Talk:The Hedgehog and the Fox

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Books. To participate in the project, please visit its page, where you can join the project and discuss matters related to book articles. To use this banner, please refer to the documentation. To improve this article, please refer to the relevant guideline for the type of work.BooksWikipedia:WikiProject BooksTemplate:WikiProject BooksBook articles

Literature

	Literature portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Literature, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Literature on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.LiteratureWikipedia:WikiProject LiteratureTemplate:WikiProject LiteratureLiterature articles
???	This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale.

Philosophy: Literature Low‑importance

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Philosophy, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of content related to philosophy on Wikipedia. If you would like to support the project, please visit the project page, where you can get more details on how you can help, and where you can join the general discussion about philosophy content on Wikipedia.PhilosophyWikipedia:WikiProject PhilosophyTemplate:WikiProject PhilosophyPhilosophy articles

Low

This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Associated task forces:
/
	Philosophical literature

Patent law (UK): Hedgehog and the Fox[edit]

43. Next I should expand a little on the "inventive concept" for the purposes of entitlement disputes. Markem has already pointed out that one is not bound by the form of the claims, if any. I think there is a great danger in being over-elaborate about this, about dividing the information in a patent into a myriad of sub-concepts, each of which is considered separately. One must proceed more like a hedgehog than a fox. And after all there is supposed to be only one inventive concept in a patent, see s.14(5)(d). --80.254.147.68]

See: http://www.hmcourts-service.gov.uk/judgmentsfiles/j3932/ida_v_southampton_0306.htm

Richard Serra sculptor related?[edit]

Is Richard Serra sculptorure, of the same title related?

File:Princeton University old rusty.jpg

--[80.254.147.68]

Yes. http://www.princeton.edu/pr/news/00/q4/1106-serra.htm --Rajah (talk) 02:15, 7 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Removed Reference to the Cabinet[edit]

I've removed the following:

In reference to Berlin's distinction, the official flag of Cabinet magazine features both a hedgehog and a fox.

There is no evidence for this. The Cabinet page notes:

The logo was designed by Richard Massey, and is derived from the fragmented elements and ligatures of an early twentieth century stencil often used in Le Corbusier’s architectural drawings and manifestos.

--RossF18 (talk) 03:29, 3 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Ronald Dworkin, Sonic the Hedgehog[edit]

I think Ronald Dworkin's use of the contrast (e.g. in Justice for Hedgehogs) should be included in the list of influenced publications. The 'coincidence' sentence about Sonic the Hedgehog should be integrated (with its direction of influence corrected, and if there's a source) into the influence section.Dsp13 (talk) 01:29, 21 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

File:Princeton University old rusty.jpg Nominated for Deletion[edit]

An image used in this article, File:Princeton University old rusty.jpg, has been nominated for deletion at Wikimedia Commons in the following category: Deletion requests September 2011

What should I do?

Don't panic; a discussion will now take place over on Commons about whether to remove the file. This gives you an opportunity to contest the deletion, although please review Commons guidelines before doing so.

If the image is non-free then you may need to upload it to Wikipedia (Commons does not allow fair use)
If the image isn't freely licensed and there is no fair use rationale then it cannot be uploaded or used.

This notification is provided by a Bot --CommonsNotificationBot (talk) 13:49, 25 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

The proper study of mankind[edit]

The anthology which was edited by Hardy and Hausheer collects many of Berlin's finest essays which do not expand on The Hedgehog and the Fox. The extent to which they reflect on Berlin's ideas in the essay is more a reflection of the ideas that intrigued Berlin throughout his work. I am quite willing to be corrected by Berlin scholars (in particular either Henry Hardy or Roger Hausheer) and would like to see examples from the other essays which do expand on The Hedgehog and the Fox. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Jcrippsclark (talk • contribs) 10:48, 22 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to one external link on The Hedgehog and the Fox. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:

Added archive https://web.archive.org/20070320003336/http://www.templeton.org:80/questions/spiritual_thinking/ to http://www.templeton.org/questions/spiritual_thinking/

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—^{cyberbot II}_{Talk to my owner:Online} 06:04, 15 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

No mention of Woody Allen's Husbands and Wives?[edit]

"I didn't. I was trying to trying very hard to go with it. I was tense. I came close...My mind just gets racing with thoughts. You'd laugh if I told you. I get so mentally hyperactive....I thought that I liked what Michael was doing to me, and it felt different from Jack. More gentle and more exciting. And I thought how different Michael was from Jack. How much deeper his vision of life was. And I thought Michael was a hedgehog and Jack was a fox. And then I thought Judy was a fox, and Gabe was a hedgehog. And I thought about all the people I knew, and which were hedgehogs, and which were foxes. Al Simon, a friend, was a hedgehog, and his wife Jenny was a hedgehog. And Cindy Salkind was a fox. And Lou Patrino was a hedgehog..."

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LhYyGy6t9ko

Blatant advertising?[edit]

I could be wrong but to me the Nate Silver section looks like blatant advertising. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 208.104.223.124 (talk) 17:41, 18 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

37.134.62.174 (talk) 12:05, 1 April 2016 (UTC)mmc[reply]

Philip Anderson[edit]

I put dubious tag next to Anderson on the list ofexamples because whether he fitsthat list or not, he is not likely to havebeen anyone Berlin knew much about and have been one of Berlin's examples, since Anderson was about 30 and in a much different field.Wre should use Berlin's examples, if known.Rich (talk) 05:44, 24 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Recreating Nate Silvers table?[edit]

Can somebody recreate Nate Silver's table? 88.97.108.45 (talk) 19:11, 5 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]