gaussalgo/Canard_Wiki-augmented huggingface dataset:
Richard I of England

Context: In September 1190 Richard and Philip arrived in Sicily. After the death of King William II of Sicily his cousin Tancred had seized power and had been crowned early in 1190 as King Tancred I of Sicily, although the legal heir was William's aunt Constance, wife of the new Emperor Henry VI. Tancred had imprisoned William's widow, Queen Joan, who was Richard's sister, and did not give her the money she had inherited in William's will. When Richard arrived he demanded that his sister be released and given her inheritance; she was freed on 28 September, but without the inheritance. The presence of foreign troops also caused unrest: in October, the people of Messina revolted, demanding that the foreigners leave. Richard attacked Messina, capturing it on 4 October 1190. After looting and burning the city Richard established his base there, but this created tension between Richard and Philip Augustus. He remained there until Tancred finally agreed to sign a treaty on 4 March 1191. The treaty was signed by Richard, Philip and Tancred. Its main terms were:  Joan was to receive 20,000 ounces (570 kg) of gold as compensation for her inheritance, which Tancred kept.  Richard officially proclaimed his nephew, Arthur of Brittany, son of Geoffrey, as his heir, and Tancred promised to marry one of his daughters to Arthur when he came of age, giving a further 20,000 ounces (570 kg) of gold that would be returned by Richard if Arthur did not marry Tancred's daughter.  The two kings stayed on in Sicily for a while, but this resulted in increasing tensions between them and their men, with Philip Augustus plotting with Tancred against Richard. The two kings finally met to clear the air and reached an agreement, including the end of Richard's betrothal to Philip's sister Alys (who had supposedly been the mistress of Richard's father Henry II). CANNOTANSWER

Question: What was Richard I of England's occupation?
Answer: kings
Richard I of England

Context: In September 1190 Richard and Philip arrived in Sicily. After the death of King William II of Sicily his cousin Tancred had seized power and had been crowned early in 1190 as King Tancred I of Sicily, although the legal heir was William's aunt Constance, wife of the new Emperor Henry VI. Tancred had imprisoned William's widow, Queen Joan, who was Richard's sister, and did not give her the money she had inherited in William's will. When Richard arrived he demanded that his sister be released and given her inheritance; she was freed on 28 September, but without the inheritance. The presence of foreign troops also caused unrest: in October, the people of Messina revolted, demanding that the foreigners leave. Richard attacked Messina, capturing it on 4 October 1190. After looting and burning the city Richard established his base there, but this created tension between Richard and Philip Augustus. He remained there until Tancred finally agreed to sign a treaty on 4 March 1191. The treaty was signed by Richard, Philip and Tancred. Its main terms were:  Joan was to receive 20,000 ounces (570 kg) of gold as compensation for her inheritance, which Tancred kept.  Richard officially proclaimed his nephew, Arthur of Brittany, son of Geoffrey, as his heir, and Tancred promised to marry one of his daughters to Arthur when he came of age, giving a further 20,000 ounces (570 kg) of gold that would be returned by Richard if Arthur did not marry Tancred's daughter.  The two kings stayed on in Sicily for a while, but this resulted in increasing tensions between them and their men, with Philip Augustus plotting with Tancred against Richard. The two kings finally met to clear the air and reached an agreement, including the end of Richard's betrothal to Philip's sister Alys (who had supposedly been the mistress of Richard's father Henry II). CANNOTANSWER

Question: What happened in Sicily involving Richard I?
Answer: After the death of King William II of Sicily his cousin Tancred had seized power and had been crowned early in 1190 as King Tancred I of Sicily,
Richard I of England

Context: In September 1190 Richard and Philip arrived in Sicily. After the death of King William II of Sicily his cousin Tancred had seized power and had been crowned early in 1190 as King Tancred I of Sicily, although the legal heir was William's aunt Constance, wife of the new Emperor Henry VI. Tancred had imprisoned William's widow, Queen Joan, who was Richard's sister, and did not give her the money she had inherited in William's will. When Richard arrived he demanded that his sister be released and given her inheritance; she was freed on 28 September, but without the inheritance. The presence of foreign troops also caused unrest: in October, the people of Messina revolted, demanding that the foreigners leave. Richard attacked Messina, capturing it on 4 October 1190. After looting and burning the city Richard established his base there, but this created tension between Richard and Philip Augustus. He remained there until Tancred finally agreed to sign a treaty on 4 March 1191. The treaty was signed by Richard, Philip and Tancred. Its main terms were:  Joan was to receive 20,000 ounces (570 kg) of gold as compensation for her inheritance, which Tancred kept.  Richard officially proclaimed his nephew, Arthur of Brittany, son of Geoffrey, as his heir, and Tancred promised to marry one of his daughters to Arthur when he came of age, giving a further 20,000 ounces (570 kg) of gold that would be returned by Richard if Arthur did not marry Tancred's daughter.  The two kings stayed on in Sicily for a while, but this resulted in increasing tensions between them and their men, with Philip Augustus plotting with Tancred against Richard. The two kings finally met to clear the air and reached an agreement, including the end of Richard's betrothal to Philip's sister Alys (who had supposedly been the mistress of Richard's father Henry II). CANNOTANSWER

