In this paper, I examine Frank Jackson’s (1998) defense of conceptual analysis and flag some of the problems with his defense. If I am right about my criticisms, then, firstly, we do not desperately need conceptual analysis because neither our science nor metaphysics need to be committed to completeness and entailment. This was shown by methodological physicalism. Secondly, conceptual analysis does not give us the expected results. If we expect the conceptual analysis to give us apriori results (in the sense (...) of counterfactual intensions) we are mistaken. There is no fundamental reason to assume that any of our ordinary and natural language concepts are a good way to start to dig for real apriori results. It is equally possible that these results are not discoverable by the human mind. Thirdly, if we can give up apriori results with empirical discovery, then Lycan (1988) is right that we can give up large chunks of our folk concept of free will and still be realist about free will. There is no need to define free will in a way that is near enough to or a natural extension of the folk concept of free will to be a realist about free will. (shrink)

My argument here is two-fold. I agree with Nagel that folk experience of absurdity and the way this experience is conceptually articulated (“the standard arguments for absurdity”) is distorted and confused. However, I argue that his proposed philosophical articulation of the absurd is not coherent and deprives the folk experience of the absurd from its true and original crux hidden behind its confused expressions. Here, firstly, I review the main argument of Nagel’s paper and compare his liberal “ironic view” of (...) absurdity to Camus’s “heroic view.’ (Sect 1). Then, I highlight some inconsistencies in his argument and some difficulties in his account (Sect. 2). Finally, I will propose a eudemonic approach to absurdity. Here, I contrast socialist humor with liberal ironic or heroic attitudes to absurdity (Sect. 3). (shrink)

The evaluation of universities from different perspectives is important for their scientific development. Analyzing the scientific papers of a university under the bibliometric approach is one main evaluative approach. The aim of this study was to conduct a bibliometric analysis and visualization of papers published by Hamadan University of Medical Science (HUMS), Iran, during 1992-2018. This study used bibliometric and visualization techniques. Scopus database was used for data collection. 3753 papers were retrieved by applying Affiliation Search in Scopus advanced search (...) section. Excel and VOSviewer software packages were used for data analysis and bibliometric indicator extraction. An increasing trend was seen in the numbers of HUMS's published papers and received citations. The highest rate of collaboration in national level was with Tehran University of Medical Sciences. Internationally, HUMS's researchers had the highest collaboration with the authors from the United States, the United Kingdom and Switzerland, respectively. All highly-cited papers were published in high level Q1 journals. Term clustering demonstrated four main clusters: epidemiological studies, laboratory studies, pharmacological studies, and microbiological studies. The results of this study can be beneficial to the policy-makers of this university. In addition, researchers and bibliometricians can use this study as a pattern for studying and visualizing the bibliometric indicators of other universities and research institutions. (shrink)