This paper examines how three central aspects of personhood — the capacities of individuals, their normative status, and the social aspect of being recognized — are related, and how personhood depends on them. The paper defends first of all a ‘basic view’that while actual recognition is among the constitutive elements of full personhood, it is the individual capacities (and not full personhood) which ground the basic moral and normative demands concerning treatment of persons. Actual recognition depends analyti- cally on (...) such pre-existing normative requirements: it is a matter of responsiveness to them. The paper then discusses four challenges. The challenges claim that pace the basic view, the relevant capacities depend on recognition, that recognition seems to have normative rele- vance, and that the basic view cannot as such explain the equality either of persons, or of humans. Responding to these challenges amounts to refining the basic view accordingly. (shrink)

Social media misinformation is widely thought to pose a host of threats to the acquisition of knowledge. One response to these threats is to remove misleading information from social media and to de-platform those who spread it. While content moderation of this sort has been criticized on various grounds—including potential incompatibility with free expression—the epistemic case for the removal of misinformation from social media has received little scrutiny. Here, I provide an overview of some costs and benefits (...) of the removal of misinformation from social media. On the one hand, removing misinformation from social media can promote knowledge acquisition by removing misleading evidence from online social epistemic environments. On the other hand, such removals require the exercise of power over evidence by content moderators. As I argue, such exercises of power can encourage suspicions on the part of social media users and can compromise the force of the evidence possessed by such users. For these reasons, the removal of misinformation from social media poses its own threats to knowledge. (shrink)

Psychometrics firms such as Cambridge Analytica (CA) and troll factories such as the Internet Research Agency (IRA) have had a significant effect on democratic politics, through narrow targeting of political advertising (CA) and concerted disinformation campaigns on social media (IRA) (U.S. Department of Justice 2019; Select Committee on Intelligence, United States Senate 2019; DiResta et al. 2019). It is natural to think that such activities manipulate individuals and, hence, are wrong. Yet, as some recent cases illustrate, the moral concerns (...) with these activities cannot be reduced simply to the effects they have on individuals. Rather, we will argue, the wrongness of these activities relates to the threats they present to the legitimacy of political orders. This occurs primarily through a mechanism we call “emergent manipulation,” rather than through the sort of manipulation that involves specific individuals. (shrink)

Moral error theorists face the so-called “now-what problem”: what should we do with our moral judgments from a prudential point of view if these judgments are uniformly false? On top of abolitionism and conservationism, which respectively advise us to get rid of our moral judgments and to keep them, three revisionary solutions have been proposed in the literature: expressivism, naturalism, and fictionalism. In this paper, I argue that expressivism and naturalism do not constitute genuine alternatives to abolitionism, of which they (...) are in the end mere variants—and, even less conveniently, variants that are conform to the very spirit of abolitionism as formulated by its proponents. The main version of fictionalism, by contrast, provides us with a recommendation to which abolitionists cannot consistently subscribe. This leaves us with only one revisionary solution to the now-what problem. (shrink)

Across the humanities and social sciences it has become commonplace for scholars to argue that categories once assumed to be “natural” are in fact “social” or, in the familiar lingo, “socially constructed”. Two common examples of such categories are race and gender, but there many others. One interpretation of this claim is that although it is typically thought that what unifies the instances of such categories is some set of natural or physical properties, instead their unity rests on (...) social features of the items in question. Social constructionists pursuing this strategy—and it is these social constructionists I will be focusing on in this paper—aim to “debunk” the ordinary assumption that the categories are natural, by revealing the more accurate social basis of the classification.2 To avoid confusion, and to resist some of the associations with the term ‘social construction’, I will sometimes use the term ‘socially founded’ for the categories that this sort of constructionist reveals as social rather than natural. (shrink)

La théorie démocratique contemporaine entretient une relation ambivalente avec les élections. Alors que les points de vue agrégatifs et minimalistes les considèrent comme une institution centrale de la démocratie représentative , les conceptions plus riches de la démocratie n’ont pas nécessairement de penchant pour elles. Les théories délibératives ont tendance à négliger les élections pour se concentrer sur la délibération publique, c’est-à-dire sur le processus continu de formation de l’opinion et d’échange de raisons qui se produit entre les élections . (...) Les théories participatives ont également tendance à les écarter en faveur d’une vision moins agonistique et plus coopérative de l’action politique . Par conséquent, peu d’attention normative a été accordée dans la littérature récente à ce moment très distinctif de la vie démocratique, à quelques notables exceptions près . Une conséquence naturelle est que la plupart des théoriciens font appel à des expériences délibératives telles que les jurys de citoyens et les mini-publics comme réponse efficace aux préoccupations démocratiques actuelles . Le tirage au sort peut ainsi être présenté comme une alternative préférable à l’élection, car il garantit une représentation descriptive, évite la capture de l’État par des élites puissantes et promet des résultats substantiellement meilleurs. Alors que de nombreux théoriciens s’intéressent aux moyens de compléter les institutions électorales par des organes délibératifs non électoraux , certains chercheurs se débarrasseraient volontiers des élections . Le moment est-il venu de les abandonner ? Cet article se concentre sur une affirmation spécifique que beaucoup de partisans du tirage au sort ont avancée, à savoir que celui-ci serait plus égalitaire que les élections, et vise à la rejeter. D’autres chercheurs ont déjà critiqué le tirage au sort pour diverses raisons. Landa et Pevnick , ainsi qu’Umbers objectent qu’il ne permet pas d’obtenir les améliorations instrumentales du gouvernement promises par ses promoteurs ; Ceva et Ottonelli , ainsi que Lafont nient que les critiques lotocratiques des élections reflètent une compréhension adéquate de l’autorité démocratique en tant que forme d’autonomie collective ; et Umbers soutient également que la lotocratie est en contradiction avec les principes de justice distributive et d’égalité sociale . En complément à ces critiques récentes, nous soutenons que la vision de l’égalité politique qui sous-tend le tirage au sort est problématique et peu convaincante. (shrink)

