The Oxford Companion to Philosophy Part 2. The book is alphabetized by the whole headings of entries, as distinct from the first word of a heading. Hence, for example, abandonment comes before a priori and a posteriori. It is wise to look elsewhere if something seems to be missing. At the end of the book there is also a useful appendix on Logical Symbols as well as the appendices A Chronological Table of Philosophy and Maps of Philosophy. | x Preface philosophers from all parts and inclinations of the subject. They agreed about the large and indisputable core of the list but not much more. They did not much agree about their proposed additions to the rest of the list or their proposed deletions from it. No proposed inclusion or deletion got more than two votes from the twelve good philosophers and true. Any contemporary who did get two votes was added in. No deletions were made. For this second edition opinions were taken from thirty philosophers of all or anyway various persuasions as to how to make the contemporaries in the book representative of the new millennium well under way. The results of this poll contained some biffs to my loyalties and sensibilities. But being a true as against merely a hierarchic democrat I acted on the advice. Should you be certain reader that this little anointing is a very serious matter remember David Hume Saint David the greatest of British philosophers. He did not get elected to professorships at Edinburgh and Glasgow which accolades went instead to Mr Cleghorn and Mr Clow. Finally my gratitude of which there is a lot. I am grateful to many people first the 291 contributors. They did not do too much satisficing. Contributors to the first edition put up with a change of mind about entry lengths. Many of them put up with a lot more including a lot of letters about revising their work or making new starts. Some were stalwarts who did a goodly number ofentries very well. They rush to mind and produce glows ofgratitude there. Some were philosophical about the sad fact that their prize entry say the Frankfurt School or the indeterminacy of translation did not get into the book because the editor had blundered and earlier assigned it to someone else. Some contributors and others were decent or anyway silent when their proposed entries say marital act and Ayn Rand did not penetrate my fortress ofphilosophical principle. My special thanks to Peter Momtchiloff doyen of the .
