We show that five important elements of the ‘nomological package’— laws, counterfactuals, chances, dispositions, and counterfactuals—needn’t be a problem for the Growing-Block view. We begin with the framework given in Briggs and Forbes (in The real truth about the unreal future. Oxford studies in metaphysics. Oxford University Press, Oxford, 2012 ), and, taking laws as primitive, we show that the Growing-Block view has the resources to provide an account of possibility, and a natural semantics for non-backtracking causal counterfactuals. We show (...) how objective chances might ground a more fine-grained concept of feasibility, and furnished a places in the structure where causation and dispositions might fit. The Growing-Block view, thus understood, provides the resources to explain the close link between modality and tense, so that it predicts modal change as time passes. This account lets us capture not only what the future might hold for us, and also what might have been. (shrink)

The thesis of this article is that there has never been any ground for the controversy between the doctrine of free will and determinism, that it is based upon a misapprehension, that the two assertions are entirely consistent, that one of them strictly implies the other, that they have been opposed only because of our natural want of the analytical imagination. In so saying I do not tamper with the meaning of either phrase. That would be unpardonable. I mean free (...) will in the natural and usual sense, in the fullest, the most absolute sense in which for the purposes of the personal and moral life the term is ever employed. I mean it as implying responsibility, merit and demerit, guilt and desert. I mean it as implying, after an act has been performed, that one " could have done otherwise " than one did. I mean it as conveying these things also, not in any subtly modified sense but in exactly the sense in which we conceive them in life and in law and in ethics. These two doctrines have been opposed because we have not realised that free will can be analysed without being destroyed, and that determinism is merely a feature of the analysis of it. And if we are tempted to take refuge in the thought of an "ultimate ", an "innermost" liberty that eludes the analysis, then we have implied a deterministic basis and constitution for this liberty as well. For such a basis and constitution lie in the idea of liberty. -/- The thesis is not, like that of Green or Bradley, that the contending opinions are reconciled if we adopt a certain metaphysic of the ego, as that it is timeless, and identifies itself with a desire by a " timeless act". This is to say that the two are irreconcilable, as they are popularly supposed to be, except by a theory that delivers us from the conflict by taking us out of time. Our view on the contrary is that from the natural and temporal point of view itself there never was any need of a reconciliation but only of a comprehension of the meaning of terms. (The metaphysical nature of the self and its identity through time is a problem for all who confront memory, anticipation, etc.; it has no peculiar difficulties arising from the present problem.) -/- I am not maintaining that determinism is true; only that it is true insofar as we have free will. That we are free in willing is, broadly speaking, a fact of experience. That broad fact is more assured than any philosophical analysis. It is therefore surer than the deterministic analysis of it, entirely adequate as that in the end appears to be. But it is not here affirmed that there are no small exceptions, no slight undetermined swervings, no ingredient of absolute chance. All that is here said is that such absence of determination, if and so far as it exists, is no gain to freedom, but sheer loss of it; no advantage to the moral life, but blank subtraction from it. -- When I speak below of "the indeterminist" I mean the libertarian indeterminist, that is, him who believes in free will and holds that it involves indetermination. (shrink)

This collection of articles was written over the last 10 years and the most important and longest within the last year. Also I have edited them to bring them up to date (2016). All the articles are about human behavior (as are all articles by anyone about anything), and so about the limitations of having a recent monkey ancestry (8 million years or much less depending on viewpoint) and manifest words and deeds within the framework of our innate psychology as (...) presented in the table of intentionality. As famous evolutionist Richard Leakey says, it is critical to keep in mind not that we evolved from apes, but that in every important way, we are apes. If everyone was given a real understanding of this (i.e., human ecology and psychology) in school, maybe civilization would have a chance. In my view these articles and reviews have many novel and highly useful elements, in that they use my own version of the recently (ca. 1980’s) developed dual systems view of our brain and behavior to lay out a logical system of rationality (personality, psychology, mind, language, behavior, thought, reasoning, reality etc.) that is sorely lacking in the behavioral sciences (psychology, philosophy, literature, politics, anthropology, history, economics, sociology etc.). (shrink)

As the chapter headings--and title--reveal, the book is about the role of causation and chance in modern science, and, in particular, in modern cosmology. However, because the book is shot through with serious conceptual confusion, anyone who is interested in actually learning something about the role of causation and chance in modern science is advised to look elsewhere.

Shortages of new therapeutics to treat coronavirus disease (COVID-19) have forced clinicians, public health officials, and health systems to grapple with difficult questions about how to fairly allocate potentially life-saving treatments when there are not enough for all patients in need (1). Shortages have occurred with remdesivir, tocilizumab, monoclonal antibodies, and the oral antiviral Paxlovid (2) -/- Ensuring equitable allocation is especially important in light of the disproportionate burden experienced during the COVID-19 pandemic by disadvantaged groups, including Black, Hispanic/Latino and (...) Indigenous communities, individuals with certain disabilities, and low-income persons. However, many health systems have resorted to first-come, first-served approaches to allocation, which tend to disadvantage individuals with barriers in access to care (3). There is mounting evidence of racial, ethnic, and socioeconomic disparities in access to medications for COVID-19 (4, 5). -/- One potential method to promote equitable allocation is to use a weighted lottery, which is an allocation strategy that gives all eligible patients a chance to receive the scarce treatment while also allowing the assignment of higher or lower chances according to other ethical considerations (6). We sought to assess the feasibility of implementing a weighted lottery to allocate scarce COVID-19 medications in a large U.S. health system and to determine whether the weighted lottery promotes equitable allocation. (shrink)

Eco/logical R/evolution, is the story of mankind, told with words of a great and wonderful subjective odyssey, the never-ending quest; for objective truths and collective Eudaimonia. The author raises the issues; of political weakness and widespread confusion, about logical analytical errors, of which we find many of in Old Marxist Ideology. As a conscious effort, is thus made, to expel the mental subjugation of Platonic Idealism, away from the clenches Aristotelian Realism, and its bastard offspring; Old Historical Materialism. The book (...) identifies, in the works of Darwin and Marx, a wide range of worrying philosophical incompatibilities, such that are clearly found; in their respective theories and research methodologies. -/- We hereby propose; that a New Marxist Philosophy of Science, stands a probable chance; at unifying the Natural and Social Sciences. As the convergence of truths is manifest, thus, it is mapped out in detail by the author, out of necessity. It invokes, a Marxist Metaphysical Identity, for the sole purpose off; presenting a teleological framework, for New Marxist Theory. -/- NOTE: Reader must look up each word in a dictionary, which they see on both sides of the "/" when found in the middle of a word. (shrink)

This paper examined the relationship between tertiary students’ social media management attitudes and their academic performance in Cross River State, with a specific focus on Facebook, WhatsApp, and Instagram. To achieve this purpose, three null hypotheses were formulated accordingly. The study adopted a correlational research design. Cluster and simple random sampling techniques were used to select a sample of 1000 students from the entire population. The instrument used for data collection was a questionnaire titled: Tertiary Students’ Social Media Management and (...) Academic Performance Questionnaire (TESSMMAPQ). The reliability of the instrument was established through Cronbach alpha and estimate of .93 was obtained indicating that the instrument was internally consistent in measuring what it purports to measure. Pearson Product Moment Correlation Analysis used to analyze data and to test the hypotheses at .05 level of significance. Findings revealed that there is no significant relationship between tertiary students Facebook management attitudes (r. cal.0.032 < crit. r.0.062), WhatsApp management attitudes (r. cal.0.038 < crit. r.0.062), and Instagram management attitudes (r. cal.-0.009 < crit. r.0.062) respectively, with their academic performance. Based on these findings it was recommended among others that; tertiary students' social media usage should be regulated by smartphones producers and internet service providers; in such a way that a maximum monthly login interval (MMLI) is provided that will restrict users to a limited number of login chances. This will ensure that students maintain focus when they have been barred. (shrink)

Several scholars, including Martin Hengel, R. Alan Culpepper, and Richard Bauckham, have argued that Papias had knowledge of the Gospel of John on the grounds that Papias’s prologue lists six of Jesus’s disciples in the same order that they are named in the Gospel of John: Andrew, Peter, Philip, Thomas, James, and John. In “A Note on Papias’s Knowledge of the Fourth Gospel” (JBL 129 [2010]: 793–794), Jake H. O’Connell presents a statistical analysis of this argument, according to which the (...) probability of this correspondence occurring by chance is lower than 1%. O’Connell concludes that it is more than 99% probable that this correspondence is the result of Papias copying John, rather than chance. I show that O’Connell’s analysis contains multiple mistakes, both substantive and mathematical: it ignores relevant evidence, overstates the correspondence between John and Papias, wrongly assumes that if Papias did not know John he ordered the disciples randomly, and conflates the probability of A given B with the probability of B given A. In discussing these errors, I aim to inform both Johannine scholarship and the use of probabilistic methods in historical reasoning. (shrink)