Question: Other than Richard I's occupation of Sicily, are there any other interesting aspects about this article?
Answer: Tancred had imprisoned William's widow, Queen Joan, who was Richard's sister,
Richard I of England

Context: In September 1190 Richard and Philip arrived in Sicily. After the death of King William II of Sicily his cousin Tancred had seized power and had been crowned early in 1190 as King Tancred I of Sicily, although the legal heir was William's aunt Constance, wife of the new Emperor Henry VI. Tancred had imprisoned William's widow, Queen Joan, who was Richard's sister, and did not give her the money she had inherited in William's will. When Richard arrived he demanded that his sister be released and given her inheritance; she was freed on 28 September, but without the inheritance. The presence of foreign troops also caused unrest: in October, the people of Messina revolted, demanding that the foreigners leave. Richard attacked Messina, capturing it on 4 October 1190. After looting and burning the city Richard established his base there, but this created tension between Richard and Philip Augustus. He remained there until Tancred finally agreed to sign a treaty on 4 March 1191. The treaty was signed by Richard, Philip and Tancred. Its main terms were:  Joan was to receive 20,000 ounces (570 kg) of gold as compensation for her inheritance, which Tancred kept.  Richard officially proclaimed his nephew, Arthur of Brittany, son of Geoffrey, as his heir, and Tancred promised to marry one of his daughters to Arthur when he came of age, giving a further 20,000 ounces (570 kg) of gold that would be returned by Richard if Arthur did not marry Tancred's daughter.  The two kings stayed on in Sicily for a while, but this resulted in increasing tensions between them and their men, with Philip Augustus plotting with Tancred against Richard. The two kings finally met to clear the air and reached an agreement, including the end of Richard's betrothal to Philip's sister Alys (who had supposedly been the mistress of Richard's father Henry II). CANNOTANSWER

Question: What happened after Queen Joan was imprisoned?
Answer: he demanded that his sister be released and given her inheritance; she was freed on 28 September, but without the inheritance.
Richard I of England

Context: In September 1190 Richard and Philip arrived in Sicily. After the death of King William II of Sicily his cousin Tancred had seized power and had been crowned early in 1190 as King Tancred I of Sicily, although the legal heir was William's aunt Constance, wife of the new Emperor Henry VI. Tancred had imprisoned William's widow, Queen Joan, who was Richard's sister, and did not give her the money she had inherited in William's will. When Richard arrived he demanded that his sister be released and given her inheritance; she was freed on 28 September, but without the inheritance. The presence of foreign troops also caused unrest: in October, the people of Messina revolted, demanding that the foreigners leave. Richard attacked Messina, capturing it on 4 October 1190. After looting and burning the city Richard established his base there, but this created tension between Richard and Philip Augustus. He remained there until Tancred finally agreed to sign a treaty on 4 March 1191. The treaty was signed by Richard, Philip and Tancred. Its main terms were:  Joan was to receive 20,000 ounces (570 kg) of gold as compensation for her inheritance, which Tancred kept.  Richard officially proclaimed his nephew, Arthur of Brittany, son of Geoffrey, as his heir, and Tancred promised to marry one of his daughters to Arthur when he came of age, giving a further 20,000 ounces (570 kg) of gold that would be returned by Richard if Arthur did not marry Tancred's daughter.  The two kings stayed on in Sicily for a while, but this resulted in increasing tensions between them and their men, with Philip Augustus plotting with Tancred against Richard. The two kings finally met to clear the air and reached an agreement, including the end of Richard's betrothal to Philip's sister Alys (who had supposedly been the mistress of Richard's father Henry II). CANNOTANSWER

Question: What did Richard I do to get the inheritance?
Answer: Richard attacked Messina, capturing it on 4 October 1190.
Richard I of England

Context: In September 1190 Richard and Philip arrived in Sicily. After the death of King William II of Sicily his cousin Tancred had seized power and had been crowned early in 1190 as King Tancred I of Sicily, although the legal heir was William's aunt Constance, wife of the new Emperor Henry VI. Tancred had imprisoned William's widow, Queen Joan, who was Richard's sister, and did not give her the money she had inherited in William's will. When Richard arrived he demanded that his sister be released and given her inheritance; she was freed on 28 September, but without the inheritance. The presence of foreign troops also caused unrest: in October, the people of Messina revolted, demanding that the foreigners leave. Richard attacked Messina, capturing it on 4 October 1190. After looting and burning the city Richard established his base there, but this created tension between Richard and Philip Augustus. He remained there until Tancred finally agreed to sign a treaty on 4 March 1191. The treaty was signed by Richard, Philip and Tancred. Its main terms were:  Joan was to receive 20,000 ounces (570 kg) of gold as compensation for her inheritance, which Tancred kept.  Richard officially proclaimed his nephew, Arthur of Brittany, son of Geoffrey, as his heir, and Tancred promised to marry one of his daughters to Arthur when he came of age, giving a further 20,000 ounces (570 kg) of gold that would be returned by Richard if Arthur did not marry Tancred's daughter.  The two kings stayed on in Sicily for a while, but this resulted in increasing tensions between them and their men, with Philip Augustus plotting with Tancred against Richard. The two kings finally met to clear the air and reached an agreement, including the end of Richard's betrothal to Philip's sister Alys (who had supposedly been the mistress of Richard's father Henry II). CANNOTANSWER