The idea that the concept ‘knowledge’ has a distinctive function or social role is increasingly influential within contemporary epistemology. Perhaps the best-known account of the function of ‘knowledge’ is that developed in Edward Craig’s Knowledge and the state of nature (1990, OUP), on which (roughly) ‘knowledge’ has the function of identifying good informants. Craig’s account of the function of ‘knowledge’ has been appealed to in support of a variety of views, and in this paper I’m concerned with the claim (...) that it supports a sort of epistemic contextualism, which is (roughly) the view that the semantic contents and truth-conditions of ‘knowledge’ ascriptions - instances of ‘S knows that p’- depend on and vary with the context of ascription (see, for instance, John Greco’s ‘What’s wrong with contextualism’, Philosophical Quarterly [2008]). Prima facie, this claim should strike us as surprising. A number of concepts and linguistic items (words, sentences) serve functions that have little or nothing to do with semantics. However, I argue that, on the best interpretation of talk of the function of a concept such as ‘knowledge’, the function of ‘knowledge’ is relevant to semantics. Along the way I also suggest how to improve on what I call the ‘usual argument’ that Craig’s account of the function of ‘knowledge’ supports epistemic contextualism. (shrink)

Shared intentions supporting cooperation and other social practices are often used to describe human social life but not the social lives of nonhuman animals. This difference in description is supported by a lack of evidence for rebuke or stakeholding during collaboration in nonhuman animals. We suggest that rebuke and stakeholding are just two examples of the many and varied forms of social maintenance that can support shared intentions. Drawing on insights about mindshaping in social cognition, (...) we show how apes can be stakeholders of a different sort in joint action. Drawing on pluralistic social maintenance methods of behavior enforcement, we show ape joint action can be supported by different forms of positive and negative social pressures, and not just protest. We explain how diverse relationships, contexts, social structures, and forms of communication may play a role in forming and successfully fulfilling joint commitments for humans, great apes, and other animals. (shrink)

n this paper, I analyse Rahel Jaeggi’s socio-ontological account of forms of life. I show that her framework is a two-sided one, since it involves an understanding of forms of life both as inert bundles of practices and as having a normative structure. Here I argue that this approach is based on an a priori argument which assumes normativity as the condition of intelligibility of social criticism. I show that the intimate tension between these two sides is reflected in (...) the socio-ontological model of the constitution of social phenomena, which on the one side is understood in terms of habituation and materialization, and on the other side in terms of constitution through norms. The second side in the end prevails and leads to some sort of normative essentialism which involves a prescriptive meta-theoretical understanding of normativity combined with a socio-ontological model of constitutive rules. I then analyse two arguments that Jaeggi offers in support of her assumption that normative constitution is the deep structure of social practices. I name these the functional- teleological argument, and the crisis developmental argument, and argue that neither succeeds in proving that practices are not normatively underdetermined. (shrink)

The orthodox view of social cognition maintains that mentalizing is an important and pervasive element of our ordinary social interactions. The orthodoxy has come under scrutiny from various sources recently. Critics from the phenomenological tradition argue that phenomenological reflection on our social interactions tells against the orthodox view. Proponents of pluralistic folk psychology argue that our ordinary social interactions extend far beyond mentalizing. Both sorts of critics argue that emphasis in social cognition research ought to (...) be on other elements of our social practices. In this paper, I consider social explanations specifically and argue that social explanations are implicated in many of the social practices highlighted by critics of the orthodox view. (shrink)

Research in multi-agent systems typically assumes a regulative model of social practice. This model starts with agents who are already capable of acting autonomously to further their individual ends. A social practice, according to this view, is a way of achieving coordination between multiple agents by restricting the set of actions available. For example, in a world containing cars but no driving regulations, agents are free to drive on either side of the road. To prevent collisions, we introduce (...) driving regulations, insisting that everyone drives on the left hand side of the road. We accept this limitation on our freedom because it lowers the probability of a collision. -/- This paper describes AI systems that are based on the constitutive view of social practice. According to this alternative view, there are certain actions that are only available to the agent because he is participating in a practice of a certain sort. For example, you can swing a peculiarly shaped piece of wood without participating in any particular practice - but this action will only constitute a strike if you are participating in a game of baseball. I can raise my hand whenever I like, but this only counts as voting for the motion within the institution of voting. But not all the examples are from frivolous, optional or institutional activities. Sellars and Brandom argue that even the fundamental act of assertion is only possible within the context of a particular social practice: the Game of Giving and Asking for Reasons. -/- The constitutive view, which is familiar to philosophers, is relatively unknown within the AI community. -/- The central aim of this paper is to show how the constitutive view of practice can be put to use in AI applications. (shrink)

Intractable political disagreements threaten to fracture the common ground upon which we can build a political community. The deepening divisions in society are partly fueled by the ways social media has shaped political engagement. Social media allows us to sort ourselves into increasingly likeminded groups, consume information from different sources, and end up in polarized and insular echo chambers. To solve this, many argue for various ways of cultivating more responsible epistemic agency. This chapter argues that this epistemic (...) lens does not reveal the complete picture and therefore misses a form of moral respect required to reestablish cooperation across disagreements in a divided society. The breakdown of discourse online provides renewed reasons to draw out not an epistemic but a moral basis for political cooperation among diverse citizens—one inspired by Rawlsian political liberalism. We need ways to cultivate mutual respect for our fellow citizens in order to reestablish common moral ground for political debate. (shrink)

I have two aims in this paper. The first is to add to a growing case against reading the sovereign individual, discussed by Nietzsche in On the Genealogy of Morality, as Nietzsche’s ethical ideal. I suggest that the conception of responsibility active in the sovereign individual passage is directly at odds with what, as a second aim, I argue Nietzsche’s positive account of responsibility to be. Thinking that the sovereign individual, a sort of distant and composed individual who stands apart, (...) represents Nietzsche’s ideal fails to appreciate what we can call the social aspects of Nietzsche’s philosophy. Nietzsche’s positive account of responsibility is a conception that sees as central and crucial our place in a community of interpreting and self-interpreting others who figure in the processes by which we, as Nietzsche puts it, become what we are. (shrink)

