| Revision as of 21:18, 28 September 2007 editVolkovBot (talk | contribs)447,718 editsm robot Adding: ru:Википедия:Именование статей/Монархи и титулованые персоны← Previous edit | Revision as of 21:05, 12 October 2007 edit undoJulidebanuozturk (talk | contribs)3 editsNo edit summaryNext edit → | ||
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
| Teoman Duralı was born in 1947, Zonguldak, provincial capital on the western shores of the Black Sea. Studied at the University of Istanbul history of philosophy, logic, epistemology and biology. Since 1977 member of staff of the Department of Philosophy/ University of Istanbul. | |||
| {{Misplaced Pages subcat guideline|naming convention|Titles|]}} | |||
| Dissertation: “The Problem of Living Beings within the Framework of Contemporaneous Thought” (1977). | |||
| As royalty often use titles rather than surnames, and often change titles, using a clear and agreed nomenclature can sometimes be difficult. | |||
| Habilitation: “The Problem of the Living Being and Evolution in Aristotle’s Philosophy” (1982). | |||
| The following is a set of conventions that have emerged from a detailed discussion on Misplaced Pages. For the discussions, see ] and, earlier, ]. If there are wikipedians out there who know more about this subject, please add to the discussion. | |||
| Professorship: “The Evolutionary Bases of (the Kantian) A Priori Cognitive Faculties” (1988). | |||
| Some additional rules for article ''content'' are on ]. | |||
| Teoman Duralı has been teaching philosophy of biology, philosophy of history and history of philosophy at the University of Istanbul and as visiting professor at the Interational Institute of Islamic Thought and Civilization (ISTAC), Kuala Lumpur/ Malaysia (1992 - 1993, 1995, 1997, 1999); philosophy of science at the Science University Penang/Malaysia (1993); Institut für Wissenschaftstheorie und Wissenschaftsforschung, University of Vienna (1994&2003); visiting lecturer, Pensylvania State University (1985); visiting lecturer, Centro Estudios Filosoficos..., Mexico City/ Mexico (1991). | |||
| ''Most general rule overall:'' use the '''most common form of the name used in English''' if none of the rules below cover a specific problem. | |||
| He travelled extensively within Turkey, all over Europe, in Western, Central, East and South East Asia, America... | |||
| Most of the conventions below are intended for medieval and modern European and Muslim rulers and nobility, since in these civilizations several countries share the same given names, so some disambiguation is often required, and disambiguation by territorial designation is convenient. Elsewhere, territorial designations are usually unnecessary in names and in article titles. | |||
| How to use titles and names in articles themselves, check ]. | |||
| Publications (a selected list) | |||
| ==Monarchical titles== | |||
| #Pre-emptively ] the names of monarchs, of modern countries in the format ''"{Monarch's first name and ordinal} of {Country}"''. Examples: ]; ]; ]. | |||
| #*''This is an exception to the general rule of most common English name.'' Nevertheless, ''Monarch's first name'' and ''Country'' should both be the most common form used in current English works of general reference. This convention is not applied to Roman or Byzantine Emperors, or to the older monarchies of antiquity. | |||
| #Where there '''has only been one holder''' of a specific monarchical name in a state, the ordinal is used only when the ordinal was in official use. For example, ], not ''Victoria I of the United Kingdom''; ], not ''Juan Carlos of Spain.'' The use of ordinals where there has been more than a single holder of a specific monarchical name is correct and appropriate. For example, ], not ''William of England'', as ] and ] hold the same monarchical name. | |||
| #Take care to use the '''''correct'' name of the state''' at the time when a monarch reigned. So it is | |||
| ##with the '''British:''' monarchs of ''England'' only up to 1707 (e.g., ]), ''Great Britain'' from 1707-1800 (e.g., ]), the ''United Kingdom'' since 1801 (e.g., ]). "England", "Great Britain" and "United Kingdom" describe ''different'' historical states covering different geographic areas, and so they ''do'' need to be clarified. | |||
| ##with '''German monarchs:''' Holy Roman Empire until 1806 (e.g., ]), ''Germany'' from 1871 (e.g., ]), Austria after then, etc. Germany is especially complex; when in doubt, refer to ]. | |||