Question: Did Richard I die?
Answer: CANNOTANSWER
Richard I of England

Context: In September 1190 Richard and Philip arrived in Sicily. After the death of King William II of Sicily his cousin Tancred had seized power and had been crowned early in 1190 as King Tancred I of Sicily, although the legal heir was William's aunt Constance, wife of the new Emperor Henry VI. Tancred had imprisoned William's widow, Queen Joan, who was Richard's sister, and did not give her the money she had inherited in William's will. When Richard arrived he demanded that his sister be released and given her inheritance; she was freed on 28 September, but without the inheritance. The presence of foreign troops also caused unrest: in October, the people of Messina revolted, demanding that the foreigners leave. Richard attacked Messina, capturing it on 4 October 1190. After looting and burning the city Richard established his base there, but this created tension between Richard and Philip Augustus. He remained there until Tancred finally agreed to sign a treaty on 4 March 1191. The treaty was signed by Richard, Philip and Tancred. Its main terms were:  Joan was to receive 20,000 ounces (570 kg) of gold as compensation for her inheritance, which Tancred kept.  Richard officially proclaimed his nephew, Arthur of Brittany, son of Geoffrey, as his heir, and Tancred promised to marry one of his daughters to Arthur when he came of age, giving a further 20,000 ounces (570 kg) of gold that would be returned by Richard if Arthur did not marry Tancred's daughter.  The two kings stayed on in Sicily for a while, but this resulted in increasing tensions between them and their men, with Philip Augustus plotting with Tancred against Richard. The two kings finally met to clear the air and reached an agreement, including the end of Richard's betrothal to Philip's sister Alys (who had supposedly been the mistress of Richard's father Henry II). CANNOTANSWER

Question: In addition to Richard I's attack did anything else happen?
Answer: Richard attacked Messina, capturing it on 4 October 1190. After looting and burning the city Richard established his base there,
Richard I of England

Context: In September 1190 Richard and Philip arrived in Sicily. After the death of King William II of Sicily his cousin Tancred had seized power and had been crowned early in 1190 as King Tancred I of Sicily, although the legal heir was William's aunt Constance, wife of the new Emperor Henry VI. Tancred had imprisoned William's widow, Queen Joan, who was Richard's sister, and did not give her the money she had inherited in William's will. When Richard arrived he demanded that his sister be released and given her inheritance; she was freed on 28 September, but without the inheritance. The presence of foreign troops also caused unrest: in October, the people of Messina revolted, demanding that the foreigners leave. Richard attacked Messina, capturing it on 4 October 1190. After looting and burning the city Richard established his base there, but this created tension between Richard and Philip Augustus. He remained there until Tancred finally agreed to sign a treaty on 4 March 1191. The treaty was signed by Richard, Philip and Tancred. Its main terms were:  Joan was to receive 20,000 ounces (570 kg) of gold as compensation for her inheritance, which Tancred kept.  Richard officially proclaimed his nephew, Arthur of Brittany, son of Geoffrey, as his heir, and Tancred promised to marry one of his daughters to Arthur when he came of age, giving a further 20,000 ounces (570 kg) of gold that would be returned by Richard if Arthur did not marry Tancred's daughter.  The two kings stayed on in Sicily for a while, but this resulted in increasing tensions between them and their men, with Philip Augustus plotting with Tancred against Richard. The two kings finally met to clear the air and reached an agreement, including the end of Richard's betrothal to Philip's sister Alys (who had supposedly been the mistress of Richard's father Henry II). CANNOTANSWER

Question: Aside from the attack on Messina, what else was Richard known for?
Answer: Richard officially proclaimed his nephew, Arthur of Brittany, son of Geoffrey, as his heir, and Tancred promised to marry one of his daughters to Arthur when he came of age,
Richard I of England

Context: In September 1190 Richard and Philip arrived in Sicily. After the death of King William II of Sicily his cousin Tancred had seized power and had been crowned early in 1190 as King Tancred I of Sicily, although the legal heir was William's aunt Constance, wife of the new Emperor Henry VI. Tancred had imprisoned William's widow, Queen Joan, who was Richard's sister, and did not give her the money she had inherited in William's will. When Richard arrived he demanded that his sister be released and given her inheritance; she was freed on 28 September, but without the inheritance. The presence of foreign troops also caused unrest: in October, the people of Messina revolted, demanding that the foreigners leave. Richard attacked Messina, capturing it on 4 October 1190. After looting and burning the city Richard established his base there, but this created tension between Richard and Philip Augustus. He remained there until Tancred finally agreed to sign a treaty on 4 March 1191. The treaty was signed by Richard, Philip and Tancred. Its main terms were:  Joan was to receive 20,000 ounces (570 kg) of gold as compensation for her inheritance, which Tancred kept.  Richard officially proclaimed his nephew, Arthur of Brittany, son of Geoffrey, as his heir, and Tancred promised to marry one of his daughters to Arthur when he came of age, giving a further 20,000 ounces (570 kg) of gold that would be returned by Richard if Arthur did not marry Tancred's daughter.  The two kings stayed on in Sicily for a while, but this resulted in increasing tensions between them and their men, with Philip Augustus plotting with Tancred against Richard. The two kings finally met to clear the air and reached an agreement, including the end of Richard's betrothal to Philip's sister Alys (who had supposedly been the mistress of Richard's father Henry II). CANNOTANSWER

