The Elements of Philosophy: II.13.76.3

“Because man is a composite of body and soul, and hence a person who is responsible [§53.7] for his own conduct, the society he forms is, unlike other unities, unified by an intrinsic principle, the self-binding will of its members.  In this specific sense society is a unity resulting from an actualized moral order, a unitas ordinis.  Nevertheless society rests also on an extrinsic formative principle that adds to the note of order one of organization.  The reason for this is not only that the self-binding will of its members is to some extent defective, but also that the concrete demands of society’s extrinsic ends are not fully recognizable by all its members, and furthermore, that the lasting realization of the social end from one generation to another can be secured only by organizational means that are legal or administrative.”  (The Elements of Philosophy by Father William A. Wallace, O.P.; PART II.  //  CHAPTER 13.  SOCIAL PHILOSOPHY  //  [Section] §76.  SOCIETY  //  [paragraph] 3 //   [page] 235)

Obiter Dicta:  In a democratic or republic form of government all free citizens of sound mind who acquire a certain age are allowed to vote.  This fact presents a problem, which is highlighted by Father Wallace’s statement “…the concrete demands of society’s extrinsic ends are not fully recognizable by all its members…”.  If members are unable to understand the “concrete demands” and “ends” (purposes/goals) of society, it then is dangerous to give these person the power of voting.  They are too easily swayed by demagogues who have motives other than the well being of society and its members.  Nevertheless, all are allowed to vote.  The remedy for this danger is education.  Citizens and citizens-to-be must receive moral education, in addition to history, science, art, geography, mathematics, and citizenship.

Persons who believe and make statements such as “don’t legislate morality” and “keep your laws off my body” are ignorant of the “concrete demands” and “ends” of civil society.  They are unaware that each and every law is moral by nature.  Every law attempts to protect and nurture what some person or group believes to be good.  Aiming at and supporting what is good is a definition of morality.  Society through its laws seeks to display and foster what is good for human beings.  The human being is a “composite of soul and body”.  Properly speaking, human beings are animate bodies; an indivisible unity of body and soul.  Because body is an essential aspect of the human being, human beings seek what is good for their animate bodies.  Seeking what is good for human animate bodies is a definition of morality.  Within a society, law is a tool used to identify and protect those goods.  Laws created and enforced by a just and learned lawgiver, seek what is good for animate bodies. Such laws, by their very nature are incapable of not addressing the needs of animate bodies. In its lawgiving and enforcement, society seeks to identify and promulgate laws which best serve the human needs of their animate bodies.

Key:  For an explanation of the reference and cross reference forms used in this book (e.g. [§19.6] and (11:292c), see previous posts in this blog entitled “The Elements of Philosophy:  Preface (7)” and “The Elements of Philosophy: Preface (8)”.

The Elements of Philosophy: II.13.76.2

“Guided by experience, and thus by the findings of the social sciences, the social philosopher regards it as empirically established that man can attain the full development of his nature only in association with others.  Human nature [§29] therefore constitutes the ontological basis for society; it manifests this through its biological, psychological, and theological tendencies.  Biologically, man’s nature is ordered to marriage [§78] and the family [§79].  Psychologically, the impulse to be a member of a social group and to be appreciated as such is characteristically human.  Teleologically, man seeks happiness and conformity with the natural law [§§51.4, 54.3]; both of these, in turn, urge him to establish an order of social life guaranteeing freedom and common utility as conditions for the achievement of a fully human existence.  In consequence, viewed ontologically; human nature needs social supplementation for its integration; again, since different potentialities are found in individual humans, human nature is capable of bringing about such supplementation.  Hence man is by nature a social animal.”  (The Elements of Philosophy by Father William A. Wallace, O.P.; PART II.  //  CHAPTER 13.  SOCIAL PHILOSOPHY  //  [Section] §76.  SOCIETY  //  [paragraph] 2 //   [pages] 234 and 235)

Obiter Dicta:  It has been said that a significant difference between the American constitution and the way of marxist-communistic forms of government is that whereas the state papers of the first (America) focus on the identification and protection of political rights, the second focus their statements on a putative support of economic rights.  A significant or even exclusive focus on economic rights is in accord with materialistic ways of thinking in which the human being and his/her higher faculties and abilities are seen as solely the result of material processes.  Such a material reductionism finds no need to focus on those political needs which support the unique goals of human kind accomplished through acts of mind; self-awareness, free choice, and reasoning.  Such has been the production/consumption attitudes behind the thinking and actions of not only marxist-communist governments, but also behind governments which place an exclusive emphasis on capitalistic consumeristic materialism.