Many of the most important social institutions—e.g., law and language—are thought to be normative in some sense. And philosophers have been puzzled by how this normativity can be explained in terms of the social, descriptive states of affairs that presumably constitute them. This paper attempts to solve this sort of puzzle by considering a simpler and less contentious normative social practice: table manners. Once we are clear on the exact sense in which a practice is normative, we (...) see that some practices can be normative in an interesting and non-trivial sense, but also explicable with merely descriptive resources. In addition to arguing that it is possible to explain normative practices with descriptive resources, this paper presents and defends just such an explanation—an account of the nature of table manners that appeals only to descriptive states of affairs. (shrink)

On a certain reading, the respective theories of Freud and Nietzsche might be described as exploring the suffered relational histories of the subject, who is driven by need; these histories might also be understood as histories of language. This suggests a view of language as a complicated mode of identifying-with, which obliges linguistic subjects to identify the non-identical, but also enables them to simultaneously identify with each other in the psychoanalytic sense. This ambivalent space of psychoanalytic identification would be conditioned (...) by relational histories. On one hand, this might lead to conformity within a system of language as a shared, obligatory compromise formation that would defend against the non-identical; magical language, typified in Freud’s critique of animism and in Nietzsche’s critique of “free will” guided by absolute normative signifiers (“Good” and “Evil”), would be symptomatic of this sort of defense. On the other hand, given other relational histories, it may produce the possibility for more transitional modes of identification, and thereby modes of language that can bear its suffered histories, and lead to proliferation of singular compromise formations. It is suggested that while the former is historically dominant, Nietzsche and various psychoanalytic thinkers contribute to conceiving of the possibility of working ourselves towards the latter. (shrink)

Imagine you are casually browsing an online bookstore, looking for an interesting novel. Suppose the store predicts you will want to buy a particular novel: the one most chosen by people of your same age, gender, location, and occupational status. The store recommends the book, it appeals to you, and so you choose it. Central to this scenario is an automated prediction of what you desire. This article raises moral concerns about such predictions. More generally, this article examines the ethics (...) of artificial social cognition—the ethical dimensions of attribution of mental states to humans by artificial systems. The focus is presumptuous aim attributions, which are defined here as aim attributions based crucially on the premise that the person in question will have aims like superficially similar people. Several everyday examples demonstrate that this sort of presumptuousness is already a familiar moral concern. The scope of this moral concern is extended by new technologies. In particular, recommender systems based on collaborative filtering are now commonly used to automatically recommend products and information to humans. Examination of these systems demonstrates that they naturally attribute aims presumptuously. This article presents two reservations about the widespread adoption of such systems. First, the severity of our antecedent moral concern about presumptuousness increases when aim attribution processes are automated and accelerated. Second, a foreseeable consequence of reliance on these systems is an unwarranted inducement of interpersonal conformity. (shrink)

Consider a game of blind chess between two chess masters that is recorded in some standard chess notation. The recording is a representation of the game. But what is the game itself? This question is, we believe, central to the entire domain of social ontology. We argue that the recorded game is a special sort of quasi-abstract pattern, something that is: (i) like abstract entities such as numbers or forms, in that it is both nonphysical and nonpsychological; but at (...) the same time, (ii) through its association with specific players and a specific occasion, tied to time and history. We discover other abstract patterns of this sort especially in the domains of law and commerce. This essay draws on the work in social ontology, we of Hernando de Soto and of John Searle to develop an ontology of the social world based on an analysis of the peculiar interdependence between quasi-abstract patterns and their representations in documents of different sorts. (shrink)

We motivate a picture of social epistemology that sees forgetting as subject to epistemic evaluation. Using computer simulations of a simple agent-based model, we show that how agents forget can have as large an impact on group epistemic outcomes as how they share information. But, how we forget, unlike how we form beliefs, isn’t typically taken to be the sort of thing that can be epistemically rational or justified. We consider what we take to be the most promising argument (...) for this claim and find it lacking. We conclude that understanding how agents forget should be as central to social epistemology as understanding how agents form beliefs and share information with others. (shrink)

For much of the first fifty years of its existence, analytic philosophy shunned discussions of normativity and ethics. Ethical statements were considered as pseudo-propositions, or as expressions of pro- or con-attitudes of minor theoretical significance. Nowadays, in contrast, prominent analytic philosophers pay close attention to normative problems. Here we focus our attention on the work of Searle, at the same time drawing out an important connection between Searle’s work and that of two other seminal figures in this development: H.L.A. Hart (...) and John Rawls. We show that all three thinkers tend to assume that there is but one type of normativity within the realm of social institutions – roughly, the sort of normativity that is involved in following the results of chess – and that they thereby neglect features that are of crucial significance for an adequate understanding of social reality. (shrink)

Social emergence is one the most important problems in social science that the way it is answered affects the results of social studies and policies. The complexity of social emergence conception has caused a variety of definitions. This article seeks to define the robust social emergence conditions, using the philosophy of mind conception such as subvenience, wildly disjunctives, and multiple realization. Different approaches have different challenges in satisfying robust social emergence conditions. These challenges could (...) be formulated in three problems i.e. realism, top-down causality, and mechanism. This article aims to analytically criticize how critical realism approaches these problems. Critics believe that critical realism faces two sort of difficulties in satisfying robust social emergence: the first, the independence of structure from agencies that leads to reifying and the second, that ontological and causal emergence conflicts with subvenience. It seems the first problem could be resolved by employing the unrestricted mereological composition conception, and the second by the fact that subvenience do not necessitate ontological dependence. (shrink)