Question: In addition to that, did Richard promise anything else?
Answer: The two kings finally met to clear the air and reached an agreement, including the end of Richard's betrothal to Philip's sister Alys
Brian Statham

Context: Despite a record benefit against the Australians and a few wonderful performances in 1961 (notably 8 for 47 against Hampshire), decline set in for the previously incomparable bowler. His haul of wickets fell from 97 at 10.91 to 78 at 17.93 and Lancashire became a weak county for the first time in Championship history. In 1962, though he was as good as ever in the Tests against Pakistan, with little support for him and Higgs, Statham fell further and only just reached 100 wickets, with Lancashire only just escaping finishing last.  When Fred Trueman and Statham toured Australia for the 1962-63 Ashes series they had 216 and 229 wickets respectively were poised to overtake the record of 236 Test wickets set by the assistant-manager Alec Bedser. The Australian captain Richie Benaud was another contender with 219 wickets, but it was Statham who broke the record in the Fourth Test at Adelaide. Trueman caught Barry Shepherd in the gully to give him his record 237th wicket. Despite the record Statham rarely shined on the tour, taking 13 wickets (44.61), and was used as a steady stock bowler. Statham took his record to 242 wickets, but returned to England while Trueman continued to New Zealand, where he broke Statham's record after only two months.  In 1963, whilst his county form on overgrassed pitches was back to something close to his best, on the less grassy surfaces in the First Test against the West Indies his bowling lacked its old venom, and he was surprisingly replaced by the veteran Derek Shackleton for the rest of the series - a move criticised heavily in the press because it was known fast bowlers would do well at Lord's. A highlight that year came when Statham took five wickets in the first-ever Gillette Cup match against Leicestershire.  In 1964, Statham, despite the arrival of Sonny Ramadhin to provide help, was disappointing and out of contention for the Ashes Tests. He did take 15 for 108 against a weak Leicestershire side and 7 for 50 against Warwickshire at Coventry, but had more bad matches than in any other season of his career. CANNOTANSWER

Question: Did Brian Statham's career start to go downhill?
Answer: decline set in for the previously incomparable bowler.
Brian Statham

Context: Despite a record benefit against the Australians and a few wonderful performances in 1961 (notably 8 for 47 against Hampshire), decline set in for the previously incomparable bowler. His haul of wickets fell from 97 at 10.91 to 78 at 17.93 and Lancashire became a weak county for the first time in Championship history. In 1962, though he was as good as ever in the Tests against Pakistan, with little support for him and Higgs, Statham fell further and only just reached 100 wickets, with Lancashire only just escaping finishing last.  When Fred Trueman and Statham toured Australia for the 1962-63 Ashes series they had 216 and 229 wickets respectively were poised to overtake the record of 236 Test wickets set by the assistant-manager Alec Bedser. The Australian captain Richie Benaud was another contender with 219 wickets, but it was Statham who broke the record in the Fourth Test at Adelaide. Trueman caught Barry Shepherd in the gully to give him his record 237th wicket. Despite the record Statham rarely shined on the tour, taking 13 wickets (44.61), and was used as a steady stock bowler. Statham took his record to 242 wickets, but returned to England while Trueman continued to New Zealand, where he broke Statham's record after only two months.  In 1963, whilst his county form on overgrassed pitches was back to something close to his best, on the less grassy surfaces in the First Test against the West Indies his bowling lacked its old venom, and he was surprisingly replaced by the veteran Derek Shackleton for the rest of the series - a move criticised heavily in the press because it was known fast bowlers would do well at Lord's. A highlight that year came when Statham took five wickets in the first-ever Gillette Cup match against Leicestershire.  In 1964, Statham, despite the arrival of Sonny Ramadhin to provide help, was disappointing and out of contention for the Ashes Tests. He did take 15 for 108 against a weak Leicestershire side and 7 for 50 against Warwickshire at Coventry, but had more bad matches than in any other season of his career. CANNOTANSWER

Question: What were some of the things that caused Brian Statham's decline?
Answer: His haul of wickets fell from 97 at 10.91 to 78 at 17.93
Brian Statham