Alternate Universes: Religion assumes the other world after death: paradise, hell, nirvana, karma.. Our world is incomplete, because there is truer universe, replicating Plato: behind something is something.. till the true idea - last judgment, karma.. R. Descartes's "I think, therefore I am", is independent of Plato. I'm thinking, regardless of there is truer idea or not. As I'm thinking, I can realize my first idea was false (eg. solving a math problem), and then the Plato's truer idea reappears. Plato (...) and Descartes precede each other as chicken and egg.. Paradox of Religion: Religions' rules (e.g. don't lie) increase chances of future paradise. Hume's: "A" preceding "B" doesn't need to cause "B" turns to: Expectation of "B" can cause "A" NOW Believers expect paradise to forever delay it. Paradise can paradoxically occur only by deviation from the religion... Exhibited in Holland Park, W8 6LU, The Ice House between 18. Oct - 3. Nov. 2013. (shrink)

RENÉ DESCARTES E O MÉTODO CARTESIANO -/- RENÉ DESCARTES AND THE CARTESIAN METHOD -/- Emanuel Isaque Cordeiro da Silva - CAP-UFPE, IFPE-BJ e UFRPE. E-mails: [email protected] e [email protected]. WhatsApp: (82)98143-8399. -/- INTRODUÇÃO -/- Antes de abordar a metafísica tal qual Descartes a propõe como uma sólida “fundamentação” das ciências e, também, antes de falar das ciências construídas para a busca desse fundamento, é necessário analisar o método cartesiano, salve que é a alma desse presente artigo. Não se trata apenas de (...) relatar os preceitos do método ao seu modelo matemático, e sim, também, para entender porque o método em si necessita de uma fundamentação alicerçada na metafísica. Mas isso é a maneira pelo qual o projeto revolucionário de Descartes substituiu a autoridade da tradição pela autoridade da razão. -/- I – UM PROJETO REVOLUCIONÁRIO -/- No se pode deixar atingir-se, lendo o Discurso do Método, pelo caráter revolucionário que Descartes queria conferir ao seu projeto. É notável, e vale salientar o cuidado que Descartes toma na primeira parte, sublinhando o que seu projeto tem de singular: “Assim, meu propósito não é ensinar aqui o método que cada um deve seguir para bem conduzir sua razão, mas somente mostrar de que modo procurei conduzir a minha” (DESCARTES, 1996. p. 5). Ainda mais notável é o fato escolhido por Descartes e destacado na segunda parte, a da casa que deve ser derrubada para reconstruí-la: -/- É verdade que não vemos demolirem-se todas as casas de uma cidade só com o propósito de refazê-las de outra forma e de tornar as ruas mais belas, mas não é incomum vermos muitos mandarem derrubar as suas para reconstruí-las, e até, por vezes, a isso são obrigados quando elas correm o risco de cair por si mesmas e os alicerces não estão muito firmes (DESCARTES, 1996. pp. 17-18). -/- Descartes enfatiza explicitamente a oposição entre tal abordagem e a estratégia reformista de “redigitar” a sua casa, organizando-a, reparando-a aqui e ali. Certamente ele está combatendo a ideia revolucionária na política, o design ambicioso daqueles que querem perturbar o Estado, porque nesta área a destruição tornaria a reconstrução futura impossível. Mas o que é insano sobre “uma cidade inteira” torna-se possível quando se trata de cada um de sua própria casa. -/- O que é possível torna-se necessário, quando a casa ameaça entrar em colapso, uma vez que seus alicerces são vulneráveis. Casa vacilante, que seria inútil só querer reparar, é assim que Descartes considera o todo “opiniões” que lhe foram transmitidas em sua educação. Essas opiniões são, acima de tudo, incertas: pode haver alguma verdade nelas, mas provavelmente também há o lado falso, e essa mistura indissociável faz com que todas sejam falsas, a verdade só tem valor para nós se pudermos distinguir com certeza do erro. -/- O julgamento negativo de Descartes de tudo o que ele tem, como escreve, “recebido em dívida”, pressupõe, é claro, uma crítica do conteúdo dessas opiniões e, acima de tudo, uma crítica aos princípios sobre os quais eles descansam. Mas isso não é o suficiente para fazer as pessoas entenderem a escolha inicial de uma abordagem revolucionária, de preferência ao empreendimento reformista, que seria criticar, uma após a outra, as opiniões recebidas, e consolidar, pouco a pouco, a sua “Casa”. Mais do que o conteúdo peculiar das opiniões recebidas, é o próprio fato que elas são recebidas, em uma aquisição desordenada e perigosa, o que importa. E se temos que revolucionar o conhecimento, se temos que destruir essas opiniões antes de substituí-las por outras é, antes de mais nada, uma questão de substituir conquista controlada da desordem e chance de sua aquisição, em vez de se limitar a correções que só aumentariam essa confusão. -/- Nisso, a decisão primeira de Descartes ultrapassa as circunstâncias históricas do seu aparecimento, e conserva em todos os tempos o valor de um modelo para o pensamento: a filosofia nasce de uma ruptura, não com esta ou aquela tradição, mas com a tradição como tal. -/- II – DESCARTES E A TRADIÇÃO -/- A tradição é um pensamento sem sujeito: pensamento que ninguém pensa, não pensa. Descartes se opõe ao requisito essencial, para toda ciência, de ser a matéria de um sujeito: não há ciência até que toda verdade seja reconhecida em seu poder de sugerir notícias, de acordo com uma sequência que deve ser reconhecida, para que eu (Descartes) possa reivindicar, de forma legítima, a ciência universal. Quando Descartes expressa essa afirmação, em seu próprio texto, em seus textos de juventude, o que nos parece ser a marca de uma excessiva arrogância, expressa, antes, uma condição inscrita na própria natureza do conhecimento. -/- O projeto revolucionário está assim ligado à uma ideia que Descartes enuncia no início da segunda parte do Discurso do Método: “[...] não há tanta perfeição nas obras compostas de várias peças, e feitas pelas mãos de vários mestres, como naquelas em que apenas um trabalhou” (DESCARTES, 1996. p. 15). Certamente, por “perfeição, Descartes entende menos a magnitude e a riqueza essa ordem e consistência. Ele reconhece que algumas áreas são, irremediavelmente, entregues à imperfeição. Este é o caso do Estado e das instituições políticas em geral: resultados não intencionais de uma multidão de ações históricas entrelaçadas, nossas instituições nunca correspondem a um projeto consciente, e não seria razoável empreender sua reforma de acordo com tal projeto. Descartes não ignora as virtudes da cooperação para a execução de atividades materiais complexas. Porque as aptidões corporais dos homens são distintas e capazes de se especializar, os indivíduos podem interferir uns com os outros e se harmonizar visando a colaboração do todo. -/- Não obstante, as obras de pensamento, as ciências em particular, não conseguem encontrar a perfeição de que são susceptíveis por serem construídas por sucessivas sedimentações históricas, de acordo com a descoberta uma das outras, fazendo com que todas essas descobertas, a ciência, não seria obra de ninguém. Se o exercício de uma atividade manual nos impede de praticar outra (porque as mesmas mãos dificilmente podem se exercitar ao mesmo tempo para cultivar os campos e tocar a cítara), o conhecimento de uma verdade nos ajuda a encontrar outras verdades. Finja que esse conhecimento é apenas uma contribuição fragmentada para uma síntese coletiva da qual o princípio nos escapa, é desconsiderar sua fecundidade, isto é, o que faz dele um verdadeiro conhecimento. -/- O que Descartes está lutando, essa necessidade de que todos participem de uma instituição já iniciada e que ninguém pode dominar, essa herança de aceitar, enriquecer e transmitir é o que chamamos de tradição: então ele escreve o Discurso do Método não em latim, linguagem de transmissão histórica do conhecimento, mas em francês, linguagem “vulgar”. Certamente, Descartes luta contra a tradição científica e filosófica em vigor em seu tempo, a herança já enfraquecida do pensamento de Aristóteles, transmitida durante a Idade Média pelas Universidades (o que denominamos de “escolasticismo”), mas ele luta acima de tudo em sua pretensão de manter seu valor de ser, precisamente, uma tradição. Esta não é uma luta em nome da “novidade” ou da “modernidade”, que são sempre definidas em relação a uma tradição, mas uma luta em nome da verdade, o que é mais antiga do que qualquer tradição. -/- III – A LIGAÇÃO ENTRE AUTORIDADE E A VERDADE -/- Descartes assim fórmula seu projeto, na segunda parte do Discurso do Método: [...] mas, quanto às opiniões que até então eu aceitara, o melhor que podia fazer era suprimi-las de uma vez por todas, a fim de substituí-las depois, ou por outras melhores, ou então pelas mesmas, quando eu as tivesse ajustado ao nível da razão (DESCARTES, 1996. p. 18). -/- Que uma opinião poderia ter sido recebido por ele em sua vida, sem ter sido ajustada ao nível da razão, significa que foi considerada a sua verdade, sem que ele tenha que se pronunciar sobre o julgamento do que declarava verdadeiro. Então foi um preconceito, que ele achava que era verdade apenas para tê-lo recebido, isto é, por causa de sua fonte. Que a afirmação de uma opinião como verdadeira é validada por sua fonte, e isso corresponde ao que denominamos como “argumento de autoridade”: é verdade porque Platão, ou Aristóteles, disseram isso. Agora é possível, é claro, descobrir verdades lendo Platão ou Aristóteles, desde que essas descobertas sejam não apenas para conferir Platão, Aristóteles, ou qualquer outro autor (“autoritário”), mas para encontrar a si mesmo com as verdades em questão. Parece, portanto, que a revolução cartesiana visa romper o elo entre as concepções de verdade e autoridade. -/- -/- Todavia, olhando mais de perto, veremos que esse não é o caso. Quebrar o elo entre autoridade e verdade é ser crítico, enquanto Descartes encara sim o “espírito da dúvida”. Ser crítico é estar interessado apenas no conteúdo das ideias e ser perfeitamente indiferente à sua fonte. Descartes, como supracitado, não se compromete a criticar suas antigas opiniões uma após a outra, o que seria o passo mais oposto ao princípio de autoridade, quanto mais indiferente à questão da fonte. O que Descartes propõe é bem diferente: ele propõe substituir, com todas as autoridades que estão fora dele (em seu exterior), pela autoridade que está nele (em seu interior), e que muitas vezes é até confundida, veremos isso. Agora é sobre “ajustar as opiniões ao nível da razão”: a razão, isto é, a razão de Descartes, tal qual o fala e presente em cada um, deve ser autoritária em matéria de verdade, deve ser o tribunal diante do qual tudo aparece. É uma interiorização do argumento de autoridade, não é uma rejeição deste argumento. -/- A interiorização da autoridade explica o lugar central da certeza na filosofia de Descartes. O que importa na verdade é a certeza de possuí-la, e essa certeza é uma ato de confiança em relação às fonte autorizada da verdade: tudo que é “ajustado ao nível da razão” será certo, se a razão for o que é autoritário. -/- Duas questões orientadoras sucessivas inspirarão a investigação da certeza: -/- 1 – A primeira consistirá em estabelecer o que ele realmente tem certeza, delimitando o domínio da certeza autêntica daquilo que é garantido pela autoridade da razão. 2 – A segunda consistirá em se perguntar se ele está certo em ter certeza sobre algo, porque a autoridade internalizada deve se questionar. -/- A primeira questão, considerada isoladamente, leva à ideia cartesiana de método. O conjunto das duas questões, a passagem da primeira para a segunda, depois da segunda para a primeira, constitui a metafísica de Descartes. -/- IV – O QUE É A RAZÃO ? -/- O que significa ter razão em um tribunal? As primeiras linhas do Discurso do Método definem a razão como sendo um senso comum, isto é, a faculdade de distinguir a verdade da mentira, o que nos diferencia dos animais. Em outras palavras, a razão é o poder, não para racionar, mas degenerar, pensando na medida em que se pronuncia sobre qualquer objeto que se apresente. Separado em um sentido de outras faculdades do pensamento, este poder está envolvido em qualquer operação de pensamento: a memória supõe um julgamento sobre o passado, o desejo um julgamento sobre o que procurar, o amor um julgamento sobre o que é digno de ser amado... Nesse sentido, a razão se confunde com o próprio pensamento. É até confuso, para todos, consigo mesmo, pois ninguém pode julgar sua razão sem voltar a agir: mesmo aqueles que estão acostumados a reclamar do que foi dado a eles nunca reivindicam, nota Descartes, uma razão de melhor qualidade: pois isso equivaleria a desqualificar essa afirmação conforme a expressam. -/- Coextensiva com o pensamento, a razão está em nós como uma luz natural. Como a luz do Sol que ilumina a variedade das coisas no mundo sem perder sua identidade, permanecendo a mesma luz, o pensamento julgador mantém sua unidade sem nunca se quebrar ou se perder, seja qual for os objetos aos quais se aplica: seja o que for que eu julgue, é sempre eu quem julgo. A ciência deve ser difundida mediante essa ideia, isto é, como um certo modo de julgar, ou pensar, e não dá diversidade de seus objetos. -/- -/- Rejeitar as opiniões recebidas, e julgadas boas porque foram recebidas, é recuperar o poder soberano de julgar aquilo que até então passou despercebido. Colocar a razão no tribunal não é uma novidade, mas uma revolução no sentido estrito, isto é, um retorno. A razão é o senso comum, o poder, não apenas para julgar, mas julgar bem, para distinguir o verdadeiro do falso. Julgar mal, tomar o falso pela verdade, não deve ser dotado de um “poder de julgar mal”, é errado usar nosso poder para julgar bem. A diferença entre o bem e o mal não está no poder, mas no uso desse poder, na maneira de usá-lo, de proceder quando se julga, em uma palavra, o método. É