Emanuel Isaque Cordeiro da Silva E-mails: [email protected] e [email protected] WhatsApp: (82)9.8143-8399 -/- Max Weber: Ação Social e Tipos Ideais Nascido na Alemanha, em 1864. Os trabalhos de Weber estão condensados entre as duas primeiras décadas do século XX e estipulam uma nova estruturação para as Ciências Sociais. Weber, assim como outros cientistas sociais, dedicou-se a metodizar a Sociologia, não obstante, sua perspectiva sociológica diverge do pensamento de Durkheim, particularmente no que tange à transcendência do sujeito e de sua ação (...) social. Divergente de Émile Durkheim, o autor em questão, não considerava o corpo social como algo externo e eminente aos sujeitos. Para Weber, o corpo social careceria ser ponderado sobre o alicerce do conjunto das ações individuais. Todavia, o que seria o supracitado? Para o autor, qualquer ação individual é norteada por outras ações, isto é, quando procedemos, levamos em consideração e nos norteamos pela ação de outrem. Alicerçados na expectação de como nossa ação será vista, procedemos de uma ou outra maneira, sempre com base no olhar de outrem. Logo, nossa ação individual é acatada por Weber como sendo social, uma vez que ela está inserida em um contexto histórico e social que caracteriza todas as ações individuais. Com isso, os acontecimentos sociais são resultados diretos de ações individuais, o que nos dá ideia de que não há objeção entre o sujeito e o corpo social, visto que, para o autor, somente é possível captar o corpo social no momento em que a ação individual a divulga. Logo, o sujeito não é visto como um produto de um todo coercitivo. O sujeito é, antagonicamente, consciente pelos seus atos. O corpo social não tem uma essência própria, mas é reproduzido pelos sujeitos que o conformam, que mediante suas ações lhe conferem essa essência que o falta. Por conseguinte, os estudos de Weber tem como fundamental âmago a indicação de que o entendimento de acontecimentos sociais organizacionais (como o capitalismo, as formas de poder, as formas de dominação, os Estados, os regimes políticos e as religiões) situa-se na observação e no entendimento das ações individuais ou de um agrupamento dessas ações. Mediante tais análises supracitadas, Weber explana: [a sociologia é a] ciência que tem como meta a compreensão interpretativa da ação social de maneira a obter uma explicação de suas causas, de seu curso e de seus efeitos. Por “ação” se designará toda a conduta humana, cujos sujeitos vinculem a esta ação um sentido subjetivo. Tal comportamento pode ser mental ou exterior; poderá consistir de ação ou de omissão no agir. O termo “ação social” será reservado à ação cuja intenção fomentada pelos indivíduos envolvidos se refere à conduta de outros, orientando-se de acordo com ela. Para o autor, o sujeito é singular, e que essa singularidade é um alusivo cêntrico, tanto para si próprio quanto para o corpo social. Logo, significa dizer que a análise weberiana parte do sujeito e de sua ação individual para elucidar os acontecimentos ou fenômenos sociais que se decorrera. Como exemplo pragmático do texto supra, não seria exequível elucidar o ascendente número de suicídios provenientes da crise econômica em certo país. Contrariamente, seria imprescindível partir da observação e entendimento empírico das ações solitárias que serviram como motivação para essa ascensão e suicídios. Logo, somos capazes de compreender que a ação social é o agente de investigação cêntrica da sociologia de Max Weber. Todavia, o que é uma ação social? Para o autor em questão, a ação social nada mais é do que quaisquer ação de um sujeito que é norteada pela a ação de outrem. Como exemplo pragmático do antes citado, temos as eleições. O sujeito vota, tendo como norte os comentários, pelas intenções, pelas pesquisas realizadas por instituições como Ibope, Datafolha, etc. e até mesmo pelo votos de outros votantes. Isto é, a ação de votar em urna eletrônica é individual, mas só se torna cognoscível sociologicamente ao passo em que a escolha de estipulado candidato tem como norte o conjunto dos demais votantes. A seguir, imagens que representam uma eleitora exercendo seu papel democrático na urna eletrônica no Rio de Janeiro, outubro de 2010 e, logo depois uma charge de 2010. As observações e as compreensões de Weber ante os corpos sociais e de seus acontecimentos peculiares tem como centralidade o referencial da ação do agente individual. Com isso, a protestação histórica de determinados acontecimentos devem ser entendidos mediante o agrupamento das ações individuais. Tendo como estopim as ações individuais, o autor objetiva entender problemas sociais genéricos. Destarte, para analisar problemas que afetam e caracterizam o corpo social como um todo, é preciso partir da investigação de ações individuais intrínsecas. Para Weber, o conhecimento sociológico, só pode ter finalidade se tiver como alicerce o estudo dessas ações individuais supracitadas. Não obstante, o que deve ser posto em análise? Segundo Weber, a realidade é desmesurável e, com isso, deverá ser fragmentada para que se possa compreendê-la. O instrumento de investigação é, assim, criado pelo sociólogo. O especialista social faz uma escolha dos fatos que vai investigar: sua escolha é intrínseca. É o sociólogo que decide o que estudar e analisar alicerçado em julgamentos que se fundamentam de acordo com seus valores pessoais. Mediante essa escolha do que analisar, que é peculiarmente intrínseca, Max Weber constrói um método de investigação para alcançar a imparcialidade científica. Os resultados são considerados objetivos, ao passo em que os procedimentos de investigação da ação social são aplicados na prática efetiva. Quanto mais longe da finalidade da investigação o sociólogo se coloca, mais concretos e objetivos serão os resultados de sua análise. As metodologias de investigação, que asseguram a imparcialidade dos resultados, estão diretamente relacionadas à construção de tipos ideais ou tipos puros. O alcunhado tipo ideal é um “instrumento” que o analista e pesquisador utiliza para se aproximar da realidade subjetiva. Cotejando com a Física, digamos que o tipo ideal é uma régua que serve para medição de determinado elemento. Nada mais é do que um artífice para medir a realidade, bem como para tentar compreender o conteúdo dessa realidade em questão. Todavia, como a realidade é plural e múltipla e impossível de ser elucidada em toda sua totalidade, o autor elabora tipos ideais para se apropinquar o máximo possível da realidade pragmática e subjetiva em análise. Tais tipos ideais são obrados mediante as regularidades sociais que ele observou. Frisando que a edificação de um tipo ideal, apesar de se espelhar na realidade pragmática, nada mais é do que um artífice teórico do pesquisador. Algo como escolher certas características regulares de determinada sociedade e construir um tipo ideal de pai de família . Quando o pesquisador for investigar um corpo social especifico, esse tipo ideal antes citado, ainda que não insira-se exatamente na realidade, servirá de alicerce para compreender como, citando caso análogo, alguns pais estipulam relações com suas famílias em certas comunidades. Como conclusão, Weber edificou quatro tipos ideais de ação social, são elas: 1. A ação social com relação a fins; 2. A ação social com base na relação de valores; 3. A ação tradicional e, por fim, 4. A ação afetiva. Por se tratar de tipos ideais, essas ações não são formalmente reconhecíveis na realidade. Todavia, alicerçados pela construção teórica de weber, podemos analisar a realidade e a verificar algumas ações individuais definidas por um único ou mais tipos ideais de ação social. A essência aqui é enxergar e entender que esse artífice favorece o entendimento do corpo social ao passo em que apropinqua o pesquisador da realidade estudada. -/- AVALIAÇÃO DE FIXAÇÃO DO ASSUNTO: MAX WEBER: AÇÃO SOCIAL E TIPOS IDEAIS PROF. Lic. EMANUEL ISAQUE CORDEIRO DA SILVA SOCIOLOGIA GERAL II – 24 de Maio de 2019 TURMA: 2° __ -/- Estudante: __________________________________________________________ N°: ___ -/- 1 Amparados pelas aulas ministradas, aclare a suma importância dos estudos de Weber para a estruturação do novo estágio das Ciências Sociais do século XX. 2 A sociologia de Weber diverge da de Durkheim. Aponte as principais divergências entre o pensamento dos autores sobre o indivíduo e sobre a sociedade. 3 Para Weber, quaisquer ação individual é orientada por ações de outros sujeitos. Aclare a ideia, antes citada, alicerçados por fundamentos de sua vida pragmática em sodalício. 4 Segundo Weber, só é possível compreender a sociedade mediante a manifestação da ação individual do sujeito. Elucide a ideia defendida pelo estudioso e, embasados pelas aulas em sala de aula, cite exemplos de manifestações contemporâneas no nosso país que servem de alicerce para entender a realidade social do Brasil. 5 Elucide a teoria de que a compreensão dos fenômenos sociais estruturais estão alicerçados na análise e entendimento das ações individuais ou de um conjunto dessas ações. 6 Debruçados a citação do livro Conceitos básicos de Sociologia, elucide por quê a meta da Sociologia, como ciência, é a compreensão interpretativa das ações dos indivíduos. 7 Amparados pela citação do livro de Weber, supracitada no texto, defina o que seria “ação” e “ação social” para o autor, posteriormente, use tais alcunhas weberianas e dê uma nova definição para os termos, embasados pela sua observação quanto a sociedade contemporânea. 8 Ao votar, o eleitor pratica uma ação individual que é orientada pela ação dos outros indivíduos. Explique por quê. 9 Para Weber, a realidade é infinita e deve ser recortada para ser compreendida. Aclare a ideia. 10 Elucide por quê a escolha do pesquisador sobre o que vai se analisar deverá ser subjetiva. 11 Elucide o que seria um tipo ideal weberiano. 12 Elucide por quê é fundamental o conceito de tipo ideal para que o pesquisador se apropinquar da realidade subjetiva. 13 O tipo ideal, comparando com a Física, é uma régua que serve para medir um elemento. Aclare a ideia weberiana. 14 Defina os tipos ideias de ação social construídos por Weber e, posteriormente, cite exemplos de ambos os tipos na sociedade atual em que vivemos. a) Ação Tradicional; b) Ação Afetiva; c) Ação Racional orientada a valores, e d) Ação Racional orientada a fins. 15 Como conclusão, debruçados sobre o texto introdutório, leio atentamente após todas as questões resolvidas, para um melhor entendimento profundo, e disserte sobre todas as ideias explanadas, expondo seu ponto de vista sobre o tema, isto é, se concorda ou não, sempre usando uma fundamentação que alicerce seu ponto de vista. (Mínimo – 35 linhas/Máximo – 65 linhas). -/- De coração, boa sorte! (shrink)