In such an environment (materialistic consumeristic) the social needs of human beings are de-emphasized and suffer.  A relative of mine who traveled to the area of the former East Germany, noticed there was an unusually large number of persons with dogs.  The relative noticed that dogs were allowed in many business establishments, such as restaurants.  At one point the relative asked a native why dogs were so prevalent.  My relative was told that under the previous totalitarian governments, it was not safe to speak one’s mind to other persons.  People acquired dogs to have someone safe with whom to talk.

The primary reason for emphasizing political rights is that this is best suited for identifying and protecting those natural rights required by citizens in order to attain those goals which are uniquely human; freedom, creativity, family, eternal life, happiness, and others.  There is a related secondary reason of equal importance; a focus on political rights calls attention to and supports the social needs of human beings so that they might mature, be healthy, and creatively productive.

Key:  For an explanation of the reference and cross reference forms used in this book (e.g. [§19.6] and (11:292c), see previous posts in this blog entitled “The Elements of Philosophy:  Preface (7)” and “The Elements of Philosophy: Preface (8)”.

The Elements of Philosophy: II.13.76.1

“A society (13:386b) is a permanent union of human beings who are united by modes of behavior that are demanded by some common end, value, or interest.  It is broader in meaning that a community (4:80a), which is a natural form of society in which men are more intimately bound by specified ends and natural forces, and an association (1:964d), which is a  social system freely organized to satisfy particular needs and interests.  Since society itself is not possible unless based  upon some common moral and legal understanding with social laws and controls to sustain it, some characteristics of associations and communities are found also in society.”  (The Elements of Philosophy by Father William A. Wallace, O.P.; PART II.  //  CHAPTER 13.  SOCIAL PHILOSOPHY  //  [Section] §76.  SOCIETY  //  [paragraph] 1 //   [page] 234)

Obiter Dicta:  Societies, particularly those in the form of democracies and/or constitutional republics, institute laws and nurture religion and family for the purposes of securing peace and safety.  Within a context of peace and safety, persons can mature and children can be raised under the guidance of families and religion.

Positive (human/civil) law, primarily in the form of constitutional law, is what protects a society from mobs (see The Federalist #55; James Madison, Alexander Hamilton, and John Jay).  Mobs are often ineffectual immature silly things.  Their main danger, as well shown throughout history, is that some malicious person or group can “put him/herself in front of the parade” and take control of the mob and its energy so as to impose his/her own, usually, dictatorial or tyrannical agenda.

Key:  For an explanation of the reference and cross reference forms used in this book (e.g. [§19.6] and (11:292c), see previous posts in this blog entitled “The Elements of Philosophy:  Preface (7)” and “The Elements of Philosophy: Preface (8)”.

The Elements of Philosophy: II.13.75.4

Sociology (13:400c) as a special science deals with the structure and functions of social pluralities and systems under the aspects of interaction or interdependence.  Following the cultural-science model, social action is viewed as rational, motivated behavior, though affected also by non-rational influences; it cannot be studied in physical terms alone, but account must be taken of the meaning of such action for the actors, and so beliefs, attitudes, goals, and values assume considerable importance.  One of its central concepts is that of social order, or the underlying regularity of human social behavior.  Sociology differs from the other social sciences precisely in its concern for such common elements of order and conflict that characterize all forms of social life; thus it is distinct from economics (5:61d), which is concerned with social interaction from the point of view of the production, distribution, and consumption of goods and services.  Social work (13:361b) has a yet more restricted focus:  it may be defined as an organized group of services designed to help people meet their needs or to cope more effectively with their problems in social functioning.”  (The Elements of Philosophy by Father William A. Wallace, O.P.; PART II.  //  CHAPTER 13.  SOCIAL PHILOSOPHY  //  [Section] §75.  SOCIAL PHILOSOPHY AND SOCIAL SCIENCE  //  [paragraph] 4 //   [pages] 233 to 234)

Obiter Dicta:  Social work deals with justice; giving each person his or her due.  More specifically, what is due each and every person is the realization and actualization of the natural rights she possesses, which are needed for attaining those goals unique to human beings; things such as eternal life and happiness and creativity and family and liberty.  This justice is also a fundamental part of Christian love.

