Problems to sharpen the young An annotated translation of Propositiones ad acuendos juvenes, the oldest mathematical problem collection in Latin, attributed to Alcuin of York Translated by JOHN HADLEY Commentary by DAVID SINGMASTER and JOHN HADLEY PROBLEMS TO SHARPEN THE YOUNG 103 events of the time, but details are sparse. In 796 he retired to become Abbot of the monastery of St. Martin at Tours. He revived the school mere, making it the best in France. He died at Tours on 19th May 804. The sources Propositiones Alcuini doctoris Caroli Magni Imperatoris ad acuendos juvenes.

Most moral philosophers accept that we have obligations to provide at least some aid and assistance to distant strangers in dire need. Philosophers who extend rights and obligations to nonhuman animals, however, have been less than explicit about whether we have any positive duties to free-roaming or 'wild' animals. I argue our obligations to freeroaming nonhuman animals in dire need are essentially no different to those we have to severely cognitively impaired distant strangers. I address three objections to the view that we have positive duties to free-roaming nonhuman animals, and respond to the predation objection to animal rights.

Recent proposals to improve public communication about animalbased biomedical research have been narrowly focused on reforming biomedical journal submission guidelines. My suggestion for communication reform is broader in scope, reaching beyond the research community to healthcare communicators and ultimately the general public. The suggestion is for researchers to provide journalists and public relations practitioners with concise summaries of their 'animal use data'. Animal use data is collected by researchers and intended for the public record but is rarely, if ever, given significant media exposure. By providing healthcare communicators with specific details about their animal use, researchers can inform people about a matter of serious public interest and help to promote a more open and publicly accountable animal research culture.

No abstract

No abstract

No abstract

In this article I offer a response to recent debate over direct action animal advocacy and legitimate public deliberation in liberal democracies. Mathew Humphrey and Marc Stears and Stephen D'Arcy have argued that liberal democracies ought to tolerate direct action animal advocacy in the interests of promoting the right of proponents of nonmainstream views to inform public deliberation and decision making. I argue that the precise scope of Humphrey and Stears' and D'Arcy's analyses is unclear and important parts of their theory are under-described. I highlight the logical and practical implications of their claim that direct action is useful as a means of overcoming the stifling influence of conventional wisdom. I conclude by arguing that tolerance for direct action advocacy ought not to extend to controversial animal rights campaigning tactics such as making threats, using incendiary devices and damaging property.

No abstract