It is usually accepted that whether or not indirect discrimination is a form of immoral discrimination, it appears to be structurally different from direct discrimination. First, it seems that either one involves the agent focusing on different things while making a decision. Second, it seems that the victim’s group membership is relevant to the outcomes of either sort of action in different ways. In virtue of these two facts, it is usually concluded that indirect discrimination is structurally different from direct (...) discrimination. I argue against the notion that indirect discrimination and direct discrimination have significantly different structures. I first argue that both kinds of discrimination involve similar decision-making processes. Second, I analyze how being in a social group affects personal identity, and from there argue that indirect discrimination and direct discrimination are about group membership similarly. In virtue of these two arguments, I conclude that direct and indirect discrimination are structurally similar. (shrink)

Much has been written about the ethics of sex selection. This article thoroughly explores the ethical arguments put forth in the literature both for and against non-medical sex selection using sperm sorting. While most of these arguments come from philosophers, feminist scholars, social scientists and members of the healthcare community, they are often echoed in empirical studies that have explored community values. This review is timely because the first efficacious method for sex selection via sperm sorting, MicroSort, (...) is currently in clinical trials and moving closer to FDA approval for marketing in the USA. While the clinical trials are currently focused on the use of MicroSort to avoid X-linked genetic diseases, MicroSort can also be used to satisfy parental preferences. (shrink)

Qu’est-ce que l’indignation ? Cette émotion est souvent conçue comme une émotion morale qu’une tierce-partie éprouve vis-à-vis des injustices qu’un agent inflige à un patient. L’indignation aurait ainsi trait aux injustices et serait éprouvée par des individus qui n’en seraient eux-mêmes pas victimes. Cette émotion motiverait la tierce-partie indignée à tenter de réguler l’injustice en l’annulant et en punissant son auteur. Cet article entreprend de montrer que cette conception de l’indignation n’est que partielle. En effet, l’indignation ne porte pas que (...) sur les injustices, mais plus généralement sur les torts injustifiés. Ce faisant, l’indignation peut être une émotion morale, mais aussi une émotion conventionnelle ou esthétique. De plus, elle peut être éprouvée par les individus victime des torts : elle n’est pas uniquement éprouvée par des tierces-parties. De la sorte, les individus indignés qui subissent les torts peuvent eux-mêmes chercher à les annuler et à punir leurs auteurs. Puisqu’elle peut être éprouvée tant par des spectateurs que par les personnes qui subissent les torts et qu’elle incline ceux qui l’éprouvent à faire appel à d’autres personnes pour réguler ces torts, l’indignation vécue individuellement est partageable : elle peut devenir une émotion collective jouant un rôle fondamental dans la régulation sociale en contribuant au renforcement de normes sociales existantes ou à l’émergence de nouvelles normes sociales associées aux idées du juste prévalant dans la société considérée. (shrink)