Context: Despite a record benefit against the Australians and a few wonderful performances in 1961 (notably 8 for 47 against Hampshire), decline set in for the previously incomparable bowler. His haul of wickets fell from 97 at 10.91 to 78 at 17.93 and Lancashire became a weak county for the first time in Championship history. In 1962, though he was as good as ever in the Tests against Pakistan, with little support for him and Higgs, Statham fell further and only just reached 100 wickets, with Lancashire only just escaping finishing last.  When Fred Trueman and Statham toured Australia for the 1962-63 Ashes series they had 216 and 229 wickets respectively were poised to overtake the record of 236 Test wickets set by the assistant-manager Alec Bedser. The Australian captain Richie Benaud was another contender with 219 wickets, but it was Statham who broke the record in the Fourth Test at Adelaide. Trueman caught Barry Shepherd in the gully to give him his record 237th wicket. Despite the record Statham rarely shined on the tour, taking 13 wickets (44.61), and was used as a steady stock bowler. Statham took his record to 242 wickets, but returned to England while Trueman continued to New Zealand, where he broke Statham's record after only two months.  In 1963, whilst his county form on overgrassed pitches was back to something close to his best, on the less grassy surfaces in the First Test against the West Indies his bowling lacked its old venom, and he was surprisingly replaced by the veteran Derek Shackleton for the rest of the series - a move criticised heavily in the press because it was known fast bowlers would do well at Lord's. A highlight that year came when Statham took five wickets in the first-ever Gillette Cup match against Leicestershire.  In 1964, Statham, despite the arrival of Sonny Ramadhin to provide help, was disappointing and out of contention for the Ashes Tests. He did take 15 for 108 against a weak Leicestershire side and 7 for 50 against Warwickshire at Coventry, but had more bad matches than in any other season of his career. CANNOTANSWER

Question: Did Brian Statham have an injury or illness that caused his decline?
Answer: CANNOTANSWER
Brian Statham

Context: Despite a record benefit against the Australians and a few wonderful performances in 1961 (notably 8 for 47 against Hampshire), decline set in for the previously incomparable bowler. His haul of wickets fell from 97 at 10.91 to 78 at 17.93 and Lancashire became a weak county for the first time in Championship history. In 1962, though he was as good as ever in the Tests against Pakistan, with little support for him and Higgs, Statham fell further and only just reached 100 wickets, with Lancashire only just escaping finishing last.  When Fred Trueman and Statham toured Australia for the 1962-63 Ashes series they had 216 and 229 wickets respectively were poised to overtake the record of 236 Test wickets set by the assistant-manager Alec Bedser. The Australian captain Richie Benaud was another contender with 219 wickets, but it was Statham who broke the record in the Fourth Test at Adelaide. Trueman caught Barry Shepherd in the gully to give him his record 237th wicket. Despite the record Statham rarely shined on the tour, taking 13 wickets (44.61), and was used as a steady stock bowler. Statham took his record to 242 wickets, but returned to England while Trueman continued to New Zealand, where he broke Statham's record after only two months.  In 1963, whilst his county form on overgrassed pitches was back to something close to his best, on the less grassy surfaces in the First Test against the West Indies his bowling lacked its old venom, and he was surprisingly replaced by the veteran Derek Shackleton for the rest of the series - a move criticised heavily in the press because it was known fast bowlers would do well at Lord's. A highlight that year came when Statham took five wickets in the first-ever Gillette Cup match against Leicestershire.  In 1964, Statham, despite the arrival of Sonny Ramadhin to provide help, was disappointing and out of contention for the Ashes Tests. He did take 15 for 108 against a weak Leicestershire side and 7 for 50 against Warwickshire at Coventry, but had more bad matches than in any other season of his career. CANNOTANSWER

Question: Are there any other interesting aspects about this article on Brian Statham besides his decline?
Answer: A highlight that year came when Statham took five wickets in the first-ever Gillette Cup match against Leicestershire.
Brian Statham

Context: Despite a record benefit against the Australians and a few wonderful performances in 1961 (notably 8 for 47 against Hampshire), decline set in for the previously incomparable bowler. His haul of wickets fell from 97 at 10.91 to 78 at 17.93 and Lancashire became a weak county for the first time in Championship history. In 1962, though he was as good as ever in the Tests against Pakistan, with little support for him and Higgs, Statham fell further and only just reached 100 wickets, with Lancashire only just escaping finishing last.  When Fred Trueman and Statham toured Australia for the 1962-63 Ashes series they had 216 and 229 wickets respectively were poised to overtake the record of 236 Test wickets set by the assistant-manager Alec Bedser. The Australian captain Richie Benaud was another contender with 219 wickets, but it was Statham who broke the record in the Fourth Test at Adelaide. Trueman caught Barry Shepherd in the gully to give him his record 237th wicket. Despite the record Statham rarely shined on the tour, taking 13 wickets (44.61), and was used as a steady stock bowler. Statham took his record to 242 wickets, but returned to England while Trueman continued to New Zealand, where he broke Statham's record after only two months.  In 1963, whilst his county form on overgrassed pitches was back to something close to his best, on the less grassy surfaces in the First Test against the West Indies his bowling lacked its old venom, and he was surprisingly replaced by the veteran Derek Shackleton for the rest of the series - a move criticised heavily in the press because it was known fast bowlers would do well at Lord's. A highlight that year came when Statham took five wickets in the first-ever Gillette Cup match against Leicestershire.  In 1964, Statham, despite the arrival of Sonny Ramadhin to provide help, was disappointing and out of contention for the Ashes Tests. He did take 15 for 108 against a weak Leicestershire side and 7 for 50 against Warwickshire at Coventry, but had more bad matches than in any other season of his career. CANNOTANSWER

