says, "Rabbit is hoeing the parsley tomorrow. It's a surprise." By the time word has spread to all of Rabbit's friends, it's anyone's guess just what it is that rabbit will be doing tomorrow!
Abstract: "I'm having a party tomorrow," Rabbit whispers to Owl. "It's a surprise." But Owl tell the news to Squirrel, he says, "Rabbit is hoeing the parsley tomorrow. It's a surprise." By the time word has spread to all of Rabbit's friends, it's anyone's guess just what it is that Rabbit will be doing tomorrow!

4 citations



Journal ArticleDOI
TL;DR: The response to surprise attack: Three directives, 22 June 1941 this article, Vol. 23, No. 4, pp. 519-553, were used in this article.
Abstract: (1972). The Soviet response to surprise attack: Three directives, 22 June 1941. Soviet Studies: Vol. 23, No. 4, pp. 519-553.

1 citations


Journal Article
TL;DR: The use of surprise endings has been widely used in literature of little substance, e.g., in the detective story or the "suspense" drama as mentioned in this paper, where the author provides a true ''shock of recognition''.
Abstract: One does not usually associate the surprise ending with literature of serious intent. Perhaps because of its frequent employment in works of little substance the detective story or the \"suspense\" drama this device is all too often thought of as a tool of the author whose major concern lies in achieving the cheap and easy thrill, or as a sort of literary or theatrical tour de force which has less to do with the essence of the work itself than with the author's ability to manipulate plot imaginatively, or, worst of all, as a last minute bit of trickery designed to rescue an otherwise bland or inept effort. And yet, there is nothing inherently demeaning in the use of a surprise ending, especially if in that final unexpected moment the author provides a true \"shock of recognition.\" As employed by John Millington Synge in his plays, this technique constitutes far more than empty gesture. Indeed, Synge·s surprise endings invariably provide his audience with quintessential distillations of the themes and motives which have been implicit in his dramas from their opening moments. As such, they represent anything but the sort of gimcrackery mentioned above in that they fulfill what has always been a requirement of significant drama: its events must unfold in a manner which makes the inevitable seem unexpected.

1 citations


Journal ArticleDOI
TL;DR: The Rome Treaty of 1957 as discussed by the authors defines a set of business practices that are forbidden in the European Common Market, including horizontal or vertical pricefixing, the limitation or control of production, distribution, technical development, and investment; the dividing of markets or sources of supply; tie-in sales; full-line forcing; and discriminatory prices or other sales conditions.
Abstract: In 1957, an improbable and in fact revolutionary event took place in Western Europe. Six sovereign countries, by treaty, transferred control over large sectors of their industrial economy to a supranational institution, the Europear Economic Community. Among the most surprising provisions of the Rome Treaty establishing this Common Market were Articles 85 and 86,1 which are directed, roughly speaking, at the same restrictive business practices as are covered by section i of the Sherman Act of i89o, section 3 of the Clayton Act of 1914, and the Robinson-Patman Act of 1936. Article 85(i) and (2) of the Rome Treaty brand as illegal all agreements, decisions, and concerted practices of enterprises which are apt to affect commerce among the six member states of the Common Market and have as their object or effect the prevention, restriction, or adulteration of competition within the Market. Among the practices specifically enumerated in the Article are horizontal or vertical pricefixing; the limitation or control of production, distribution, technical development, and investment; the dividing of markets or sources of supply; tie-in sales; full-line forcing; and discriminatory prices or other sales conditions. This is all encompassing and sophisticated language. Restrictive practices are to be adjudged mainly on the basis of their actual and potential effect on competition; the intent of the parties is of only secondary significance. The prohibition applies to \"all concerted practices\" of enterprises and \"decisions\" of associations, which necessarily cover tacit agreements or gentlemen's understandings and may cover more. It is also conceded by the commentators that these prohibitions may apply to business activities that are primarily confined to a single country provided they have an effect on trade among member states. Provision' is made in Article 85(3) for granting exemptions for business restrictions \"which contribute to the improvement of the production or distribution of commodities or to the promotion of technological or economic progress.\" However, this broad exemption is qualified by three safeguards: that the restrictive arrangement result in some benefit to consumers, that it not be more restrictive than is necessary

1 citations


Journal ArticleDOI
TL;DR: The question remains what Durer meant by knowledge as mentioned in this paper, and the point of this question is driven home by noting that Richter's remark is made in the context of surprise at how near Leonardo's "conception of what true science should be came to modern standards".
Abstract: By “science” I mean knowledge in its broadest sense. Durer's scientific side thus becomes, in terms of his art, the practice of art insofar as it is the pursuit of knowledge. Richter observes that in the Renaissance “no clear distinction was drawn between art, science, and philosophy,”1 so that it seems the practice of the one would necessarily be the practice of the others. However, the question remains what Durer meant by knowledge. The point of this question is driven home by noting that Richter's remark is made in the context of surprise at how near Leonardo's “conception of what true science should be came to modern standards.”2 Can the same be said for Durer?

