To send content items to your account,
please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies.
If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account.
Find out more about sending content to .
To send content items to your Kindle, first ensure email@example.com
is added to your Approved Personal Document E-mail List under your Personal Document Settings
on the Manage Your Content and Devices page of your Amazon account. Then enter the ‘name’ part
of your Kindle email address below.
Find out more about sending to your Kindle.
Note you can select to send to either the @free.kindle.com or @kindle.com variations.
‘@free.kindle.com’ emails are free but can only be sent to your device when it is connected to wi-fi.
‘@kindle.com’ emails can be delivered even when you are not connected to wi-fi, but note that service fees apply.
This article aims to temper the myth of the sound and scale of Arsenii Avraamov's city-wide mass spectacle the “Symphony of Sirens”—a myth that has been largely unquestioned in English-language sound and urban studies scholarship on the symphony. Instead of focusing solely on the symphony's dreaded noise, I pay attention to the symphony's silence—to the limits of what can be known about its sounds. Drawing on Avraamov's untranslated writings and personal correspondences, I investigate how the symphony's ideal of proletarian unity collides with the geographic, social, and sonic reality of the cities it sought to compose. I then investigate the roots of this ideal in Avraamov's personal aesthetic philosophy, as well as his idiosyncratic views on mechanical reproduction. This article will be of interest to those who wish to explore the connections between urbanism, colonialism, sound technology, the mass spectacle, and mass media in the Soviet musical avant-garde.
This article examines whether discovery could, contrary to common philosophical opinion, be taken seriously as a ground of territorial rights. I focus on the discovery of uninhabitable lands such as found in the Arctic. After surveying the role of discovery in Roman private law and modern international law, I turn to Locke's well-known theory or original acquisition. I argue that many of the justifications that do the work in Locke's theory also apply to discovery. I then discuss some of the many reasons why discovery may seem unpromising as a ground of original acquisition. I close by arguing that if there is a bridge mechanism by which property can legitimately transform into territory and if, at least in some circumstances, discovery can produce property rights, then it would follow that in some circumstances discovery could also produce territorial rights.
According to the Plutarch, Alexander the Great offered to spare besieged Athens on the condition that Demosthenes, the leader of the anti-Macedonian party, be surrendered to him. Were the Athenians morally permitted to deliver Demosthenes to face certain death at the hands of Alexander? This question engaged a great number of late scholastic moral theologians.
This chapter presents and analyzes the solutions that they offered to this moral dilemma, from Francisco de Vitoria onwards. I first present a number of philosophically unpromising lines of argument proposed in the early stages of the controversy. As the controversy evolved and matured, authors gravitated towards two core views, those of Luis de Molina and João of St Thomas (Poinsot). The latter argued against the former that Athens would be intentionally killing an innocent (Demosthenes) by surrendering him to Alexander. St Thomas conceded that this committed him to the view that Demosthenes would also be killing an innocent (himself) if he were to surrender of his own accord.
Almost anything we do or produce could be an occasion of another’s sin. When we do this culpably we incur the sin of ‘scandal’. The painting of portraits used for the purpose of initiating and sustaining illicit relationships was therefore suspect of scandal. The late scholastics attempted to determine the level of burden that painters should be ready to shoulder in order not to furnish an occasion of sin. In these controversies, we witness increasingly lenient views on the excuses available to portraitists painting women at the behest of lovers.
Francés de Urrutigoyti sought to show that these portraits are, however, inexcusable He argued that because lustful deeds and thoughts are only indirectly voluntary, it makes sense to say that the painter is not merely giving an occasion of sin but co-inducing it.
The controversy about portraits provides a good illustration of the fact that, on the one hand, the doctrine of scandal imposed heavy burdens on moral agents, but, on the other hand, gave significant leeway for excusing the producing or selling of things foreknown to result in others’ self-harmful sins.
Mass migration of the rural poor to the cities brought with it a wave of poor-law reforms across Europe which was opposed to by Medina, Soto, Castro, Ledesma and others. One of Soto's objections to the reforms was that they conceived of the poor as outsiders to the social body. He did so by exploiting the metaphor of the city as a body, while at the same time laying bare the shortcomings of the body metaphor when it comes to incorporating the non-working poor. The debate on the foreign poor also pressed the question of the fair distribution of the duty to relieve poverty. Castro convincingly argued that the new reforms which confine the poor to their hometowns distribute this moral burden unfairly.
There was relatively little engagement with the objections to the poor law reforms. It is conjectured that this lack of engagement may have been caused by a shift from looking at the poor as individual persons, equal under the rule of law, to seeing them as an aggregate class with generalizable attributes.
Soto eloquently explained the social need for preserving the secrecy of some of our acts, as well as the nature of the wrong involved in revealing the secrets of others. For him, the wrongness of defaming a person consists in the violation of her property right to her reputation. If reputation, is property it is up to the individual to decide how to use or squander it.
The property approach to reputation was not devoid of critics. They were inspired by Cajetan’s view that a person who self-defames deprives the community of something that belongs to it. Tomás Hurtado, argued that the community has eminent domain over our reputation so that its destruction injures the community. He also suggested that in order for the community to benefit from one’s membership one has a duty to preserve oneself as a person who, as far as the public knows, can be held in respect and to not purposefully disgrace oneself by revealing hidden misdeeds.
The Spanish late scholastics shared with most other Spaniards the conviction that the tax system of the time was morally indefensible. The challenge for the theologians advising tax payers was to generate morally tenable strategies to help them cope with an unbearable tax burden without calling for outright civil disobedience. The vast majority of the moral theologians thought that an acceptable modus vivendi was to argue that one is morally obliged to pay tax only when expressly demanded to do so by the fiscal authorities. The real challenge for the late scholastics was to defend the custom of payment on demand without thereby denying that we have a strong moral obligation to pay the tax. This chapter surveys and evaluates the strategies of Alfonso de Castro, Navarrus (Martín de Azpicueta) and Francisco Suárez to surmount this challenge by focusing on their use of the doctrine of ‘purely penal law’ and their understanding of the relation between custom and law.