Many ethicists maintain that medical research on human subjects that presents no prospect of direct medical benefit must have a prospect of social benefit to be ethical. Payment is not the sort of benefit that justifies exposing subjects to risk. Alan Wertheimer has raised a serious challenge to this view, pointing out that in industry, social value is not considered necessary to make dangerous jobs ethical. This article argues that Wertheimer was correct to think that the ethics of (...) hazard pay should be the same in medical research and in business. Nevertheless, a qualified social benefit requirement should apply in both fields. For a study or a job with significant net physical risk to be ethical, it must have social value beyond the satisfaction of ordinary preferences, including the preference for money. The requirement derives from a non-absolutist version of the doctrine of double effect. If a risky study or a dangerous job has no distinctive social value, and hazard pay is subjects' or workers’ only reason to undergo risks, the very fact that they undergo risk is intended as a means to a financial end. Inviting people to enrol in such a study or to take such a job wrongfully treats people as mere means. By contrast, if a study or a job has social value, people can participate with a primary end other than money, even if they accept compensation. Researchers or employers do not intend but merely foresee risks to subjects or workers. (shrink)

I argue that in addressing worries about the validity and reliability of implicit measures of social cognition, theorists should draw on research concerning “entitativity perception.” In brief, an aggregate of people is perceived as highly “entitative” when its members exhibit a certain sort of unity. For example, think of the difference between the aggregate of people waiting in line at a bank versus a tight-knit group of friends: The latter seems more “groupy” than the former. I start by arguing (...) that entitativity perception modulates the activation of implicit biases and stereotypes. I then argue that recognizing this modulatory role will help researchers to address concerns surrounding the validity and reliability of implicit measures. (shrink)

John Dewey proposed soon after the atomic bombings of Hiroshima and Nagasaki that citizens of techno-industrial nations suffer from "cultural lag" (LW 15:199-200; cf. LW 4:203-28). He had in mind a sort of moral jet lag, a condition in which most of the basic alternatives we have on hand to think and talk about moral and political life, from customary moralizing to sophisticated theorizing, were developed, canned, and pickled on a shelf so long ago that they now lag far behind (...) the multi-faceted problems that our values must speak to. The failure of many countries, most visibly the United States, to effectively navigate climate change and the Covid-19 global pandemic exemplifies our moral jet lag. Our collective responses to the new normal of global disruptions are, in William James’s words in Pragmatism, “out of plumb and out of key and out of ‘whack’” (1907, 37). The American philosophical tradition that includes James and Dewey has long sought to compensate for the excesses of America’s hyper-individualism and its anti-naturalistic distrust of experimental intelligence. In this brief analysis of our morally jet lagged response to the Covid-19 pandemic, we draw heavily on two highly articulated intellectual resources for America’s moral, political, and educational recovery: Jane Addams’s social ethics and Dewey’s deeply democratic theory of moral and political deliberation. (shrink)

Anglophone philosophy in the last three decades has seen a growing interest in the way participation in human society—as characterized by our doing things that count as taking up and conferring norm-governed roles within institutions like language, the law, social custom, and education—is part of what explains our existence as rational (to whatever extent we are) animals. Using the label discursive norms to refer to the standards of evaluation that attend the exercise of rational thought and agency, this development (...) in philosophy can be understood as a growing interest over the the social institution of discursive norms. The essays in this volume present a sample—by no means representative—of the sorts of issues that arise when we ask and look to answer questions about the way our social lives constrain and support our lives as rational animals. (shrink)

Kant identifies the “highest moral-physical good” as that combination of “good living” and “true humanity” which best harmonises in a “good meal in good company”. Why does Kant privilege the dinner party in this way? By examining Kant’s accounts of enlightenment, cosmopolitanism, love and respect, and gratitude and friendship, the answer to this question becomes clear. Kant’s moral ideal is that of an enlightened and just cosmopolitan human being who feels and acts with respect and love for all persons and (...) such an ideal is temporarily manifested in the sort of social interaction achievable at a good dinner party. (shrink)