| ##But if an obscure ''official'' name of a state exists alongside a clearly understood one, it is fine to use the more widely known version. For example, ] rather than the technically correct ''Kings of the Hellenes''. | |||
| #Where a monarch has '''reigned over a number of states,''' use the most commonly associated ones. For example, ], not ''Charles II of England, Scotland and Ireland;'' ], not ''William I of Prussia,'' although there should be redirects from these locations. When several states are so associated, it is proper and often desirable to give the others compensating prominence in the intro when one gets the name of the article. | |||
| #European monarchs whose rank was below that of King (e.g., Grand Dukes, Electors, Dukes, Princes), should be at the location "{Monarch's first name and ordinal}, {Title} of {Country}". Examples: ], ]. | |||
| #Do not apply an ] in an article title to a '''pretender,''' i.e., someone who has not reigned. For example, use ], not ''Louis XX'' when referring to the legitimist pretender to the French throne. A person may however be referred to if they have a title, for example, ] for the last Italian Crown Prince. But he should not be referred to as ''Victor Emmanuel IV'' even though Italian royalists call him so. Where someone has a disputed title, for example, "Henry V" — whom French Legitimists believed became the ''real'' king of France in 1830 after ] and ]'s abdications — could be referred to as such in the article. Alternatively a disambiguation page could be created, redirecting enquiries about "Henry V" to the page where his biography exists, that is, ]. | |||
| #'''Former or deposed monarchs''' should be referred to by their previous monarchical title with the exception of those who are still alive and are most commonly referred to by a non-monarchical title; all former or deposed monarchs should revert to their previous monarchical title upon death; for example, ] not ''ex-King Constantine II'' or ''Constantine Glücksburg'', ] not the ''Prince Edward, Duke of Windsor,'' but ] not ''Simeon II of Bulgaria''. | |||
| #'''No family or middle names, except where English speakers normally use them.''' The exception holds, for example, for Italian Renaissance dynasts. No cognomens (nicknames) in article titles — they go in the first line of the article; but see exception 4 below. | |||
| #'''Make redirects''' from other plausible names that people might search for or link to, even if strictly incorrect. For example, ] should have redirects from ], ], ], ] etc. | |||
| Fifty five philosophico-scientific treatises —six in English, the rest in Turkish. | |||
| ''Exceptions:'' | |||
| # These conventions do not apply to Eastern and Polynesian civilizations. See also: ], ], ]. | |||
| # '''Roman Emperors''' do not need the "of the Roman Empire", nor would Pericles be "of Athens" nor Algirdas "of Lithuania" — their names already indicate where they were from. The first line of the article can say when (and which empire) they ruled. Otherwise, we get stuck with Roman Emperor, Western R. E., Eastern R. E., Byzantine E., and (under the ]) Roman Emperor (again). See also ] | |||
| # It has been proposed that leaders of a people, rather than a country or nation, (for example, the late antique Germanic tribes) should be called "of the Goths", etc., or have no ethnic disambiguation at all. "Of the Goths", "Picts", "Lombards", are not widely used, but this is a reasonable suggestion when disambiguation is necessary. | |||
| # If a monarch or prince is overwhelmingly known, in English, by a cognomen, it may be used, and there is then no need to disambiguate by adding ''Country''. Examples: ], ], ], ], ], etc...". But there must be consensus so strong that it would be surprising to omit the epithet; and the name must actually be unambiguous. For example, although ] is often used, '''Richard I''' is not unusual, so he is at ]; again, if two kings of different countries are both known in English as ''Name'' the Great (for example Louis the Great of Hungary and Louis the Great of France), do not use the epithet but disambiguate them by country (those two are at ] and ]). | |||
| #*This exception also applies, but is less common, to persons less than sovereign. | |||
| Six books in Turkish: | |||
| These conventions will lead to most rulers and their consorts having no title in the name of their article. However, there is no Misplaced Pages convention that an article called ''Name of Place'' implies the subject is royal; ] is one example. | |||