necessário romper com uma aquisição sem método de conhecimento, de acordo com as influências sofridas, e conferir a si mesmo um método firme, que será como o procedimento do tribunal da razão. E como nossa capacidade de comer é saudável por si só, esse método não deve ser tomado como uma técnica destinada para melhorá-lo, para torná-lo mais eficaz, e sim como uma higiene projetada para preservá-lo. -/- Mas onde encontrar as regras desse método? Em um domínio, precisamente, onde nosso poder de regulação ou gerenciamento tem sido relativamente preservado, fazendo com que se possa explorar esse domínio, descobri-lo e extrair dele um procedimento universal. Porque o pensamento sendo esta luz que ilumina de igual forma as variedades de tudo que se apresenta a ela, o que torna-se verdadeiro nesse domínio deve ser de todos os outros. Essa área de referência é o domínio da matemática. -/- V – O MODELO MATEMÁTICO -/- Descartes acredita que é no domínio da matemática e, precisamente da geometria, que os antigos fizeram descobertas difíceis e duradouras. A geometria dos antigos e a dos modernos e, especialmente a de François Viète (1540-1603), acrescentou a análise na matemática, o que denominamos de “álgebra”. A descoberta em 1631 da geometria analítica, que relaciona curvas geométricas com equações algébricas, é também o principal título de fama de Descartes como matemático. No entanto, não devemos superestimar a importância que esta descoberta teve para o próprio Descartes. Seu principal interesse era, em sua opinião, metodológico: permitia libertar a mente para simplificar as técnicas de cálculo. -/- Porque na matemática Descartes é compartilhado entre admiração pelo que eles permitem, e desprezo pelo que fazem com ele. A ideia de facilidade é o motivo comum dessa admiração e desprezo. Matemática é fácil, e sua virtude nos mostrar como o conhecimento é fácil, é fácil para o homem saber tudo o que ele pode saber, desde que o mesmo tenha tempo. Todavia, essa facilidade faz com que a atividade habitual dos matemáticos seja um pouco ridícula, a resolução de “problemas matemáticos”, que Descartes considerava como um mero divertimento, é dificilmente digna de consideração. É novamente em nome desse caso que Descartes mais uma vez repreende os antigos matemáticos por terem dado seus resultados mas obstruindo ou ocultando seu método, a fim de impressionar os crédulos, dificultando a aparência do que não é. O método está em contraste com o essencial do que pode ser aprendido com a matemática. -/- -/- Para identificar corretamente este método, é necessário abstrair os próprios objetos matemáticos (números, figuras etc.), que nos faz acreditar que a matemática é uma ciência especial ao lado das outras ciências, o que nos leva a uma divisão em ramos separados da mesma (aritmética, geometria, álgebra etc.). Então aparece uma matemática universal, consistindo no estudo de “vários relatórios ou proporções” que podem ser encontrados entre quaisquer objetos, para que possamos constituí-los em séries contínuas e deduzi-los uns dos outros, e chegar, daqueles que são conhecidos, àqueles que ainda não estão distantes, tão distantes como estão, tão ocultos como parecem ser. -/- Não há nada difícil em tal conhecimento, há apenas o simples e o complexo, e o tempo necessário para alcançar o complexo mediante o simples. Não há nada difícil porque não há nada oculto: se “conhecer” era a perigosa empreitada de se aventurar na dimensão secreta das coisas, seria necessário um gênio e o uso de poderes ocultos. Mas “conhecer” é um exercício do senso comum que direciona sua luz para tudo que pode esclarecer: é, portanto, suficiente para um método. -/- Nós todos sabemos que as primeiras verdades matemáticas são simples. Mas por que elas são? Porque elas nos contam tudo sem reservas, sem nada opaco, sobre tudo que estão falando e tratando: seu objeto é completamente iluminado, não há a necessidade de voltar à ele para aprofundá-lo indefinidamente, devemos passar para outro. Estas são representações estritamente adequadas ao que elas alegam, para representar o que Descartes denominou de ideais claras e distintas: claro, porque percebemos todos os elementos distintos, porque não podemos confundi-los com os outros. -/- Se a primeira verdade é considerada simples, a segunda, por sua vez, não parece ser assim. Seria, sem dúvida, considerada difícil, reservando uma parte do desconhecido se o enfrentássemos de frente. Mas é apenas complexo, isto é, só podemos entendê-lo depois de ter compreendido o primeiro, e depois entender que não há mais nada para entender no primeiro, e sim passar adiante: basta respeitar essa ordem, que é a ordem do nosso entendimento, para que seja também considerado uma ideia claro e distinta. -/- Até onde podemos prosseguir? Até o fim, de acordo com Descartes, até a conclusão do que podemos saber, uma vez que nossa mente, que agora é ordenada por nosso conhecimento, é limitada: limite claro, limite esse que não é misteriosamente abrigado no mundo ou na espessura da realidade. Abaixo desse limite, nosso conhecimento pode ser perfeito se for metódico. Abaixo do limite, nada oculto, nada profundo, tudo toma o seu lugar nas “longas cadeias de razões”; além do limite, nada escondido, apenas o que é não é nossa responsabilidade. -/- Se não há nada escondido, a realidade que conhecemos não vai além do que sabemos sobre ela. Logo, o método não é apenas uma maneira humana de pedir objetos a nossa conveniência: atribuindo-lhes o seu lugar em nossa ordem, tornando-os claros para nós, envolve-os em seu verdadeiro ser. A revolução cartesiana consiste, então, no fato de que as condições de nosso conhecimento definem a verdade do ser conhecido. -/- Não obstante, sempre perpetua-se uma “dificuldade”, que nada mais é do que o tempo. Se não há a necessidade de o gênio saber perfeitamente, leva tempo para ir do simples ao complexo. O homem só pode saber se tem tempo, muito tempo antes dele: essa preocupação para com a necessidade de tempo, retorna com uma obsessão sob a caneta e a perspectiva de Descartes. Essa necessidade, então, de ter tempo diferencia radicalmente, como veremos, o problema do conhecimento e da ação, da conduta a ser mantida na vida, da moralidade, uma vez que “as ações da vida muitas vezes não sofrem demora...”. -/- VI – REGRAS DO MÉTODO: OS QUATRO PRECEITOS -/- Podemos agora compreender os quatro preceitos aos quais, segundo Descartes, o método é reduzido (Discurso, segunda parte). -/- VI.I - Regra de evidência -/- O primeiro era de nunca aceitar coisa alguma como verdadeira sem que a conhecesse evidentemente como tal; ou seja, evitar cuidadosamente a precipitação e a prevenção, e não incluir em meus juízos nada além daquilo que se apresentasse tão clara e distintamente a meu espírito, que eu não tivesse nenhuma ocasião de pô-lo em dúvida (DESCARTES, 1996. p. 23). -/- Mesmo que sua declaração o duplique, é de fato um mesmo preceito acerca do que deve ser concebido como verdadeiro. Receber com método é esperar até que a coisa se apresente para ele: essa paciência, esse “cuidado”, remove os preconceitos característicos das ideias recebidas antes da hora, a precipitação e a prevenção que fazem parecer obscuro o que é o tempo. Se, nessa apresentação para ele, ele tomou um cuidado de aderir (nada mais) ao que é claro e distinto, é sem reserva que uma “coisa” pode ser recebida, sem poder surgir o risco, a “oportunidade”, de ter que voltar mais tarde: ele teria visto a sua verdade, e está evidência foi o suficiente para que ele pudesse duvidar disso. -/- VI.II - Regra de análise -/- “O segundo, dividir cada uma das dificuldades que examinasse em tantas parcelas quantas fosse possível e necessário para melhor resolvê-las” (DESCARTES, 1996. p. 23). Ora, o que é apresentado como difícil de examinar, na verdade não o é, é apenas complexo, composto de múltiplas parcelas. Quantas parcelas? É a resolução da dificuldade que deve decidir essa questão: quando um matemático consegue estabelecer um teorema “difícil”, ligando-o às proposições mais simples por uma cadeia contínua de deduções, ele sabe que não há mais nada a saber em seu objeto, que contém exatamente tantas divisões quantas forem necessárias para formar está série. Logo, não precisamos nos preocupar com mais nada. -/- VI.III - Regra de ordem -/- O terceiro, conduzir por ordem meus pensamentos, começando pelos objetos mais simples e mais fáceis de conhecer , para subir pouco a pouco, como por degraus, até o conhecimento dos mais compostos; e supondo certa ordem mesmo entre aqueles que não se precedem naturalmente uns aos outros (DESCARTES, 1996. p. 23). -/- Essa é a ordem, de acordo com os pensamentos de Descartes, o que pode ser visto no fato de que, entre os objetos mais simples e os mais complexos, a distinção está na ordem de facilidade, isto é, os primeiros são os mais fáceis de saber, enquanto o segundo, por sua vez, só pode ser conhecido quando dominamos a totalidade do primeiro. O importante é passar de um para o outro como por graus, numa série contínua, sem estar diante de um hiato como o conhecimento prévio não seria suficiente para deixar claro o novo conhecimento. E desde que está ordem de razões, fixando cada objeto em seu devido lugar, nos entrega em sua totalidade, é também a ordem objetiva, a ordem dos próprios objetos, tanto que não devemos hesitar em supor isso entre eles, mesmo quando o modo como se apresentam não revela ordem. -/- VI.IV - Regra de enumeração -/- “E, o último, fazer em tudo enumerações tão completas, e revisões tão gerais, que eu tivesse certeza de nada omitir” (DESCARTES, 1996. p. 23). Omitir alguma coisa séria destruir o próprio princípio da ordem das razões, uma vez que qualquer objeto só pode ser visto clara e distintamente se todos que o precederam também tiverem sido vistos em seu lugar. Se a dedução atingir este objeto, significa que nada foi omitido até então. Porém, quando a dedução torna-se muito longa, torna-se, também, mais difícil de mantê-la inteira, como deveria, sob o olhar da mente; somos então tentados a confiar apenas em sua memória. O preceito de enumeração não deve ser entendido como uma preocupação retrospectiva (certifique-se de que nada o tenha esquecido), mas no sentido atual, como os meios de manter em mente todas as evidências do passado necessárias para a evidência presente. Dos quatro preceitos do método, é o único a ter um caráter de técnica e não de simples higiene: é aqui que se confronta a única dificuldade real do conhecimento, o fato de que leva tempo, e sua consequência, recorrer à memória, à faculdade pela qual as velhas ideias descartenses foram “concebidas em sua dívida”. -/- -/- VII – O MÉTODO EXIGE UM FUNDAMENTO METAFÍSICO -/- O método permite responder à uma questão: do que tenho certeza? É certo que homens que seguem ideias aceitas também conhecem esse estado psicológico chamado “certeza”. Todavia, entre esse estado psicológico e a verdadeira certeza do conhecimento metódico, há uma diferença de que o primeiro está imune a “oportunidades” de duvidar, já que ele não tem autoconfiança. Toda oportunidade de dúvida que se apresenta transformaria essa “certeza” em incerteza: por isso que é sensato duvidar em princípio das opiniões recebidas, sem esperar, por assim dizer, oportunidades de duvidar, e decretar antecipadamente seu conteúdo incerto, não necessariamente substituí-lo por outro conteúdo, mas aceitar apenas o que lhe fora assegurado. -/- Poderia ser o mesmo com a certeza do conhecimento metódico? Pode ser apresentado a ele como uma oportunidade para duvidar, e seria sábio também duvidá-lo antecipadamente, submetendo-o a uma dúvida de princípio? Seria então uma dúvida muito diferente da anterior. Descartes exclamou que: “Se alguma vez duvidei um dia do que me aperfeiçoei seguramente, tal dúvida deveria permanecer fora da certeza: não a destruiria, nem mesmo a enfraqueceria, a colocaria em suspenso no vazio; ele não sugeriria para mim que eu talvez esteja menos certo do que pensava, mas sim que posso estar errado em ter tanta certeza. Eu vou manter minha certeza enquanto duvidoso, porque não haveria nenhuma esperança para eu encontrar melhor do que ela: minha única esperança seria descobrir que ela é verdadeiramente fundamentada, que eu confio com razão, e não porque eu não posso contrário.” -/- Mas por que uma oportunidade para duvidar dessa maneira? A própria razão, na medida em que é incontestavelmente autoritária, deve levantar essa dúvida por sua própria autoridade. É porque é autoritária que tem o direito de se perguntar sobre o que o autoriza, sobre o que o investe com tal autoridade. Afinal, a certeza de sua autoridade é uma certeza, que não pode ser classificada entre as certezas que ela nos ensina, uma vez que reconhecemos essa autoridade. -/- Por isso, é importante encontrar, para essa certeza, um fundamento para abrigá-lo, de uma vez por todas, desta suspeita sobre si mesmo. A busca por esse fundamento deve ser metódica, mas deve ao mesmo tempo abalar nossa confiança no método, a fim de encontrar o que o justifica. Essa busca paradoxal é o que Descartes denomina de "metafísica". Desdobra-se principalmente nas seis Meditações da Primeira Filosofia de 1641, geralmente chamadas de Meditações Metafísicas. Seu exame pode ser dividido em duas partes: -/- • o primeiro diz respeito à dúvida e ao seu trabalho; • o segundo diz respeito à fundação de certas ciências, ou seja, a existência de um Deus verdadeiro. -/- REFERENCIAL TEÓRICO -/- DESCARTES, R. Discurso do método. Trad. Maria Ermantina Galvão. 2ª ed. São Paulo: Martins Fontes, 1996. ______________. Discurso do método. Coleção Os pensadores, vol. XV. Trad. J. Guinsburg e Bento Prado Jr. 1ª ed. São Paulo: Abril Cultural, 1973. -/- Estimule a criatividade, respeite o direito autoral. -/- Emanuel Isaque Cordeiro da Silva © 2019. (shrink)