1 citations


Journal ArticleDOI
TL;DR: Much to nearly everyone's surprise, doctors do better than anticipated, and certainly much better than one would expect for a group repeatedly charged with major responsibility for the deficiencies of the American health-care system.
Abstract: Even when they are not busy predicting election results, opinion samplers are not wanting in topics. Recurring favorites are the doctor and health care in general. "What do you think about the medical profession?" — "Do you have confidence in your doctor?" So the familiar questions run. Much to nearly everyone's surprise, doctors do better than anticipated, and certainly much better than one would expect for a group repeatedly charged with major responsibility for the deficiencies of the American health-care system. In the public's eye medicine ranks consistently as the most respected profession, although medicine's lead, according to a recent . . .

Journal ArticleDOI
TL;DR: For many centuries great thinkers, scientists, and inventors have commented and reflected upon the unusual power of metaphorical thought as discussed by the authors, and Gordon has developed materials to encourage creative thinking in children based upon his metaphorical approach.
Abstract: For many centuries great thinkers, scientists, and inventors have commented and reflected upon the unusual power of metaphorical thought. For example, Edison described his insight into inventing the telephone in terms of a metaphorical thought. He commented on how the bones of the human ear were large as compared with the delicate thin membrane that operated them. This made Edison think that perhaps a thicker and stouter piece of membrane could move his piece of steel. And, of course, the telephone was invented. 1 Another example is that of Kekule, who by associating himself with a snake swallowing its tail began to think of the benzene molecule as a ring rather than a chain of carbon atoms.2 And Brunei's solution to developing an underwater construction was solved by watching a shipworm tunnel into a timber. "The worm constructed a tube for itself as it moved forward, and the classical notion of caissons arose."3 Bruner is one scholar who has attempted to describe and analyze metaphorical thought. In his book, On Knowing, Essays for the Left Hand, he talked about the creative experience as being an act that produces "effective surprise." One type of effective surprise was "metaphorical effectiveness." It involved the connection of domains "of experiences that were apart, but with the form of connectedness that has the discipline of art . . . Metaphoric combination leaps beyond systematic placement and explores connections that before were unsuspected.4 However, although there has been some effort to describe how adults think metaphorically, there has been almost no effort made to discern how children use metaphor and if children can be helped to use metaphor beyond its random occurrence to induce innovative thinking. Gordon has developed materials to encourage creative thinking in children based upon his metaphorical approach.5 However, his exper-

Journal ArticleDOI
TL;DR: For example, this paper pointed out that each generation seems to discover that institutions have a way of enslaving both the ruler and the ruled and that men are seldom free and autonomous after all.
Abstract: Since we cannot change the schools, the least we can do is change society. In reading the articles which appeared in the January issue of this journal such was the message I received. Particularly was this message given off by the articles by Heiny, Gregory, Cunningham, Harvey, and Lenke.1 Many share the obvious frustrations of Heiny et al. concerning the contemporary modes of educational organization. It is tempting to throw up one's hands and accept the fact that schools are hopeless and seek alternatives to schooling. Charles Silberman, in a reasoned and well documented fashion, discovered what Lenke is apparently surprised and angry about, i.e., that teachers as well as students are victimized by schools.2 Willard Waller discovered the same thing in 1932.3 Indeed, each generation seems to discover that institutions have a way of enslaving both the ruler and the ruled and that men are seldom free and autonomous after all. For each generation, this discovery comes as a startling surprise and is articulated as a new and unique phenomenon.

Journal ArticleDOI
TL;DR: To have won the Henry Dunant Medal comes as more than a surprise as mentioned in this paper, it is a great honour, an honour beyond my wildest expectations and makes me feel very grateful and very happy indeed.
Abstract: To have won the Henry Dunant Medal comes as more than a surprise. It is a great honour, an honour beyond my wildest expectations. I knew, of course, of the nature and origin of the Medal but only as an interesting fact that had nothing to do with me. Therefore, to be personally part of this great Red Cross event makes me feel very grateful and very happy indeed.