But there is a fundamental difference between Christian love/charity and social work.  That difference has to do with the functional definition of justice.  Justice, in a social work setting, refers to things such as distributive justice and retributive justice in the areas of economics, politics, legal procedures, and social needs.  All of these human notions of justice are valued by Judeo-Christianity.  However, justice, in the Judeo-Christian sense primarily refers to fidelity to the covenant.  Covenant is a blood-like (familial) relationship of loyalty and loving kindness between God and us.  Fidelity to this covenantal relationship with God is primary; all other notions of justice are secondary to this primary notion.  When the question becomes one of carrying out God’s will (in response to this covenantal relationship), one begins to deal with the concept of holiness; the primary meaning of which is the function to which a thing or person is dedicated to God’s use.  Justice, in the sense of holiness, then refers to all those other notions of justice as they prove constitutive-to/useful-for carrying out this assignment of holiness.

Key:  For an explanation of the reference and cross reference forms used in this book (e.g. [§19.6] and (11:292c), see previous posts in this blog entitled “The Elements of Philosophy:  Preface (7)” and “The Elements of Philosophy: Preface (8)”.

The Elements of Philosophy: II.13.75.3

“The philosophy of the social sciences is concerned mainly with the problem of choosing various models of science that suit the different disciplines (13:338d-340d, 390b-393d) and with investigating the methodology (9:753d) that these impose upon them.  Since social science developed as a category of knowledge under the attraction of the physical sciences, there have been repeated attempts to adopt models based on the natural sciences (German, Naturwissenschaften) for generating a science of society.  In general, mathematical models of physics are not directly applicable, although development of statistics has permitted the use of quantitative procedures and mathematical models are finding increasing use, especially in economics [§67.7].  The principal natural science models are the mechanical and the biological:  the mechanical model stresses the independence of the individual within society and attempts to describe and predict behavior on the basis of various forces and conflicts that develop within a competitive society; the biological model likens society to an organism with its own principles of integration that develops and evolves by adjustment and adaptation.  Those who favor a mechanical model generally see the basic laws of social life as invariant with respect to place and time, and so as synchronic; the organicists, on the other hand, usually subscribe to historical relativity and to evolutionary theory and see such laws as changing in time, or as diachronic.  The other major alternative is a model based on the cultural sciences (German, Geisteswissenschaften or Kulturwissenschaften), which focuses on man’s freedom and moral responsibility and his consequent ability to transcend nature and mechanical forces.  Those who subscribe to this model are not so impressed by the methods of the natural sciences, develop techniques for delving into man’s intentions, motivations, and capabilities, and focus less on the prediction than on the understanding (Verstehen) of his societal behavior [§99.2].  Regardless of the model they adopt, most social scientists employ methods that are similar to those of the behavioral sciences [§72].  They are interested in propositions that are empirically testable, commonly employ operational or stipulative definitions, formulate hypotheses that can be verified or falsified, and collect and analyze data through experimental techniques, questionnaire design, interview methods, etc.  The interpretation of their results focuses either on validity, for those who wish to understand the socio-cultural realm, or on reliability and precision, for those who aim to predict man’s behavior in social contexts.”  (The Elements of Philosophy by Father William A. Wallace, O.P.; PART II.  //  CHAPTER 13.  SOCIAL PHILOSOPHY  //  [Section] §75.  SOCIAL PHILOSOPHY AND SOCIAL SCIENCE  //  [paragraph] 3 //   [pages] 232 to 233)

Obiter Dicta:  There are events in human society which lead us to discover and display what is going on within society; the colonization of the native peoples of the continents of America, the developments of the American republic and the Papers of the American State, slavery, the American Civil War, the societal acceptance of abortion which is allowed by law, civil rights movements such as Black Lives Matter, the attack upon the Capitol of the United States, the growth of dictatorial societies in China and Venezuela and the concomitant willingness of the subjects of those societies to allow themselves to be tyrannized, climate degradation impacted by human activity, the uses of lethal violence and the threats of the use of lethal violence as a tool of civic and national control, the economic growth of the modern world, the disparities of wealth in the modern world, the growth of modern technologically aided means of social communication.  Events, large and small, such as these and many others besides cause us to ask why these are happening?  What are the situations which cause these to arise?  Which of these situations are human in origin or natural in origin?  What ideas and attitudes have percolated and arisen within the consciousness of human society as a whole which has caused or encouraged or nurtured or allowed such events to occur?  What are human beings and human society as a whole thinking and believing during each of these events?