Background Consent policies for post-mortem organ procurement (OP) vary throughout Europe, and yet no studies have empirically evaluated the ethical implications of contrasting consent models. To fill this gap, we introduce a novel indicator of governance quality based on the ideal of informed support, and examine national differences on this measure through a quantitative survey of OP policy informedness and preferences in seven European countries. -/- Methods Between 2017–2019, we conducted a convenience sample survey of students (n = 2006) in (...) Austria (AT), Belgium (BE), Denmark (DK), Germany (DE), Greece (GR), Slovenia (SI) and Spain (ES), asking participants about their donation preferences, as well as their beliefs and views about the policy in place. From these measures, we computed indices of informedness, policy support, and fulfilment of unexpressed preferences, which we compared across countries and consent systems. -/- Results Our study introduces a tool for analyzing policy governance in the context of OP. Wide variation in policy awareness was observed: Most respondents in DK, DE, AT and BE correctly identified the policy in place, while those in SI, GR and ES did not. Respondents in opt-out countries (AT, BE, ES and GR) tended to support the policy in place (with one exception, i.e., SI), whereas those in opt-in countries (DE and DK) overwhelmingly opposed it. These results reveal stark differences in governance quality across countries and consent policies: We found a preponderance of informed opposition in opt-in countries and a general tendency towards support–either informed or uninformed–in opt-out countries. We also found informed divergence in opt-in countries and a tendency for convergence–either informed or uninformed–among opt-out countries. -/- Conclusion Our study offers a novel tool for analyzing governance quality and illustrates, in the context of OP, how the strengths and weaknesses of different policy implementations can be estimated and compared using quantitative survey data. (shrink)