Émile Durkheim: Coesão e Fato Social -/- Emanuel Isaque Cordeiro da Silva E-mails: [email protected] / [email protected] WhatsApp: (82)9.8143-8399 -/- Émile Durkheim: Coesão e Fato Social Nascido em 1858, Durkheim era francês e foi bastante influenciado pela obra do filósofo também francês Augusto Comte (1798-1857), que metodizou pela primeira vez o estudo da sociedade (Sociologia) como uma ciência particular e peculiar, e que também conectou a Sociologia com alguns artífices peculiares das Ciências Naturais. Em contrapartida, Durkheim procurou alicerçar a (...) Sociologia como uma ciência social divergente em toda sua totalidade das ciências naturais. Logo, mediante essa finalidade, cuidou em desenvolver uma tese e um artifício de análise que contivesse conceitos peculiares para a instrução da vida em corpo social. Doravante, os princípios da sociologia de Émile Durkheim podem ser reduzidos as alcunhas ou conceitos de coesão, da segmentação do trabalho (ou especialização do trabalho) e de ação, circunstância ou fato social. Ao analisar acerca da divisão do trabalho no corpo social, Durkheim explana: [...] a divisão do trabalho [...] não serviria apenas para dotar nossas sociedades de luxo, invejável talvez, mas supérfluo; ela seria uma condição de existência da sociedade. Graças à divisão do trabalho, ou pelo menos por seu intermédio, se garantiria a coesão social; ela determinaria os traços essenciais da constituição da sociedade. Por isso mesmo, caso seja essa realmente a função da divisão do trabalho, ela deve ter um caráter moral, porque as necessidades de ordem, de harmonia e de solidariedade social são geralmente consideradas morais. Vale salientar que, Émile Durkheim foi inteiramente influenciado pelos acontecimentos históricos que se decorrera nos séculos XVIII e XIX. Todo o continente europeu, ao passo do século XIX ascendeu em derredor dos princípios da Revolução Industrial e da Revolução Francesa. A primeira (Revolução Industrial), tendo sua introdução aos meados do século XVIII, exacerbou atrozmente a produção de mercadorias. Aproveitando-se dos avanços tecnológicos incorporados nas indústrias, a produção industrial na Inglaterra, ao passo do século XVIII, disseminou-se para demais países europeus no século seguinte, transfigurando-se como o âmago central de estruturação da vida sodalícia. A segunda (Revolução Francesa), com seu desencadeamento em 1789, foi inteiramente marcada por metamorfoses políticas estruturais. O corpo social feudalista, que antepor-se ao sodalismo capitalista, foi crepusculada. Todas as estruturas políticas do corpo feudalista deram lugar a hegemonia das organizações políticas capitalistas. O regime monárquico foi finalizado e comutado por entidades políticas que se apropriavam de ideais como a liberdade, a igualdade e a fraternidade, tal qual era o próprio lema da Revolução Francesa. As instituições de educação, antes dominadas e ditadas pela hegemônica Igreja católica, passaram a ser administradas pelo Estado, fazendo com que as mesmas se tornassem leigas. A chamada livre-iniciativa ou o processo em que ocorre o escambo de mercadorias foi exortado por novíssimas regras e leis estabelecidas sob a perspectiva da produção das indústrias, que estavam sob ascensão constante. Ao passo do fim do século XIX, Émile Durkheim percebia atentamente essa ascensão notória do processo de metamorfose social, particularmente instigada pela indústria, e buscava entender esse processo para elucidar o seguinte inquietamento: como pode esse corpo social capitalista, que se fragmenta e qualifica-se em funções cada vez mais divergentes, assegurar uma unicidade, uma coesão social? Pois bem, o autor buscou uma elucidação sociológica para essa questão pragmática. O sociólogo buscou compreender a unicidade social em um mundo cada vez mais fragmentado pela qualificação do trabalho. O mesmo, perguntava-se como os sujeitos distintos, em cargos sociais heterogêneos, poderiam constituir-se socialmente. Buscando uma elucidação, alicerçada nos preceitos sociológicos, desse processo de diferenciação, o autor francês apropriou-se da seguinte hipótese: todo o corpo social, de indivíduos distintos, são definidos por algum tipo de fragmentação (aprimoramento) do trabalho. Isto é, no decorrer do desenvolvimento dos corpos sociais, os sujeitos tendem a se tornarem cada vez mais heterogêneos. Em um corpo social com a mínima fragmentação do trabalho, os sujeitos são mais análogos entre si quando cotejados aos demais que vivem sob um corpo social em que o trabalho é majoritariamente fragmentado. É mediante a essa ótica que o sociólogo francês atenta sobre a coesão social, isto é, o estágio de incorporação de cada corpo social. Em corpos sociais onde o trabalho é predominantemente fragmentado é observada uma dinâmica dupla. Concomitantemente a ocorrência da distinção profissional, é criada o que Durkheim chama de interdependência funcional, isto é, alcunha para designar a dependência recíproca dos indivíduos num mundo onde o trabalho é puramente fragmentado. Os vínculos sociais e a teia de interdependência, definem uma forma de coesão social. Em corpos sociais em que o trabalho não é puramente fragmentado, são as crenças que asseguram a unicidade dos sujeitos, uma vez que o processo de aprimoramento das funções profissionais ainda são puramente arcaicos. Aclarando melhor o supracitado texto, vamos cotejar dois corpos sociais: um corpo social feudal e outro industrial. Pois bem, em um sodalismo feudal hipotético, a fragmentação do trabalho é proveniente alicerçada pelas atividades majoritariamente agrícolas. Os indivíduos servis laboram majoritariamente para o benefício do senhor feudal e a parte restante de seu tempo é para laborar em proveito da sua subsistência e de seu grupo familiar. As metodologias do labor são puramente arcaicas e as práticas de trabalho se resumem em plantar, colher e cuidar dos animais. As metodologias produtivos apropriadas pelos diferentes feudos acabam por ser predominantemente análogas, logo, não há muita distinção entre os sujeitos. Em detrimento ao corpo social feudalista, no corpo industrial, há uma acentuada fragmentação do labor, em que homens e mulheres acabam por exercer funções agudamente distintas. Existem lavadeiras, mecânicos, operários, pedreiros, marceneiros, merchandisings, professores, comerciantes, etc., citando uma parcela ligeiramente pequena das profissões existentes nesse sodalismo e que, mediante essas profissões, ainda há uma fragmentação destas, originando várias subdivisões. Elucidando o anteriormente citado, entre os professores estão aqueles que lecionam Português, Ciências, Filosofia, Antropologia, Sociologia, Educação Física, etc. Para Émile Durkheim, esses corpos sociais são puramente aprimorados, e têm maior estágio de fragmentação profissional, o que gera a caracterização dos sujeitos distintos entre si. A secção do labor é, para o autor, um ingrediente social de impulsionamento da ascensão dos corpos sociais. Os ofícios sociais são primordiais para sua análise, logo, a Sociologia de Durkheim é alcunhada de “funcionalista”. Não obstante, para meditar mais sobre a fragmentação do labor, o autor criou outros preceitos fundamentais. Um deles é o conceito de fato social, primordial para a definição do que é peculiar