| —“An Introduction to the Problem of the Living Beings”, Istanbul, 1982 & 1987. | |||
| ==Other royals== | |||
| For royalty other than monarchs: | |||
| # If they hold a princely ], use ''"{first name}, {title}"''. Examples: ], ], ]. | |||
| # If a prince(ss) holds a substantive title that is not princely (a peerage, for instance), use ''"Prince(ss) {first name}, {title}"''. Examples: ] and ]. Numerals are not used. Example: ], not "Prince Richard, 2nd Duke of Gloucester". | |||
| # Use ''"Prince(ss) {first name} of ..."'' where a prince/ss has a territorial suffix by virtue of their parent's title, e.g., ], ], ], etc. | |||
| # Where they have no substantive title, use the form ''"{title} {name} of {country},"'' e.g., ]. Use only the highest prefix title the person ever held. Deceased royal consorts should not have a title mentioned, e.g., ]. Using royal titles for more junior royals will enable users to distinguish between royal consorts and others. A prefix title can be used only when it was held and used by the person. This means that roughly before the 17th century, prince/ss would not be prefixed automatically. | |||
| # When dealing with a Crown Prince(ss) (however not consort) of a state, use the form ''"{name}, Crown Prince(ss) of {state}"'' ''unless'' there is a clear formal title awarded to a prince which defines their status as crown prince (e.g., ']', but ']', ']', etc) | |||
| # Do not use ] as part of a title of an article; e.g., ] not ''HRH Princess Irene of Greece''. | |||
| # Do not use 'surnames' in article names. Most royal families do not have surnames. Many that do have different ''personal'' surnames from the name of their ]. For example, different members of the Royal House of Windsor have a range of surnames: Windsor, Mountbatten-Windsor, etc. Charles, Prince of Wales, for example, is ''not'' Charles Windsor but Charles Mountbatten-Windsor, as are his siblings and all their children. But many of his cousins are Windsor or other names. Similarly, the ] is different to the surnames of some members of the Habsburg/Habsburg-Lorraine family. | |||
| # Incorporate surnames ''if they are known'' in the opening line of an article, e.g., ''Charles Philip Arthur George Mountbatten-Windsor''. But don't automatically presume that a name of a Royal Family is the personal surname of its members. In many cases it is not. For visual clarity, an article should begin with the form ''"{royal title} {name} {ordinal if appropriate} (full name (+ surname if known, but not for monarchs)"'' with the full name unformatted and the rest in bold <nowiki>(3 's)</nowiki>. In practice, this means for example an article on Britain's Queen Elizabeth should begin "'''Elizabeth II''' (Elizabeth Alexandra Mary)". Using this format displays the most important information clearly without an unattractive excess of formatting. Other information on royal titles should be listed where appropriate in chronological order. | |||
| # For '''past Royal Consorts,''' see ] below. | |||
| # '''Existing Royal Consorts''' are referred to by their consort name, e.g., ]. But when she dies, she will revert to her pre-marital title, ie, ]. As widow, some appropriate addition (usually announced by the country in question) will be amended to (such as Queen Dowager or Queen Mother), with the new Queen of Spain being referred to by the consort designation. The same rule applies to male royal consorts. | |||
| # Use the most senior title received by a royal or noble personage. For example, ] is referred to as such, not ''George, Duke of York'' or ''George, Prince of Wales,'' his earlier titles. | |||
| ===Past royal consorts=== | |||
| Many English and French queens are traditionally referred to in English by {Name} '''of''' {Place}, like ], ], or ], where the place is country or House of origin. There is some sentiment that this "maiden name rule" should be generalized into a convention for all past European royal consorts; however, there is limited support for doing so ''contrary'' to actual English usage. | |||
| —“Philosophy of Biology”, Ankara, 1991. | |||
| This would provide a consistent and largely unambiguous nomenclature for a large number of articles, mostly on subjects who have no surname, properly speaking. It would also avoid a certain anglocentrism present in some actual usage. There is also opposition to a broad usage of this convention, on the following grounds: | |||