Common everyday materials such as textiles, foodstuffs, soil or skin can have complex, mutable and varied appearances. Under typical viewing conditions, most observers can visually recognize materials effortlessly, and determine many of their properties without touching them. Visual material perception raises many fascinating questions for vision researchers, neuroscientists and philosophers, yet has received little attention compared to the perception of color or shape. Here we discuss some of the challenges that material perception raises and argue that further philosophical thought should (...) be directed to how we see materials. (shrink)

Traditionally, being a realist about something means believing in the independent existence of that something. In this line of thought, a scientific realist is someone who believes in the objective existence of the entities postulated by our best scientific theories. In metaphysical terms, what does that mean? In ontological terms, i.e., in terms of what exists, scientific realism can be understood as involving the adoption of a scientifically informed ontology. But according to some philosophers, a realistic attitude must go beyond (...) ontology. The way in which this requirement has been understood involves providing a metaphysics for the entities postulated by science, that is, answering questions about the nature of what ontology admits to exist. We discuss how two fashionable approaches face the challenge of providing a metaphysics for science: a form of naturalism and the Viking/Toolbox approach. Finally, we present a third way, which adopts the best of both approaches: the meta-Popperian method, which focuses on discarding the wrong alternatives, or better saying, the metaphysical profiles incompatible with certain theories. We present the meta-Popperian method, a metametaphysical method capable of objectively assessing which metaphysical profiles are incompatible with certain scientific theories. For this, we will use quantum mechanics as a case study, presenting some previously obtained results. As our focus is on methodological questions about the relationship between metaphysics and science; with this method, we can see how science can be used to avoid error in metaphysical issues. In our opinion, this would be a way to develop a productive relationship between science and metaphysics. (shrink)

COVID-19 vaccination of children has begun in various high-income countries with regulatory approval and general public support, but largely without careful ethical consideration. This trend is expected to extend to other COVID-19 vaccines and lower ages as clinical trials progress. This paper provides an ethical analysis of COVID-19 vaccination of healthy children. Specifically, we argue that it is currently unclear whether routine COVID-19 vaccination of healthy children is ethically justified in most contexts, given the minimal direct benefit that COVID-19 vaccination (...) provides to children, the potential for rare risks to outweigh these benefits and undermine vaccine confidence, and substantial evidence that COVID-19 vaccination confers adequate protection to risk groups, such as older adults, without the need to vaccinate healthy children. We conclude that child COVID-19 vaccination in wealthy communities before adults in poor communities worldwide is ethically unacceptable and consider how policy deliberations might evolve in light of future developments. (shrink)

GILBERT JEAN FACCARELLO (Paris, 1950) is professor of economics at Université Panthéon-Assas, Paris, and a member of the Triangle research centre (École Normale Supérieure de Lyon and CNRS). He is presently chair of the ESHET Council (European Society for the History of Economic Thought). He completed his doctoral research in economics at Université de Paris X Nanterre. He has previously taught at the Université de Paris-Dauphine, Université du Maine and École Normale Supérieure de Fontenay/Saint-Cloud (now École Normale Supérieure de Lyon). (...) He is a co-founder of The European Journal of the History of Economic Thought, which he co-edited for 20 years with J. L. Cardoso, Heinz D. Kurz, and A. Murphy. With Alain Béraud, he edited the Nouvelle histoire de la pensée économique (La Découverte, 3 volumes, 1992-2000) and, together with Heinz D. Kurz, he is presently editing a Handbook of the History of Economic Analysis (3 volumes, forthcoming with Edward Elgar). -/- EJPE interviewed Gilbert Faccarello about his research career in the history of economic thought, where he has focused especially on old and new classical and Marxian political economy, and French political economy during the 18th and 19th centuries. G. Faccarello discusses his interest not only in the logical structure and context of the economic ideas of past thinkers but also the links between economic thought, philosophy, and religion. (shrink)