Key:  For an explanation of the reference and cross reference forms used in this book (e.g. [§19.6] and (11:292c), see previous posts in this blog entitled “The Elements of Philosophy:  Preface (7)” and “The Elements of Philosophy: Preface (8)”.

The Elements of Philosophy: II.13.75.2

Social science (13:388b) is a more recent category of knowledge than social philosophy; it is a term applied to disciplines that make specialized studies of society and social relationships, and whose concerns are descriptive and predictive, not prescriptive and normative.  Sometimes the social sciences are conceived broadly enough to include the behavioral sciences as well as history; they would thus encompass anthropology, economics, geography, history, jurisprudence, political science, psychology, and sociology.  A more recent tendency has been to constitute the behavioral sciences as a distinct category, and, under the influence of behaviorism [§73.4] and of attempts to explain social phenomena psychologically [§72.7], even to reduce all social sciences to one form or other of behavioral science.  Also, since pragmatism as a philosophy is eminently suited to non-prescriptive disciplines, there is a tendency on the part of social scientists to by-pass the traditional normative concerns of social philosophy and to substitute instead one or other kind of philosophy of value [§62].”  (The Elements of Philosophy by Father William A. Wallace, O.P.; PART II.  //  CHAPTER 13.  SOCIAL PHILOSOPHY  //  [Section] §75.  SOCIAL PHILOSOPHY AND SOCIAL SCIENCE  //  [paragraph] 2 //   [page] 232)

Obiter Dicta:  Social science limits itself to descriptive and predictive activities.  It seeks only to discover and display and describe what is happening in the society being considered and/or to predict what might happen in a given society under consideration based on the information which can be gathered about what has and is happening in that society.  As a science, social science does not attempt to define what the goals of a society should be, nor attempt to prescribe the best (normative) routes for attaining those goals within that same society. Social science limits itself to discoveries and displays of what is happening and will happen, and avoids stating what ought or should happen.

An example of social science wandering into philosophy and politics and ethics would be the writings of Karl Marx (A.D. 1818 to 1883); his analysis (a descriptive/predictive act) of economic realities within human society and his statements of what economic and political actions would best serve humanity (a prescriptive act).

Key:  For an explanation of the reference and cross reference forms used in this book (e.g. [§19.6] and (11:292c), see previous posts in this blog entitled “The Elements of Philosophy:  Preface (7)” and “The Elements of Philosophy: Preface (8)”.

The Elements of Philosophy: II.13.75.1

Social philosophy, along with its companion discipline, political philosophy, studies man as he is a member of society; as practical, it is concerned with ordering human acts to the common good, and so conceived its problems are mainly those of social ethics [§49.5].  Social philosophy is not exclusively moral in its interests, however, for in addition it has the task of investigating the nature of social reality, its components, and the relationships that obtain between them.  In this investigation it overlaps to some degree with political philosophy [§81]; for purposes here social philosophy will be understood as concerned with the problems of society in general and of the family in particular, leaving the consideration of the state to political philosophy.  The basic supposition on which both disciplines depend is that man is a social being; by nature he is dependent on others at every stage of life, for existence and for the fulfillment of physical, emotional, intellectual, social, and even spiritual needs.  Furthermore, peace and order in human society require the conformity of individual members to certain expectations in their interaction with each other, whether individually or collectively.  Such conformity is essential if the common good [§54.1] is to be attained in family life, in education, in economic behavior, and in various political communities.  In its complete understanding, therefore, social philosophy cannot be merely descriptive or analytical; it must also be prescriptive or normative, indicating how men ought to act so as to achieve their perfection in society.  [Note that in the New Catholic Encyclopedia matters relating to social philosophy are frequently combined with those pertaining to social theology (13:314a) under the comprehensive title of social thought (13:341d—361b) so as to permit a distinctively Catholic treatment.]”  (The Elements of Philosophy by Father William A. Wallace, O.P.; PART II.  //  CHAPTER 13.  SOCIAL PHILOSOPHY  //  [Section] §75.  SOCIAL PHILOSOPHY AND SOCIAL SCIENCE  //  [paragraph] 1 //   [pages] 231 and 232)

Obiter Dicta:  In his Politics, Aristotle (384 to 322 B.C.) writes that man by nature is a social and political being.  A human being (not suffering from some significant brain damage) cannot avoid being socially engaged (for any significant length of time) and cannot avoid political activity and involvement.  In fact, social engagement and political activity can be thought of as the definition of what it means to be human.