| *English princesses who marry abroad are often traditionally known by the name of the their husband's country. For example: ]; usage on ] is divided. | |||
| *Other queens and empresses are usually known by the name of their husband's country, like ]; in some cases, this is so strong a tendency that the "maiden name rule" produces a name unintelligible to the mere reader of English, like ]. | |||
| *{Name} of (place), applied to the daughter of a reigning queen, can produce the same name as her mother. The ] is listed as ], not ]; but other cases may not have such titles - and this is still an exception in letter, if not in spirit. | |||
| *There is strong disagreement on whether such a rule should apply at all to male consorts of reigning queens - compare ] and ]. | |||
| *There is little support for such a convention where consorts are native subjects of their spouses, like ] and ]. | |||
| Where the name by itself is unambiguous or primary usage, it is pedantry to insist on this form against usage: ], not ]. | |||
| —“Aristotle's Study of Science and the Problem of the Living Beings”, Istanbul, 1995. | |||
| ==Clerical names== | |||
| {{Main|Misplaced Pages:Naming conventions (Western clergy)}} | |||
| —“From the Modern Secular European to the Contemporaneous Global Anglo-Judaic Civilization”, Istanbul, 1996. | |||
| While most names are clear, unambiguous and known, some names associated with clergy of some faiths make this difficult. In those religions which have hierarchies, the higher the level within that hierarchy the greater the likelihood that the person's first name may have ceased to be used publicly, being replaced by a title. Others replace their own name ''completely'' with a new one. As with royals, this requires a different set of guidelines, not least in so far as it may be difficult to discover what their first name actually was, particularly when dealing with ancient historical church clergy at the higher level. The following are the agreed conventions for two levels of senior clergymen: | |||
| —“Introduction to Philosophy-Science”, Istanbul, 1998. | |||
| # For '''popes,''' whether ], ], or otherwise, use the format ''"Pope {papal name} {ordinal if more than one} of {]}"''. Popes of Rome should not be linked with their episcopal sees; ''Rome'' is understood. Also, do not use a pope's personal name. For example, use ], not ''Albino Luciani'' or ''Pope John Paul I of Rome''. | |||
| # For '''patriarchs,''' whether the ], ], or otherwise, use the format ''"Patriarch {papal name} {ordinal if more than one} of {]}"''. Do not use a patriarch's personal name; e.g., use ], not ''Nikita Minov''. However, if a there is already a well established name in English for a particular patriarch, use that format instead. For example, use ] as the main title of article, with ] and ] as redirects. | |||
| #*See also the discussion in the ].' | |||
| # In the titles of articles, '''cardinals''' generally go by their full name (both first name and surname) alone, without the title "Cardinal", as "]", not "Cardinal Ascanio Sforza", nor "Ascanio Cardinal Sforza". Exceptions are cardinals who are identifiable only by the cardinalitial title (as in the case of a hypothetical Cardinal John Smith), those best known by the title "Cardinal" followed by a surname (as ]), and those of the period before the introduction of surnames. (For many of the latter, however, their place of origin will serve the same function as a surname.) When it is necessary to add the title "Cardinal", it will usually be sufficient to prefix it to the surname of the cardinal, especially in the body of an article, as "Cardinal Sforza". If both name and surname are used, wikilinking is straightforward if the title is prefixed to the name, as in "Cardinal ]". However, those who prefer the form "Ascanio Cardinal Sforza" should take care to ensure there is a redirect to the form used in the title of the article on the cardinal in question, or use a ]. | |||
| # '''Saints''' go by their most common English name, minus the "Saint", unless they are only recognisable by its inclusion. For example, ], ] but ]. (See also ].) Make redirects from forms with "St.", "St", and "Saint". Popes who are also saints are given their papal name, with a redirect from the forms with "Saint". For example, ], with redirects from ] and other forms. | |||
| # ''Cathedral and church names'', unless ''they'' individually use something different, are written as ''St.'' not ''Saint''. Hence ] not ''Saint Paul's Cathedral'', ] not ''Saint Mary's Pro-Cathedral'', etc. | |||