Question: Was Brian Statham fired?
Answer: CANNOTANSWER
Stephen Toulmin

Context: Throughout many of his works, Toulmin pointed out that absolutism (represented by theoretical or analytic arguments) has limited practical value. Absolutism is derived from Plato's idealized formal logic, which advocates universal truth; accordingly, absolutists believe that moral issues can be resolved by adhering to a standard set of moral principles, regardless of context. By contrast, Toulmin contends that many of these so-called standard principles are irrelevant to real situations encountered by human beings in daily life.  To develop his contention, Toulmin introduced the concept of argument fields. In The Uses of Argument (1958), Toulmin claims that some aspects of arguments vary from field to field, and are hence called "field-dependent," while other aspects of argument are the same throughout all fields, and are hence called "field-invariant." The flaw of absolutism, Toulmin believes, lies in its unawareness of the field-dependent aspect of argument; absolutism assumes that all aspects of argument are field invariant.  In Human Understanding (1972), Toulmin suggests that anthropologists have been tempted to side with relativists because they have noticed the influence of cultural variations on rational arguments. In other words, the anthropologist or relativist overemphasizes the importance of the "field-dependent" aspect of arguments, and neglects or is unaware of the "field-invariant" elements. In order to provide solutions to the problems of absolutism and relativism, Toulmin attempts throughout his work to develop standards that are neither absolutist nor relativist for assessing the worth of ideas.  In Cosmopolis (1990), he traces philosophers' "quest for certainty" back to Rene Descartes and Thomas Hobbes, and lauds John Dewey, Wittgenstein, Martin Heidegger, and Richard Rorty for abandoning that tradition. CANNOTANSWER

Question: What was Stephen Toulmin's objection to absolutism?
Answer: Throughout many of his works, Toulmin pointed out that absolutism (represented by theoretical or analytic arguments) has limited practical value.
Stephen Toulmin

Context: Throughout many of his works, Toulmin pointed out that absolutism (represented by theoretical or analytic arguments) has limited practical value. Absolutism is derived from Plato's idealized formal logic, which advocates universal truth; accordingly, absolutists believe that moral issues can be resolved by adhering to a standard set of moral principles, regardless of context. By contrast, Toulmin contends that many of these so-called standard principles are irrelevant to real situations encountered by human beings in daily life.  To develop his contention, Toulmin introduced the concept of argument fields. In The Uses of Argument (1958), Toulmin claims that some aspects of arguments vary from field to field, and are hence called "field-dependent," while other aspects of argument are the same throughout all fields, and are hence called "field-invariant." The flaw of absolutism, Toulmin believes, lies in its unawareness of the field-dependent aspect of argument; absolutism assumes that all aspects of argument are field invariant.  In Human Understanding (1972), Toulmin suggests that anthropologists have been tempted to side with relativists because they have noticed the influence of cultural variations on rational arguments. In other words, the anthropologist or relativist overemphasizes the importance of the "field-dependent" aspect of arguments, and neglects or is unaware of the "field-invariant" elements. In order to provide solutions to the problems of absolutism and relativism, Toulmin attempts throughout his work to develop standards that are neither absolutist nor relativist for assessing the worth of ideas.  In Cosmopolis (1990), he traces philosophers' "quest for certainty" back to Rene Descartes and Thomas Hobbes, and lauds John Dewey, Wittgenstein, Martin Heidegger, and Richard Rorty for abandoning that tradition. CANNOTANSWER

Question: Why did Stephen Toulmin believe absolutism had limited practical value?
Answer: Toulmin contends that many of these so-called standard principles are irrelevant to real situations encountered by human beings in daily life.
Stephen Toulmin

Context: Throughout many of his works, Toulmin pointed out that absolutism (represented by theoretical or analytic arguments) has limited practical value. Absolutism is derived from Plato's idealized formal logic, which advocates universal truth; accordingly, absolutists believe that moral issues can be resolved by adhering to a standard set of moral principles, regardless of context. By contrast, Toulmin contends that many of these so-called standard principles are irrelevant to real situations encountered by human beings in daily life.  To develop his contention, Toulmin introduced the concept of argument fields. In The Uses of Argument (1958), Toulmin claims that some aspects of arguments vary from field to field, and are hence called "field-dependent," while other aspects of argument are the same throughout all fields, and are hence called "field-invariant." The flaw of absolutism, Toulmin believes, lies in its unawareness of the field-dependent aspect of argument; absolutism assumes that all aspects of argument are field invariant.  In Human Understanding (1972), Toulmin suggests that anthropologists have been tempted to side with relativists because they have noticed the influence of cultural variations on rational arguments. In other words, the anthropologist or relativist overemphasizes the importance of the "field-dependent" aspect of arguments, and neglects or is unaware of the "field-invariant" elements. In order to provide solutions to the problems of absolutism and relativism, Toulmin attempts throughout his work to develop standards that are neither absolutist nor relativist for assessing the worth of ideas.  In Cosmopolis (1990), he traces philosophers' "quest for certainty" back to Rene Descartes and Thomas Hobbes, and lauds John Dewey, Wittgenstein, Martin Heidegger, and Richard Rorty for abandoning that tradition. CANNOTANSWER

Question: Does Stephen Toulmin have any beliefs other than regarding absolutism?
Answer: To develop his contention, Toulmin introduced the concept of argument fields.
Stephen Toulmin