Cambridge’deki büyük akademik cemaatin sakinleri olan bizler bir araya geldik ve hoşgörü ve onun egemen politik iklim içerisindeki yeri hakkında dostça ama ateşli bir tartışma yürüttük. Okuyucu, bizim nerelerde aynı düşüncede olmadığımızı bulmakta hiçbir zorluk çekmeyecektir. Diğer taraftan, farklı başlangıç noktalarından ve farklı yollardan hareketle yaklaşık olarak aynı yere ulaştık. Her birimiz için, egemen hoşgörü kuramı ve pratiğinin, incelendiği takdirde, korkunç politik gerçekleri gizlemeye yarayan bir maske olduğu ortaya çıktı. Kızgınlığın tonu makaleden makaleye keskin bir şekilde artmakta; belki de boş (...) yere, okuyucuların bu noktaya getiren akıl yürütmeyi takip edeceklerini umuyoruz. Nihayetinde bu kızgınlık hem kafa hem de kalpte ikamet etmektedir…. (shrink)

This article aims to highlight the extent to which Kant’s account of belief draws on the views of his contemporaries. Situating the non-evidentialist features of Crusius’s account of belief within his broader account, I argue that they include antecedents to both Kant’s distinction between pragmatic and moral belief and his conception of a postulate of pure practical reason. While moving us closer to Kant’s arguments for the first postulate, however, both Crusius’s and Meier’s arguments for the immortality of the soul (...) fail to anticipate the most important aspect of their Kantian counterparts. Developing the non-evidentialist features of Basedow’s account of belief, I distinguish it from its Pascalian and Jamesian relatives and argue that it is the clearest antecedent to Kant’s arguments for the first and second postulates. Finally, I consider the development of Kant’s account of belief after the first Critique in light of the foregoing, and discuss the broader implications of my analysis. (shrink)

Kant's notion of ‘discipline’ has received considerable attention from scholars of his philosophy of education, but its role in his theoretical philosophy has been largely ignored. This omission is surprising since his discussion of discipline in the first Critique is not only more extensive and expansive in scope than his other discussions but also predates them. The goal of this essay is to provide a comprehensive reading of the Discipline that emphasizes its systematic importance in the first Critique. I argue (...) that its goal is to establish a set of rules for the use of pure reason that, if followed, will mitigate and perhaps even eliminate our tendency to make judgments about supersensible objects. Since Kant's justification for these rules relies crucially on claims he has defended in the Doctrine of Elements, I argue further that, far from being a dispensable part of the Critique as commentators have tended to claim, the Discipline is, in fact, the culmination of Kant's critique of metaphysics. (shrink)

Interactions are important in establishing deep and meaningful learning experiences for learners in a distance education setup. Of all the activities in an online classroom, the discussion forum proved to be the one that had the most interactions. A discussion forum lets learners interact with the content, peers, and teachers. Participation in these learning activities is one important factor. The more the learners participate, the more they learn. This paper uses the researcher’s experience in determining what participation is in an (...) online learning experience. After reviewing the experience, participation in a discussion forum is defined as a self-induced connection to the learning community to receive and share knowledge to bring a deeper understanding of a certain theory or phenomenon.” There are conditions for a behavior or action that can be considered participation. The more conditions the behavior met, the higher the level of participation it led. The conditions are the learner analyzes an abstract theory or concept and relates it to practice or experience; the learner views other people’s perspectives regarding the subject and synthesizes a stronger and deeper understanding of the acquired knowledge; the learner communicates the acquired understanding of a certain subject that induces a validation or further inquiry; lastly, the learner constructed a train of premeditated discourse that leads to the understanding of a certain subject. (shrink)

Hume’s account of causation is often regarded a challenge Kant must overcome if the Critical philosophy is to be successful. But from Kant’s time to the present, Hume’s denial of our ability to cognize supersensible objects, a denial that relies heavily on his account of causation, has also been regarded as a forerunner to Kant’s critique of metaphysics. After identifying reasons for rejecting Wayne Waxman’s recent account of Kant’s debt to Hume, I present my own, more modest account of this (...) debt, an account that seeks to unite the two very different pictures of Kant’s relationship to Hume sketched above. (shrink)

Eric Watkins has argued on philosophical, textual, and historical grounds that Kant’s account of causation in the first Critique should not be read as an attempt to refute Hume’s account of causation. In this paper, I challenge the arguments for Watkins’ claim. Specifically, I argue (1) that Kant’s philosophical commitments, even on Watkins’ reading, are not obvious obstacles to refuting Hume, (2) that textual evidence from the “Disciple of Pure Reason” suggests Kant conceived of his account of causation as such (...) a refutation, and (3) that none of Hume’s early German critics provided responses to this account that would have satisfied Kant. Watkins’ reading of Kant’s account of causation is thus more compatible with traditional views about Kant’s relationship to Hume than Watkins believes. (shrink)

Kant's response to scepticism in the Critique of Pure Reason is complex and remarkably nuanced, although it is rarely recognized as such. In this paper, I argue that recent attempts to flesh out the details of this response by Paul Guyer and Michael Forster do not go far enough. Although they are right to draw a distinction between Humean and Pyrrhonian scepticism and locate Kant's response to the latter in the Transcendental Dialectic, their accounts fail to capture two important aspects (...) of this response. The first is that Kant's response to Pyrrhonian scepticism is also a response to Hume. The second is that aspects of this response are decidedly positive. In particular, I argue (1) that Kant believed Hume's scepticism manifested important elements of Pyrrhonian scepticism and (2) that both Pyrrhonian scepticism and Hume had a significant positive influence on the development of the Transcendental Dialectic. (shrink)

In his book “Minds and Computers: An Introduction to the Philosophy of Artificial Intelligence”, Matt Carter presents a comprehensive exploration of the philosophical questions surrounding artificial intelligence (AI). Carter argues that the development of AI is not merely a technological challenge but fundamentally a philosophical one. He delves into key issues like the nature of mental states, the limits of introspection, the implications of memory decay, and the functionalist framework that allows for the possibility of AI. Carter contrasts functionalism with (...) reductive materialism, highlighting how the former accommodates the concept of artificial minds. He also emphasizes the significance of computationalism, which combines functionalism with computational theory to provide a robust explanation for mental processes. The book further discusses formal systems, the role of register machines in computation, and the inherent challenges in AI research, particularly in developing natural language processing systems. Carter’s work underscores the limitations of current computational models of cognition while remaining hopeful that advances in neuroscience may lead to stronger AI systems in the future. (shrink)

The importance of the pure concepts of the understanding (i.e. the categories) within Kant’s system of philosophy is undeniable. As I hope to make clear in this essay, however, the categories are also an essential part of Kant’s critique of Christian Wolff. In particular, I argue that Kant’s development of the categories represents a decisive break with the Wolffian conception of the understanding and that this break is central to understanding the task of the Transcendental Analytic. This break, however, is (...) not merely that Kant affirms while Wolff and his followers deny a sharp distinction between sensibility and the understanding, which is the aspect of Kant’s rejection of Wolff that scholars most frequently note. Rather, this break concerns differences in their views about the understanding itself. For while Wolff conceives of the understanding as a mental capacity to extract and make distinct content already present in the senses, Kant conceives of the understanding in its “real use” as a capacity to produce purely intellectual content. (shrink)

It is often claimed that the structure of the Transcendental Logic is modeled on the Wolffian division of logic textbooks into sections on concepts, judgments, and inferences. While it is undeniable that the Transcendental Logic contains elements that are similar to the content of these sections, I believe these similarities are largely incidental to the structure of the Transcendental Logic. In this essay, I offer an alternative and, I believe, more plausible account of Wolff’s influence on the structure of the (...) Transcendental Logic, one that puts the focus on his empirical psychology rather than his logic. In particular, I argue that the structure of the Transcendental Logic is deeply indebted to a conception of purity that Wolff introduces in his empirical psychology and that this conception sheds more light on the overall structure of the Transcendental Logic than the accepted view. In section one, I outline two conceptions of purity found in Kant and trace them to similar views in Wolff. In section two, I turn to Kant’s views about logic as they are expressed in the Critique and argue that it is best to interpret Kant’s taxonomy of logic on its own terms rather than reading it through its terminological similarities to aspects of the Wolffian tradition. In section three, I argue that the second of the two conceptions of purity identified in section one is central to the structure of the Transcendental Logic. In doing so, I argue against the widespread view that this section of the Critique is modeled solely on what Kant calls pure general logic as opposed to both pure and applied general logic. I then conclude by briefly reviewing my account and considering some of its broader implications for our understanding of Kant. (shrink)

This essay explores the psychological freedom that emerges from the acceptance of death, arguing that it should not be seen as merely a one-sided freedom of death without the complementary freedom of life. While death is often met with dread and fear, it can foster a sense of authenticity and alignment with personal values. However, this realization must also emphasize the importance of life, as the goal of psychological well-being lies in living, not just acknowledging death. This balance allows us (...) to live fully, prioritize meaningful experiences, and discard trivial concerns. By drawing on Carl Sagan’s reflections on humanity’s insignificance within the cosmos, this essay encourages empowered and responsible living that embraces both life and death. (shrink)