| —“Contemporaneous Global Civilization”, Istanbul, 2000. | |||
| == Other non-royal names== | |||
| # Members of the '''hereditary Peerage''' (people who ''inherit'' their title or have received a title that they may pass down to their heirs e.g., ]), such as a marquess, viscount, count, duke, earl, etc., as with royals have two names. For example Henry John Temple was also the 3rd Viscount Palmerston, hence typically referred to as "Lord Palmerston". Rule here is, "So-and-so, ordinal (if appropriate) title (of) place", and place redirects as you see fit. The sequence number is included since personal names are often duplicated (see ].) Examples: ], or ], with redirect ], which allows both of his names to be included. EXCEPTIONS: When individuals received hereditary peerages after retiring from the post of Prime Minister (unless they are better known for their later career under an additional/alternative title), or for any other reason are known '''exclusively''' by their personal names, do not include the peerage dignity. Examples: ] (not "Anthony Eden, 1st Earl of Avon"), ] (not "Bertrand Russell, 3rd Earl Russell") (but ] not "Henry Addington"). When individuals held more than one peerage and are best known by a title other than their highest one, use the interim one. Examples: ] (not "Frederick John Robinson, 1st Earl of Ripon"), ] (not "William Petty, 1st Marquess of Lansdowne"). When individuals inherited or were created peers but are best known to history by a ] use that. Examples: ] (not "Frederick North, 2nd Earl of Guilford"), ] (not "Robert Stewart, 2nd Marquess of Londonderry"). When a peer holds one or more other peerages of the same rank as his most senior peerage, use only the most senior peerage in the title. Example: ], not "Charles Lennox, 1st Duke of Richmond and 1st Duke of Lennox" or "Charles Lennox, 1st Duke of Richmond and Lennox". Single peerages with multiple parts should be used in full. Example: ], not "Claude Bowes-Lyon, 14th Earl of Strathmore". | |||
| # '''Life peers''' (ie, people who have peerages awarded exclusively for their lifetime but who neither inherit it nor pass it on to anyone else)¹ use the same standard as for hereditary peers: use the dignity in the title, unless the individual is exclusively referred to by personal name. For example: ] (not "Quintin McGarel Hogg"), but ] (not "Margaret Thatcher, Baroness Thatcher.") | |||
| # An honorific such as ] may refer to any of the holders of the associated title, so can redirect to a page about the title itself. | |||
| # ''']''', as they hold hereditary titles, often for a large part of their lives, follow the same practice as hereditary peers and should have their title noted in the beginning of the article. The format is ]. For the article title, this format should only be used when disambiguation is necessary; otherwise, the article should be located at ]. ] should never be used with the postfix and without the prefix. | |||
| # '''Titles of Knighthood''' such as ''Sir'' and ''Dame'' should not be included in the article title: use personal name instead, e.g., ] not ''Sir Arthur Conan Doyle''. (But make a redirect from the form with the title if it is well known, thus ] redirects to ].) The article itself should clarify details such as the full title, etc. "Sir" may be used in article titles as a disambiguator. Honorary titles should not be used at all, but the appropriate ] letters or explanation should be in the article. Thus, ] is not "Sir Bob Geldof" in the title and is "Bob Geldof ] (hon.)" in the text. Post-nominals should not be used for non-Commonwealth or former British Empire citizens, as their use outside a Commonwealth context are rare. Knights bachelor have no suffix. | |||
| # '''Courtesy titles''' (also referred to as an honorific prefix)² such as ''Lord'' or ''Lady'' differ from full titles because unlike full titles they are included as part of the personal name, often from birth. As such, they should be included in the article title if a person if ''universally'' recognised with it and their name is unrecognisable without it. For example, the late nineteenth century British politician ] was always known by that form of name, never simply ''Frederick Cavendish''. Using the latter form would produce a name that would be unrecognisable to anyone searching for a page on Cavendish. Similarly, ], the Irish playwright, is more recognisable to readers than ''Augusta Gregory''. | |||