Context: Throughout many of his works, Toulmin pointed out that absolutism (represented by theoretical or analytic arguments) has limited practical value. Absolutism is derived from Plato's idealized formal logic, which advocates universal truth; accordingly, absolutists believe that moral issues can be resolved by adhering to a standard set of moral principles, regardless of context. By contrast, Toulmin contends that many of these so-called standard principles are irrelevant to real situations encountered by human beings in daily life.  To develop his contention, Toulmin introduced the concept of argument fields. In The Uses of Argument (1958), Toulmin claims that some aspects of arguments vary from field to field, and are hence called "field-dependent," while other aspects of argument are the same throughout all fields, and are hence called "field-invariant." The flaw of absolutism, Toulmin believes, lies in its unawareness of the field-dependent aspect of argument; absolutism assumes that all aspects of argument are field invariant.  In Human Understanding (1972), Toulmin suggests that anthropologists have been tempted to side with relativists because they have noticed the influence of cultural variations on rational arguments. In other words, the anthropologist or relativist overemphasizes the importance of the "field-dependent" aspect of arguments, and neglects or is unaware of the "field-invariant" elements. In order to provide solutions to the problems of absolutism and relativism, Toulmin attempts throughout his work to develop standards that are neither absolutist nor relativist for assessing the worth of ideas.  In Cosmopolis (1990), he traces philosophers' "quest for certainty" back to Rene Descartes and Thomas Hobbes, and lauds John Dewey, Wittgenstein, Martin Heidegger, and Richard Rorty for abandoning that tradition. CANNOTANSWER

Question: What is the concept of argument fields?
Answer: some aspects of arguments vary from field to field, and are hence called "field-dependent," while other aspects of argument are the same throughout all fields, and are hence called "field-invariant.
Stephen Toulmin

Context: Throughout many of his works, Toulmin pointed out that absolutism (represented by theoretical or analytic arguments) has limited practical value. Absolutism is derived from Plato's idealized formal logic, which advocates universal truth; accordingly, absolutists believe that moral issues can be resolved by adhering to a standard set of moral principles, regardless of context. By contrast, Toulmin contends that many of these so-called standard principles are irrelevant to real situations encountered by human beings in daily life.  To develop his contention, Toulmin introduced the concept of argument fields. In The Uses of Argument (1958), Toulmin claims that some aspects of arguments vary from field to field, and are hence called "field-dependent," while other aspects of argument are the same throughout all fields, and are hence called "field-invariant." The flaw of absolutism, Toulmin believes, lies in its unawareness of the field-dependent aspect of argument; absolutism assumes that all aspects of argument are field invariant.  In Human Understanding (1972), Toulmin suggests that anthropologists have been tempted to side with relativists because they have noticed the influence of cultural variations on rational arguments. In other words, the anthropologist or relativist overemphasizes the importance of the "field-dependent" aspect of arguments, and neglects or is unaware of the "field-invariant" elements. In order to provide solutions to the problems of absolutism and relativism, Toulmin attempts throughout his work to develop standards that are neither absolutist nor relativist for assessing the worth of ideas.  In Cosmopolis (1990), he traces philosophers' "quest for certainty" back to Rene Descartes and Thomas Hobbes, and lauds John Dewey, Wittgenstein, Martin Heidegger, and Richard Rorty for abandoning that tradition. CANNOTANSWER

Question: Do others share or oppose Stephen Toulmin beliefs?
Answer: CANNOTANSWER
Stephen Toulmin

Context: Throughout many of his works, Toulmin pointed out that absolutism (represented by theoretical or analytic arguments) has limited practical value. Absolutism is derived from Plato's idealized formal logic, which advocates universal truth; accordingly, absolutists believe that moral issues can be resolved by adhering to a standard set of moral principles, regardless of context. By contrast, Toulmin contends that many of these so-called standard principles are irrelevant to real situations encountered by human beings in daily life.  To develop his contention, Toulmin introduced the concept of argument fields. In The Uses of Argument (1958), Toulmin claims that some aspects of arguments vary from field to field, and are hence called "field-dependent," while other aspects of argument are the same throughout all fields, and are hence called "field-invariant." The flaw of absolutism, Toulmin believes, lies in its unawareness of the field-dependent aspect of argument; absolutism assumes that all aspects of argument are field invariant.  In Human Understanding (1972), Toulmin suggests that anthropologists have been tempted to side with relativists because they have noticed the influence of cultural variations on rational arguments. In other words, the anthropologist or relativist overemphasizes the importance of the "field-dependent" aspect of arguments, and neglects or is unaware of the "field-invariant" elements. In order to provide solutions to the problems of absolutism and relativism, Toulmin attempts throughout his work to develop standards that are neither absolutist nor relativist for assessing the worth of ideas.  In Cosmopolis (1990), he traces philosophers' "quest for certainty" back to Rene Descartes and Thomas Hobbes, and lauds John Dewey, Wittgenstein, Martin Heidegger, and Richard Rorty for abandoning that tradition. CANNOTANSWER

Question: What was Stephen Toulmin objection to relativism?
Answer: the anthropologist or relativist overemphasizes the importance of the "field-dependent" aspect of arguments, and neglects or is unaware of the "field-invariant" elements.
Stephen Toulmin