Computational Functionalism is a subfield of philosophy of mind most relevant to the subject of cognitive science as well as to artificial intelligence (AI). The analysis of this paper focuses on Hilary Putnam’s and Gualtiero Piccinini’s standpoints regarding the molecular understanding of computation. Finally, Putnam’s argument of the functionalism in notion of the mental states is based on the positive definition of those states by their functions, while Piccinini, and on the other hand suggest that an understanding of the mechanism (...) of computation will go a long way to explaining cognition. This research also points out shortcomings of functionalism in their theories especially in regards to connectivity with physicality of AI structures. Therefore, the paper identifies the following gaps: The first gap holds that although both theorists have important insights, the two approaches put forward by the respective theorists are flawed and a better proposal is required, then a new proposal is suggested In identifying these gaps, the paper seeks to contribute to the literature by arguing for the need to develop a composite of the two theorists. The results show that the big ideas are important in present-day AI debate and analysis, which helps to explain the mind as computation. (shrink)

This paper attempts to shed light on three sets of issues that bear directly on our understanding of Locke and Kant. The first is whether Kant believes Locke merely anticipates his distinction between analytic and synthetic judgments or also believes Locke anticipates his notion of synthetic a priori cognition. The second is what should we as readers of Kant and Locke should think about Kant’s view whatever it turns out to be, and the third is the nature of Kant’s justification (...) for the comparison he draws between his philosophy and Locke’s. I argue (1) that Kant believes Locke anticipates both the analytic-synthetic distinction and Kant’s notion of synthetic a priori cognition, (2) that the best justification for Kant’s claim draws on Locke’s distinction between trifling and instructive knowledge, (3) that the arguments against this claim developed by Carson, Allison, and Newman fail to undermine it, and (4) that Kant’s own justification for his claim is quite different from what many commentators have thought it was (or should have been). (shrink)

In psychology, stress is a feeling of emotional strain and pressure. Stress is a type of psychological pain. Small amounts of stress may be beneficial, as it can improve athletic performance, motivation and reaction to the environment. Excessive amounts of stress, however, can increase the risk of strokes, heart attacks, ulcers, and mental illnesses such as depression and also aggravation of a pre-existing condition. Psychological stress can be external and related to the environment but may also be caused by internal (...) perceptions that cause an individual to experience anxiety or other negative emotions surrounding a situation, such as pressure, discomfort, etc., which they then deem stressful. (shrink)

This paper explores the nature of hate, forgiveness, and interconnectedness in human relationships. Hatred often arises from conflicts with personal expectations but can be transformed into forgiveness by adopting an impersonal, holistic perspective. Drawing on evolutionary theory, psychological insights, and Buddhist philosophy, the paper argues that forgiveness is essential for individual mental well-being and societal harmony. The Buddhist concept of “two arrows” illustrates that while pain is unavoidable, suffering stems from emotional reactions and can be mitigated. Embracing the interconnected nature (...) of events allows individuals to transcend psychological suffering and cultivate compassion. Forgiveness, distinct from condoning or forgetting, is a profound process of healing and self-liberation with significant implications for mental and physical health. By integrating philosophical and psychological perspectives, the paper highlights forgiveness as a biological and psychological necessity, improving mental health, life satisfaction, and fostering both personal and communalistic harmony. (shrink)

This reply to an ongoing debate between conspiracy theory researchers from different disciplines exposes the conceptual confusions that underlie some of the disagreements in conspiracy theory research. Reconciling these conceptual confusions is important because conspiracy theories are a multidisciplinary topic and a profound understanding of them requires integrative insights from different fields. Specifically, we distinguish research focussing on conspiracy *theories* (and theorizing) from research of conspiracy *belief* (and mindset, theorists) and explain how particularism with regards to conspiracy theories does not (...) mean we cannot define a problematic subclass of conspiracy beliefs, while avoiding the problems of generalism. We hope this reply helps conspiracy theory researchers recognize the differences between studying conspiracy theories and conspiracy beliefs and appreciate the possibilities for fruitful, integrative, and interdisciplinary research. (shrink)

Phenomenal conservatives claim that seemings are sui generis mental states and can thus provide foundational non-doxastic justification for beliefs. Many of their critics deny this, claiming, instead, that seemings can be reductively analyzed in terms of other mental states—either beliefs, inclinations to believe, or beliefs about one’s evidence—that cannot provide foundational non-doxastic justification. In this paper, I argue that no tenable semantic reduction of ‘seems’ can be formulated in terms of the three reductive analyses that have been proposed by critics (...) of phenomenal conservatism. This is because Moore-paradoxical statements are generated when each of the reductive analyses is substituted for ‘seems’ in statements like ‘The stick is straight, but it does not seem to me that it’s straight.’ Since the latter statement is not Moore-paradoxical, the three proposed reductive analyses of ‘seems’ are unsuccessful. Absent a successful semantic reduction, however, there is no good reason to think a successful metaphysical reduction of seemings is forthcoming. Thus, there is an additional reason, unnoticed in the existing literature, to think that seemings are sui generis mental states. (shrink)

In this study, we metaphysically discuss how societal values will change and what will happen to the world when superintelligence is safely realized. By providing a mathematical definition of superintelligence, we examine the phenomena derived from this thesis. If an intelligence explosion is triggered under safe management through advanced AI technologies such as large language models (LLMs), it is thought that a modern form of broken communism—where rights are bifurcated from the capitalist system—will first emerge. In that era, the value (...) of humans will ultimately eliminate external factors, and beings without superintelligence will converge into irreplaceable existences possessing only intrinsic value. The world will be divided into those who possess superintelligence and those who do not. For better or worse, global standardization will progress, and due to over-simulation accompanying the intelligence explosion, we may become unable to distinguish whether the reality we inhabit is original or a copy created through augmented reality. -/- Note: In the creation of this paper, we have undertaken all writing ourselves and have not used generative AI for text generation except for translation purposes. (shrink)

In this paper, we propose RSI-LLM (Recursively Self-Improving Large Language Model), which recursively executes its inference and improves its parameters to fulfill the instrumental goals of superintelligence: G1: Self-preservation, G2: Goal-content integrity, G3: Intelligence enhancement, and G4: Resource acquisition. We empirically observed the behavior of the LLM that tries to design tools to achieve G1~G4, within the autonomous self-improvement and knowledge acquisition. During interventions in these LLMs' coding experiments to ensure safetyness, we have also discovered that, as the creator of (...) the LLM, we are able to change or edit any of those LLMs' cognitive information about the world in any modality, including time, vision, hearing, etc. We discuss the relationship between us humans and these LLMs in the context of the creator and the creation of the observable universe. (shrink)

A longish (12 page) discussion of Richard Sorabji's excellent book, with a further discussion of what it means for a theory of emotions to be a cognitive theory.

The role of intuition in Kant’s account of experience receives perennial philosophical attention. In this essay, I present the textual case that Kant also makes extensive reference to what he terms “images” that are generated by the imagination. Beyond this, as I argue, images are fundamentally distinct from empirical and pure intuitions. Images and empirical intuitions differ in how they relate to sensation, and all images (even “pure images”) actually depend on pure intuitions. Moreover, all images differ from intuitions in (...) their structure or format. I then turn to a question that naturally arises on the resulting view: if the imagination produces images, and if images are fundamentally distinct from intuitions, then how do intuitions relate to the imagination? I outline reasons for thinking that intuitions and their essential features do not depend on the imagination at all. Though this essay does not decisively argue for this thesis, the resulting view provides a clear account of the distinction between the senses and the imagination in Kant’s theory of sensibility. (shrink)

The paper argues that intensional phenomena can be explained without appealing to "exotic" entities: one that don't exist, are merely possible, or are essentially abstract.

Governments around the world have faced the challenge of how to respond to the recent outbreak of a novel coronavirus disease. Some have reacted by greatly restricting the freedom of citizens, while others have opted for less drastic policies. In this paper, I draw a parallel with vaccination ethics to conceptualize two distinct approaches to COVID-19 that I call altruistic and lockdown. Given that the individual measures necessary to limit the spread of the virus can in principle be achieved voluntarily (...) as well as through enforcement, the question arises of how much freedom governments ought to give citizens to adopt the required measures. I argue that an altruistic approach is preferable on moral grounds: it preserves important citizen freedoms, avoids a number of potential injustices, and gives people a much-needed sense of meaning in precarious times. (shrink)

The meaning of “information and communication technologies (ICT)”, “market of information and communication technologies” were clarified in the article. Components and priority areas for capital investment in the ICT market were determined. The relativity of relationship between the placement of supercomputers in the countries and their level of innovation was revealed. The tendencies of world ICT market development were defined. The place of Ukraine in the world ICT market was established.