| # In general, use the most commonly recognized English-language form of the name. Create redirections or disambiguations for other plausible links. A good way to find this form is to look up the subject in a few reliable English works of general reference. For example, ] is so called in the ''New Cambridge Modern History''. Where this leaves a choice among common names, the simplest unambiguous one is often preferable. Where a person is known by their secondname, the title of the article should be (Second name) (Surname) and the text should begin (First name) (Second name) (Surname), e.g. ]. | |||
| # Other names and titles, if any, should appear in the first paragraph of the article so they can be searched for. | |||
| # In East Asian names, look at common English usage to decide whether the western first-name last-name or the eastern last-name first-name order should be used. As a rule of thumb, Japanese names should ''usually'' be given in the western, Chinese names in the eastern order. A redirect from whatever order is not used, is almost always a good idea. Again, see ], ], ]. | |||
| # ] (includes ], ], ],...; also outside the ]): see ] | |||
| ―“Teoman Duralı’s Three Discourses/ Science – Philosophy – Theory of Evolution”; Istanbul, 2002. | |||
| —“What is the Problem?”, Istanbul, 2006. | |||
| Footnotes: | |||
| —“What is Philosophy-Science?”, Istanbul, 2006. | |||
| ¹ Life peers receive the title of ''Baron''. As a rule of thumb when deciding if someone has a life peerage or hereditary peerage, if the title is marquess, viscount, duke, earl or ''anything but baron'' the peerage can ''only'' be hereditary. However, many barons are not life peers; hereditary baronies also exist. In general, if the peerage was ''created'' before 1958, and the holder is not a judge, it will be hereditary. | |||
| And one in English: | |||
| ² A ''Courtesy title'' is an honorific prefix applied to the sons and daughters of hereditary peers. For example, ''Lady'' Diana Spencer's courtesy title came via her father's earldom. ''Lord'' John Russell was the second son of the Duke of Bedford. In many cases the holder of a courtesy title is known exclusively by its inclusion (which they may have had from birth) and unrecognisable without it, with the title treated as though it was in effect part of their name. That contrasts to full titles, which are not attached to the ''personal'' name, but exist separately. | |||
| —“A New System of PHILOSOPHY-SCIENCE from the Biological Standpoint”, Peter Lang, Vienna – New York, 1996. | |||
| ==Non-European and non-Western (names and titles)== | |||
| Apply ''Most general rule overall:'' use the '''most common form of the name used in English''' if none of the rules cover a specific problem. | |||
| * For ], please refer to ]. | |||
| * For Japan-related articles see ] | |||
| * For Thailand-related articles see ] | |||
| Monographies (all in English) | |||
| ==See also== | |||
| ―“Preliminary Remarks on the Philosophy of Biology”, Hamdard/Quarterly of Science and Medicine, v: XVII, number: 3, pp: 3 –46, Karachi/Pakistan. | |||
| * ] | |||
| * ] | |||
| ] | |||
| ―“Aristotle’s Thoughts concerning the Problem of the Living beings and their Evolution”, Comtes rendus de la Conférence d’Aristote dans le Monde Méditerranéen..., pp: 5 – 30, Editions ISIS, Istanbul – Paris – Rome, 1988. | |||
| ] | |||
| ―“An Introductory Essay on the Biological Foundations of A Priori Cognitive Faculties”, Sixth International Kant Congress, pp: 455 – 469, University Press of America, Washington D.C./USA, 1989. | |||
| ―“Philosophy-science...”, Uroboros/International Journal of the Philosophy of biology, v: 1&2, pp: 91- 115, Mexico-city/Mexico. | |||
| ―its Spanish version: “Filosofia-Ciencia A Partir del Punto de Vista Biotico”, Ludus Vitalis, v: 1, p: 1, Mexico-city, 1993. | |||
| ―“A Reassessment of Human Evolution/ A Spiritual and Material Evaluation of Human Evolution based on Islamic Considerations”, Ludus Vitalis, v: 2, n: 2, Mexico-city, 1994. | |||
| ―“Evolution/The Epitome of the Emerging Contemporaneous Global Civilization”, Ludus Vitalis, v: 5, n: 9, Mexico-city, 1997. | |||
Revision as of 21:05, 12 October 2007
Teoman Duralı was born in 1947, Zonguldak, provincial capital on the western shores of the Black Sea. Studied at the University of Istanbul history of philosophy, logic, epistemology and biology. Since 1977 member of staff of the Department of Philosophy/ University of Istanbul.