The words political and politics are derived from the Greek word polis which means “city”.  To be political means to be involved in the affairs of the city; of the community.  In order to get those things done which require more than the thought and energy of one person, others must be persuaded to engage in that activity.  The art of encouraging others to engage in a common activity to accomplish something considered good by the one encouraging is the definition of politics.  Politics is the art of getting things done.

Persuasion is the definition of the word rhetoric.  In order to persuade and encourage others to engage in common efforts, the one doing the persuasion and encouragement must use speech.  Rhetoric is a particular type of speech.  Rhetoric is the use of refined speech, and the use of other means, in order to persuade.  It is for this reason that Aristotle also wrote that speaking is the characteristic activity and the manifestation of the political nature human beings.

Only God can be private by nature.  For example, God could have chosen not to create, in which case, God’s nature/situation would have been the epitome of privacy.  Human beings, by contrast, by the mere fact that they come into existence as creatures can never be in a condition of absolute privacy.  To come into existence they are known by God (in community with God) and to remain in existence they must also be known by God.  For human kind, to be is to be known by an other (God).  For human kind, to not be known (by an other) is equivalent to not existing.  Thus, theologically, human kind is revealed to be public beings; social and political by nature/essence/design.

Key:  For an explanation of the reference and cross reference forms used in this book (e.g. [§19.6] and (11:292c), see previous posts in this blog entitled “The Elements of Philosophy:  Preface (7)” and “The Elements of Philosophy: Preface (8)”.

The Elements of Philosophy: II.12.74

“The material discussed in this chapter suggest an observation regarding the philosophy of the behavioral sciences generally.  This field of study, somewhat like the philosophy of the social sciences [§75.3], is thought to be under-developed by comparison with the philosophy of the natural sciences [§66].  The reason for this is that the disciplines treated, anthropology and psychology, stay rather close to empirical data and make few if any ontological claims; since their main subject of inquiry is man, they can get along with a common-sense notion and the simple reflective knowledge each person has of his own being.  Whatever philosophical points need be made, moreover, are more fully considered in philosophical anthropology [§29.1] or philosophical psychology [§21], and so the empirical part of the inquiry can be conducted as though neutral to philosophical commitment.  The major philosophical reflection on behavioral disciplines therefore consists of a study of their methodologies and the special type of knowledge these can be expected to yield.”  (The Elements of Philosophy by Father William A. Wallace, O.P.; PART II.  //  CHAPTER 12.  PHILOSOPHY OF THE BEHAVIORAL SCIENCES  //  [Section] §74.  PHILOSOPHY OF THE BEHAVIORAL SCIENCES  //   [pages] 229 and 230)

Obiter Dicta:  The “scientific” method of the modern behavioral sciences focuses on gathering empirical data organized around narrow and artificial theoretical goals.  Such a focus makes “few if any ontological claims”.  With this narrow definition and activity, modern psychology opts out of the business of assigning claims of normalcy or a lack of normalcy.  However, once one attempts to consider ontological claims which attempt to discover and display the essence of things, one then allows for the discovery and articulation of goals which are uniquely human.  At this point one can speak of those behaviors and attitudes and environments which aide in accomplishing those goals, and those behaviors and attitudes and environments which act in opposition to those uniquely human goals.  It then becomes possible, morally speaking, to speak of behaviors and attitudes and environments which are normal (helpful) and abnormal (unhelpful).

Key:  For an explanation of the reference and cross reference forms used in this book (e.g. [§19.6] and (11:292c), see previous posts in this blog entitled “The Elements of Philosophy:  Preface (7)” and “The Elements of Philosophy: Preface (8)”.