Context: Throughout many of his works, Toulmin pointed out that absolutism (represented by theoretical or analytic arguments) has limited practical value. Absolutism is derived from Plato's idealized formal logic, which advocates universal truth; accordingly, absolutists believe that moral issues can be resolved by adhering to a standard set of moral principles, regardless of context. By contrast, Toulmin contends that many of these so-called standard principles are irrelevant to real situations encountered by human beings in daily life.  To develop his contention, Toulmin introduced the concept of argument fields. In The Uses of Argument (1958), Toulmin claims that some aspects of arguments vary from field to field, and are hence called "field-dependent," while other aspects of argument are the same throughout all fields, and are hence called "field-invariant." The flaw of absolutism, Toulmin believes, lies in its unawareness of the field-dependent aspect of argument; absolutism assumes that all aspects of argument are field invariant.  In Human Understanding (1972), Toulmin suggests that anthropologists have been tempted to side with relativists because they have noticed the influence of cultural variations on rational arguments. In other words, the anthropologist or relativist overemphasizes the importance of the "field-dependent" aspect of arguments, and neglects or is unaware of the "field-invariant" elements. In order to provide solutions to the problems of absolutism and relativism, Toulmin attempts throughout his work to develop standards that are neither absolutist nor relativist for assessing the worth of ideas.  In Cosmopolis (1990), he traces philosophers' "quest for certainty" back to Rene Descartes and Thomas Hobbes, and lauds John Dewey, Wittgenstein, Martin Heidegger, and Richard Rorty for abandoning that tradition. CANNOTANSWER

Question: What are the field-invariant elements of an argument?
Answer: other aspects of argument are the same throughout all fields, and are hence called "field-invariant.
Stephen Toulmin

Context: Throughout many of his works, Toulmin pointed out that absolutism (represented by theoretical or analytic arguments) has limited practical value. Absolutism is derived from Plato's idealized formal logic, which advocates universal truth; accordingly, absolutists believe that moral issues can be resolved by adhering to a standard set of moral principles, regardless of context. By contrast, Toulmin contends that many of these so-called standard principles are irrelevant to real situations encountered by human beings in daily life.  To develop his contention, Toulmin introduced the concept of argument fields. In The Uses of Argument (1958), Toulmin claims that some aspects of arguments vary from field to field, and are hence called "field-dependent," while other aspects of argument are the same throughout all fields, and are hence called "field-invariant." The flaw of absolutism, Toulmin believes, lies in its unawareness of the field-dependent aspect of argument; absolutism assumes that all aspects of argument are field invariant.  In Human Understanding (1972), Toulmin suggests that anthropologists have been tempted to side with relativists because they have noticed the influence of cultural variations on rational arguments. In other words, the anthropologist or relativist overemphasizes the importance of the "field-dependent" aspect of arguments, and neglects or is unaware of the "field-invariant" elements. In order to provide solutions to the problems of absolutism and relativism, Toulmin attempts throughout his work to develop standards that are neither absolutist nor relativist for assessing the worth of ideas.  In Cosmopolis (1990), he traces philosophers' "quest for certainty" back to Rene Descartes and Thomas Hobbes, and lauds John Dewey, Wittgenstein, Martin Heidegger, and Richard Rorty for abandoning that tradition. CANNOTANSWER

Question: Is there any other interesting about Stephen Toulmin other than information regarding is objection to absolutism and relativism?
Answer: Toulmin attempts throughout his work to develop standards that are neither absolutist nor relativist for assessing the worth of ideas.
Winnie Madikizela-Mandela

Context: Mandela was portrayed by Alfre Woodard in the 1987 HBO TV movie, Mandela. Ms Woodard earned both a CableACE Award and an NAACP Image Award for her performance, as did costar Danny Glover, who portrayed Nelson Mandela.  Tina Lifford played her in the 1997 TV film Mandela and de Klerk. Sophie Okonedo portrayed her in the BBC drama Mrs Mandela, first broadcast on BBC Four on 25 January 2010.  Jennifer Hudson played her in Winnie Mandela, directed by Darrell Roodt, released in Canada by D Films on 16 September 2011. Roodt, Andre Pieterse, and Paul L. Johnson based the film's script on Anne Marie du Preez Bezdrob's biography, Winnie Mandela: A Life. The Creative Workers Union of South Africa opposed the choice of Hudson in the title role, saying the use of foreign actors to tell the country's stories undermined efforts to develop the national film industry.  In 2007, an opera based on her life called The Passion of Winnie was produced in Canada, however, she was declined a visa to attend its world premiere and associated gala fundraising concert.  Mandela was again portrayed in the 2013 film Mandela: Long Walk to Freedom by actress Naomie Harris (British actor Idris Elba played Nelson Mandela). On viewing the film, Madikizela-Mandela told Harris it was "the first time she felt her story had been captured on film". Gugulethu okaMseleku, writing in The Guardian, stated that the film had returned Winnie Mandela to her rightful place, recognising her role in "the struggle" that, "for South African women ... was more fundamental than her husband's." CANNOTANSWER

Question: Besides being about Winnie Madikizela-Mandela, Are there any other interesting aspects about this article?
Answer: Mandela was portrayed by Alfre Woodard in the 1987 HBO TV movie, Mandela.