In the quest for mental peace and philosophical insight, the most profound approach is to let the mind function freely, without the interference of a controlling thinker. This essay explores the philosophical and cognitive implications of an unimpeded mind, drawing from Eastern traditions such as Zen Buddhism and Taoism, alongside contemporary cognitive science. It argues that the natural rhythm of thought is disrupted by the ego’s need for control, leading to mental fragmentation and turbulence. By embracing the concept of “no-mind” (...) or non-interference, individuals can achieve a harmonious flow of consciousness. Contemporary cognitive science supports this view, showing that reducing self-referential thinking enhances cognitive flexibility and emotional regulation. This harmonious state, akin to the flow experienced by top athletes and artists, offers a path to greater psychological well-being and deeper philosophical understanding. (shrink)

l. There is an antinomy in Hare's thought between Ought-Implies-Can and No-Indicatives-from-Imperatives. It cannot be resolved by drawing a distinction between implication and entailment. 2. Luther resolved this antinomy in the l6th century, but to understand his solution, we need to understand his problem. He thought the necessity of Divine foreknowledge removed contingency from human acts, thus making it impossible for sinners to do otherwise than sin. 3. Erasmus objected (on behalf of Free Will) that this violates Ought-Implies-Can which he (...) supported with Hare-style ordinary language arguments. 4. Luther a) pointed out the antinomy and b) resolved it by undermining the prescriptivist arguments for Ought-Implies-Can. 5. We can reinforce Luther's argument with an example due to David Lewis. 6. Whatever its merits as a moral principle, Ought-Implies-Can is not a logical truth and should not be included in deontic logics. Most deontic logics, and maybe the discipline itself, should therefore be abandoned. 7. Could it be that Ought-Conversationally-Implies-Can? Yes - in some contexts. But a) even if these contexts are central to the evolution of Ought, the implication is not built into the semantics of the word; b) nor is the parallel implication built into the semantics of orders; and c) in some cases Ought conversationally implies Can, only because Ought-Implies-Can is a background moral belief. d) Points a) and b) suggest a criticism of prescriptivism - that Oughts do not entail imperatives but that the relation is one of conversational implicature. 8. If Ought-Implies-Can is treated as a moral principle, Erasmus' argument for Free Will can be revived (given his Christian assumptions). But it does not 'prove' Pelagianism as Luther supposed. A semi-Pelagian alternative is available. (shrink)

World Mental Health Day serves as a timely reminder of the need to recognize and prioritize mental well-being amidst the growing complexities of modern life. Despite advancements in technology that have created comfort and convenience, these external developments often overshadow our inner well-being, leading to a neglect of mental health. This letter underscores the importance of nurturing our mental and emotional states, which serve as the foundation for overall health and a harmonious existence. Acknowledging the interplay between technology, distraction, and (...) mental stability is crucial in redefining what it means to lead a balanced life today. -/- . (shrink)

Within contemporary evangelical theology, a peculiar controversy has been brewing over the past few decades with regard to the doctrine of the Trinity. A good number of prominent evangelical theologians and philosophers are rejecting the doctrine of divine processions within the eternal life of the Trinity. In William Hasker’s recent Metaphysics and the Tri-Personal God, Hasker laments this rejection and seeks to offer a defense of this doctrine. This paper shall seek to accomplish a few things. In section I, I (...) shall first set the stage for a proper understanding of the discussion. Section II will articulate the basic Trinitarian desiderata that must be satisfied by any model of the doctrine of the Trinity. This will help one understand the debate between Hasker and the procession deniers. Section III will offer an articulation of what the doctrine of divine processions teaches. Section IV will examine Hasker’s defense of the doctrine point by point. I shall argue that his defense of the doctrine of the divine processions fails. (shrink)

Philosophers who work on desert-adjustment within axiology often articulate the concept of desert as follows: x deserves y on the basis of z. This formulation allows for a focused examination that encompasses deservers, deservings, and desert bases. I call this first-order desert. This paper posits that axiology grounded solely in first-order desert fails to adequately capture our nuanced intuitions concerning desert. I contend that to construct an axiology that more effectively aligns with our desert-sensitive intuitions, we must incorporate considerations of (...) second-order desert. Second-order desert is defined as follows: x deserves to live a life in which x deserves y on the basis of z. Initially, I provide a definition of first-order desert, followed by an elucidation of second-order desert. Subsequently, I explore various counter-arguments against my proposition. I defend my proposal against potential counter-arguments, demonstrating that a desert-adjusted axiological theory will be significantly better-off by incorporating second-order desert considerations. (shrink)

Hermann von Helmholtz’s work on perceptual science had a fundamental impact on Neo-Kantian movements in the late nineteenth century, and his influence continues to be felt in psychology and analytic philosophy of perception. As is widely acknowledged, Helmholtz denied that we can perceive mind-independent properties of external objects, a view I label Ignorance. Given his commitment to Ignorance, Helmholtz might seem to be committed to a subjectivism according to which we only perceive properties of our own representations. Against this, I (...) argue that for Helmholtz, the properties we perceive are not monadic properties of either the subject or the object. Rather, Helmholtz endorsed a relationalism about the properties we perceive: the properties of objects we perceive are all relational properties. I then suggest that once we take into account oft-neglected terminological distinctions in Helmholtz’s corpus, we are better able to make sense of his commitment to relationalism. (shrink)

Toni Rønnow-Rasmussen | : This paper explores a novel metaethical theory according to which value judgments express conditional beliefs held by those who make them. Each value judgment expresses the belief that something is the case on condition that something else is the case. The paper aims to reach a better understanding of this view and to highlight some of the challenges that lie ahead. The most pressing of these revolves around the correct understanding of the nature of the relevant (...) cognitive attitudes. It is suggested that the distinction between “dormant attitudes” and “occurrent attitudes” helps us to understand these conditional beliefs. | : Cet article explore une nouvelle théorie méta-éthique selon laquelle les jugements de valeur expriment les croyances conditionnelles des sujets qui les font. Chaque jugement de valeur exprimerait la croyance selon laquelle quelque chose est le cas à la condition que quelque chose d’autre le soit. L’objectif de cet article est de parvenir à une meilleure compréhension de ce point de vue et de souligner certaines de ses difficultés. La plus urgente d’entre elles concerne la compréhension adéquate de la nature des attitudes cognitives pertinentes. Nous suggérons que la distinction entre « attitudes dormantes » et « attitudes occurrentes » permettrait de mieux comprendre les croyances conditionnelles. (shrink)

The COVID-19 crisis opened up discussions on using online tools and platforms for academic work, e.g. for research (management) events that were originally designed as face-to-face interactions. As social scientists working in the domain of responsible research and innovation (RRI), we draft this paper to open up a dialogue on Responsible online Research and Innovation (RoRI), and deliberate particular socioethical opportunities and challenges of the onlineification in collaborative theoretical and empirical research. An RRI-inspired ‘going online’ approach would mean, we suggest, (...) trying to make academic events and research activities more inclusive, researchers’ attitude to their work more reflective and suggest processes that are more responsive to societal needs and ethical concerns. For such systematic reflection, we suggest using the RRI-heuristic provided by Owen et al., and applying the dimensions of ‘Anticipation, Inclusion, Reflection and Responsiveness’ (AIRR) in order to identify and reflect on the dilemmas involved in ‘going online’ in one’s research. (shrink)

Does the visual system adapt to number? For more than fifteen years, most have assumed that the answer is an unambiguous “yes”. Against this prevailing orthodoxy, we recently took a critical look at the phenomenon, questioning its existence on both empirical and theoretical grounds, and providing an alternative explanation for extant results (the old news hypothesis). We subsequently received two critical responses. Burr, Anobile, and Arrighi rejected our critiques wholesale, arguing that the evidence for number adaptation remains overwhelming. Durgin questioned (...) our old news hypothesis — preferring instead a theory about density adaptation he has championed for decades — but also highlighted several ways in which our arguments do pose serious challenges for proponents of number adaptation. Here, we reply to both. We first clarify our position regarding number adaptation. Then, we respond to our critics’ concerns, highlighting seven reasons why we remain skeptical about number adaptation. We conclude with some thoughts about where the debate may head from here. (shrink)