The Elements of Philosophy: II.12.73.9

“Most of the material sketched above applies primarily to the behavior of normal people, although the meaning of normality (10:496b) is itself a problem for philosophers.  A considerable amount of investigation is devoted, moreover, to abnormal psychology (1:24a), to the study of mental disorders (9:655a), and to other matters pertaining directly to psychiatry (11:945a).  Branches of psychology that are more related to psychotherapy include clinical psychology (3:956b) and counseling (4:380b).  These are of less interest for the speculative philosopher, although some therapeutic matters raise ethical problems that require solution, e.g., moral aspects of psycho-surgery (11:985a).”  (The Elements of Philosophy by Father William A. Wallace, O.P.; PART II.  //  CHAPTER 12.  PHILOSOPHY OF THE BEHAVIORAL SCIENCES  //  [Section] §73.  SYSTEMS AND THEORIES OF PSYCHOLOGY  //  [paragraph] 9 //   [page] 229)

Obiter Dicta:  A person once interviewed for consideration of attaining a position in student affairs at a Roman Catholic university.  The candidate believed it was likely that some students at this university identified themselves as gay and trans-gender.  This candidate also had some awareness of Roman Catholic moral doctrine and pastoral practice regarding the needs of members of these groups.  The candidate asked what department within the university would address the needs of this group directly related to their identities as gay and trans-gender.  The candidate was told that these needs were addressed within campus ministry.  The candidate then stated that their needs should be addressed within student affairs.  When asked to explain why, the candidate stated that the stance of an education institution should be to affirm persons, to assume their chosen self-identifications were honest, to affirm their self-identifications, and to non-judgmentally address personal and social issues related to their self-identifications.  Specifically, such tasks should come under the purview of student affairs.  Placing them and their needs within campus ministry implied and communicated these persons and their needs were somehow unusual, abnormal, wrong.  Such an incorrect stance would necessarily result in such students not reaching out for assistance when needed, and when they did reach out for assistance, might result in their needs not being properly addressed.  The candidate asked if a change could be made, addressing these persons and their needs within student affairs instead of campus ministry.  When told that such a change could not take place, the person chose to be removed from consideration at this particular institution; later seeking and attaining a similar position at a secular institution which placed these persons and their needs within purview of student affairs.

In A.D. 1973, the American Psychiatric Association removed the diagnosis of “homosexuality” from the second edition of its Diagnostic and Statistical Manual (DSM II).  This act removed the label of abnormal from association with the category of homosexuality in general, and specifically removed the label as a psychiatric identification.  ( https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4695779/ )

Key:  For an explanation of the reference and cross reference forms used in this book (e.g. [§19.6] and (11:292c), see previous posts in this blog entitled “The Elements of Philosophy:  Preface (7)” and “The Elements of Philosophy: Preface (8)”.

The Elements of Philosophy: II.12.73.8

“The more important theories in present-day psychology include the following:  (1) theories of learning, which probably show the greatest sophistication; these are mainly under the influence of behaviorism, where emphasis is placed on stimulus-response (S-R) relationships, reinforcement, etc., or of Gestalt psychology, where pattern organization plays an important role and the results are termed cognitive or field theories; (2) theories of perception, where neo-behaviorists seek explanations in terms of S-R relationships, Gestaltists on inherent organizing factors; and (3) theories of personality, which aim at a higher degree of integration and comprehensiveness than the first two types, but are not so well developed empirically, with the result that the theories are found to be more speculative, rationally based, and somewhat less rigorously stated; many are under the influence of psychoanalysis and existentialist thought, e.g., existential psychology (5:728a).”  (The Elements of Philosophy by Father William A. Wallace, O.P.; PART II.  //  CHAPTER 12.  PHILOSOPHY OF THE BEHAVIORAL SCIENCES  //  [Section] §73.  SYSTEMS AND THEORIES OF PSYCHOLOGY  //  [paragraph] 8 //   [page] 229)

Obiter Dicta:  The importance of discovering and using the correct theory of learning has been highlighted recently by the Covid-19 pandemic and its impact on school based and home based education.  The education needs of many are not being met and, because of that, correct insight is needed as to how people learn and the best way to educate them.

Key:  For an explanation of the reference and cross reference forms used in this book (e.g. [§19.6] and (11:292c), see previous posts in this blog entitled “The Elements of Philosophy:  Preface (7)” and “The Elements of Philosophy: Preface (8)”.