1,720,964 research outputs found
Hans-Georg Gadamer. Cuestiones abiertas / Open Questions
No full textHans-Georg Gadamer. Cuestiones abiertas / Open Questions (2025), edited by Facundo Bey and published jointly by Filosófica Editorial and the Editorial Universitaria of the Universidad Central del Ecuador, is a bilingual open-access volume celebrating the 125th anniversary of Gadamer’s birth. It brings together fourteen original chapters by internationally recognised scholars—twelve in English and two in Spanish—including contributions from John Arthos, Nathan Eric Dickman, Dieter Teichert, Eddo Evink, Babette Babich, Roger W. H. Savage, Mirela Oliva, Luiz Rohden, Darren Walhof, Walter Lammi, Abdullah Başaran, Antoine Pageau-St-Hilaire, Einar Iván Monroy Gutiérrez, and Facundo Bey. With a prologue by Jean Grondin, the volume is structured around five major themes: 1) Language, Tradition, and Questioning in Philosophical Hermeneutics; 2) Reason, Meaning, and Science; 3) Ethics, Politics, Practical Philosophy; 4) Philosophy and Religion; and 5) Gadamer and the Classics. The book explores the ongoing relevance of Gadamer’s hermeneutics as a philosophical response to contemporary crises, and affirms the transformative power of questioning at the heart of understanding
Faith in Politics: Religion and Liberal Democracy. By Bryan T. McGraw. New York: Cambridge University Press, 2010. ix + 320 pp. 33.99 Paper
No full text
Going Beyond Counting First Authors in Author Co-citation Analysis
Full text linkThe present study examines one of the fundamental aspects of author co-citation analysis (ACA) - the way co-citation
counts are defined. Co-citation counting provides the data on which all subsequent statistical analyses and mappings
are based, and we compare ACA results based on two different types of co-citation counting - the traditional type that
only counts the first one among a cited work's authors on the one hand and a non-traditional type that takes into
account the first 5 authors of a cited work on the other hand. Results indicate that the picture produced through this non-traditional author co-citation counting contains more coherent author groups and is therefore considerably clearer. However, this picture represents fewer specialties in the research field being studied than that produced through the traditional first-author co-citation counting when the same number of top-ranked authors is selected and analyzed. Reasons for these effects are discussed
- …