Dissertation: “The Problem of Living Beings within the Framework of Contemporaneous Thought” (1977).
Habilitation: “The Problem of the Living Being and Evolution in Aristotle’s Philosophy” (1982).
Professorship: “The Evolutionary Bases of (the Kantian) A Priori Cognitive Faculties” (1988).
Teoman Duralı has been teaching philosophy of biology, philosophy of history and history of philosophy at the University of Istanbul and as visiting professor at the Interational Institute of Islamic Thought and Civilization (ISTAC), Kuala Lumpur/ Malaysia (1992 - 1993, 1995, 1997, 1999); philosophy of science at the Science University Penang/Malaysia (1993); Institut für Wissenschaftstheorie und Wissenschaftsforschung, University of Vienna (1994&2003); visiting lecturer, Pensylvania State University (1985); visiting lecturer, Centro Estudios Filosoficos..., Mexico City/ Mexico (1991).
He travelled extensively within Turkey, all over Europe, in Western, Central, East and South East Asia, America...
Publications (a selected list)
Fifty five philosophico-scientific treatises —six in English, the rest in Turkish.
Six books in Turkish:
—“An Introduction to the Problem of the Living Beings”, Istanbul, 1982 & 1987.
—“Philosophy of Biology”, Ankara, 1991.
—“Aristotle's Study of Science and the Problem of the Living Beings”, Istanbul, 1995.
—“From the Modern Secular European to the Contemporaneous Global Anglo-Judaic Civilization”, Istanbul, 1996.
—“Introduction to Philosophy-Science”, Istanbul, 1998.
—“Contemporaneous Global Civilization”, Istanbul, 2000.
―“Teoman Duralı’s Three Discourses/ Science – Philosophy – Theory of Evolution”; Istanbul, 2002.
—“What is the Problem?”, Istanbul, 2006.
—“What is Philosophy-Science?”, Istanbul, 2006.
And one in English:
—“A New System of PHILOSOPHY-SCIENCE from the Biological Standpoint”, Peter Lang, Vienna – New York, 1996.
Monographies (all in English) ―“Preliminary Remarks on the Philosophy of Biology”, Hamdard/Quarterly of Science and Medicine, v: XVII, number: 3, pp: 3 –46, Karachi/Pakistan.
―“Aristotle’s Thoughts concerning the Problem of the Living beings and their Evolution”, Comtes rendus de la Conférence d’Aristote dans le Monde Méditerranéen..., pp: 5 – 30, Editions ISIS, Istanbul – Paris – Rome, 1988.
―“An Introductory Essay on the Biological Foundations of A Priori Cognitive Faculties”, Sixth International Kant Congress, pp: 455 – 469, University Press of America, Washington D.C./USA, 1989.
―“Philosophy-science...”, Uroboros/International Journal of the Philosophy of biology, v: 1&2, pp: 91- 115, Mexico-city/Mexico.
―its Spanish version: “Filosofia-Ciencia A Partir del Punto de Vista Biotico”, Ludus Vitalis, v: 1, p: 1, Mexico-city, 1993.
―“A Reassessment of Human Evolution/ A Spiritual and Material Evaluation of Human Evolution based on Islamic Considerations”, Ludus Vitalis, v: 2, n: 2, Mexico-city, 1994.
―“Evolution/The Epitome of the Emerging Contemporaneous Global Civilization”, Ludus Vitalis, v: 5, n: 9, Mexico-city, 1997.