Comparative studies usually begin by relating two or more authors' responses to some shared question and then go on to point out similarities and differences. Sometimes they end with an interpreter arguing in favor of one response over another. Less frequently a comparative analysis ends by relating the different positions to some broader frame of reference. To go on to locate the competing views within a dynamic pattern of related but distinct stages in understanding a shared question is a relatively new enterprise. What contemporary developmental psychologists have been pursuing in their field offers some hope that scholars in other fields can do the same in their inquiries. The main purpose of the book is to bring this relatively new form of comparative interpretation to the attention of other scholars and to encourage their future experiments with it. The question for readers is whether this is a promising way of doing comparative interpretation, one remote from current practice but possibly evading some of its intellectual impasses and so introducing a better future practice.
This book is a work of outstanding importance for scholars of comparative law and jurisprudence and for lawyers engaged in EC law or other international forms of practice.
The aim of this book is to provide a comprehensive overview of chest radiography interpretation by means of a side-by-side comparison between chest radiographs and CT images.
This book, an anthology of previously published writing about Michal together with some new and original essays, is something of an experiment.
This comparative study of the works of Vladimir Solovyev and Max Scheler explores some of the areas in which their thoughts seem to bear a direct relation to one another.
This book was written to compare the spiritual journeys of Joseph and David, two anointed men in the Bible who were granted the privilege of carrying two different mantles guided by the same Holy Spirit to demonstrate different expected ...
Dream Interpretation: A Comparative Study
The question for readers is whether this is a promising way of doing comparative interpretation, one remote from current practice but possibly evading some of its intellectual impasses and so introducing a better future practice.
This is the second in a series of three books on the New Compara- tive Interpretation, i.e. on what Bernard Lonergan called the fourth functional specialty of dialectic.
This is the second in a series of three books on the New Comparative Interpretation, i.e. on what Bernard Lonergan called the fourth functional specialty of dialectic.
This is the third in a series of volumes introducing and applying the New Comparative Interpretation to contemporary intellectual puzzles. The difficult question for this book is how we are to understand the environment.