ou não da Sociologia. Com a finalidade de gerar preceitos com uma maior robustez possível, Durkheim compreendia que o fato social era como uma coisa, um fato tão apreensível quanto qualquer componente ou unidade física ou biológica. Os fenômenos sociais seriam, mediante o supracitado, formas de cogitar, vivenciar e proceder que exercem uma coerção (força) externa sobre os sujeitos sodalísticos. Para o autor, o corpo social vinha antes que todos os sujeitos e procedera sobre os mesmos, caracterizando suas formas de ser. Com isso, um fato social poder-se-ia ser identificado com base nessa força ou coerção social compulsória a um único ou mais sujeitos. Como explana o supracitado texto, só poder-se-ia ser considerado um fato social, o acontecimento que nele contivesse: 1 Generalidade (que fosse identificado em todo o corpo social); 2 Exterioridade (que seja exterior à vontade dos sujeitos); e 3 Coercitividade (que apresente uma força externa aos sujeitos e que os molde em detrimento das vontades individuais). Logo, os estudos de Émile Durkheim, além de receber a alcunha de funcionalista, recebe também a consideração de uma Sociologia estruturalista, ao passo em que, a estrutura do corpo social designaria as atitudes dos sujeitos. Na sociedade contemporânea, alguns exemplos de fatos sociais são o direito, a educação, a fragmentação do labor, às crenças religiosas e crenças políticas de divergentes espectros, os esportes, etc. O próprio futebol, a exemplo, é considerado um fato social na medida em que ele se encontra presente em todo corpo social brasileiro. Nas três características para o futebol ser considerado um fato social, ele é exterior aos sujeitos, uma vez que para ele existir não depende da vontade dos sujeitos individuais. Também é coercitivo, uma vez que impõe um padrão esportivo aos sujeitos. Diante do antepasso texto, muitos infantes e juvenis desejam ser jogadores de futebol, esse “desejo” ou sonho pode ser entendido e elucidado como uma força externa, peculiarmente social. Diante de todo o supracitado texto, observemos que, na perspectiva de Durkheim, o estudo da sociedade (Sociologia) deve ter como finalidade ou fundamento o estudo dos fatos sociais antigos, modernos e contemporâneos. Aqueles fatos que não obtiverem as três características elaboradas por Durkheim (a saber: Generalidade, Exterioridade e Coercitividade) será considerados fatos de domínio das demais ciências existentes. Pois, para finalizar, Durkheim afirma que a Sociologia é a ciência que estuda os fatos sociais. -/- EXERCÍCIO DE FIXAÇÃO DO ASSUNTO: ÉMILE DURKHEIM: COESÃO E FATO SOCIAL PROF. Lic. e Tecg°. EMANUEL ISAQUE CORDEIRO DA SILVA SOCIOLOGIA GERAL II – 17 de Maio de 2019 TURMA: 2°__ -/- Estudante:____________________________________________________________ N°:__ -/- 1 Alicerçados pelo texto supra e pelas aulas ministradas, aclare a influência de Augusto Comte sobre os estudos e a Sociologia de Émile Durkheim. 2 Durkheim teve influência direta de Comte, nada obstante, ambos divergiram quanto ao estudo e o objeto de estudo da Sociologia. Debruçados sobre o texto e lembrados pelas aulas ministradas, cite as principais divergências entre os estudos desses franceses. 3 Quais termos se reduzem a Sociologia de Durkheim? Aclare esses termos em ideias da vida contemporânea na comunidade em que vive. 4 Atente às alíneas para elucidar, posteriormente, o que se pede: “a divisão do trabalho [...] seria uma condição de existência da sociedade. [...] Graças à divisão do trabalho [...] se garantiria a coesão social. (RODRIGUES. J. A. 2000). Analise o fragmento passado e elucide a essência da divisão do trabalho para a estruturação e organização da sociedade capitalista, bem como para os avanços nos estudos de Durkheim. 5 Aclare o impacto intensivo da Revolução Industrial para o desenvolvimento da sociedade capitalista europeia e para a geração da Sociologia do autor francês Durkheim. 6 Elucide a essência da Inglaterra da Revolução Industrial que foi considerada o país estopim do âmago central de estruturação dos sujeitos e da vida em sociedade. 7 Disserte acerca do impacto intensivo da Revolução Francesa sob as esferas políticas estruturantes do século XVIII. 8 Aclare a suma importância do crepúsculo do regime feudal durante a Revolução Francesa e, posteriormente, explique a vantagem socioeconômica e política da transição do sistema feudal para a hegemonia do sistema capitalista. 9 Amparados pelo texto supra e lembrados pelas aulas anteriores, defina o lema da Revolução Francesa: Liberdade, Igualdade e Fraternidade. Depois, elucide o impacto desse lema na sociedade do século XVIII. 10 As escolas eram controladas pela Igreja Católica, com a Revolução Francesa essas instituições de ensino passaram a ser administradas pelo Estado. Elucide as vantagens da transferência do poder sobre as escolas para o desenvolvimento do ensino e da sociedade. 11 Debruçados ante o exposto texto supra e pelas aulas ministradas, elucide as vantagens e as desvantagens da fragmentação do trabalho na sociedade dos séculos XVIII e XIX. 12 Aclare o termo dinâmica dupla. 13 Elucide o que seria a interdependência funcional para Durkheim e como esse termo impactaria a sociedade contemporânea do século XXI. 14 Aclare melhor o termo fato social e, posteriormente, Elucide os termos característicos de um fato social que são a generalidade, a exterioridade e a coercitividade. 15 cite exemplos contemporâneos de fatos sociais no Brasil. 16 Por que a Sociologia de Durkheim é alcunhada de funcionalista e de estruturalista? 17 Entre em embate com Durkheim e crie um novo objeto de estudo para a Sociologia além do alicerce dos fatos sociais. Lembre-se de embasar e fundamentar bem sua teoria, uma boa ideia é a exemplificação de sua teoria na vida pragmática dos indivíduos e como seu novo objeto de estudo impactaria as esferas políticas, sociais e econômicas. (Obs.: Caso crie uma boa tese alicerçada e bem fundamentada em fatos teóricos e práticos, a nota dessa questão valerá 25% do todo). 18 Como conclusão, debruçados sobre o texto introdutório, leio atentamente após todas as questões resolvidas, para um melhor entendimento profundo, e disserte sobre todas as ideias explanadas, expondo seu ponto de vista sobre o tema, isto é, se concorda ou não, sempre usando uma fundamentação que alicerce seu ponto de vista. (Mínimo – 25 linhas/Máximo – 55 linhas). -/- De coração, boa sorte! -/- . (shrink)

The brain in its plasticity and inherent 'sociality' can be proclaimed and projected as a revolutionary organ. Far from the old reactions which opposed the authenticity of political theory and praxis to the dangerous naturalism of 'cognitive science' (with images of men in white coats, the RAND Corporation or military LSD experiments), recent decades have shown us some of the potentiality of the social brain (Vygotsky, and more recently Negri 1995 and Negri 2000, Virno 2001). Is the brain somehow (...) inherently a utopian topos? If in some earlier papers I sought to defend naturalism against these reactions, here I consider a new challenge: the recently emerged disciplines of neuronormativity, which seek in their own way to overcome the nature-normativity divide. This is the task of a materialist brain theory today. 1. The setup: horns of a dilemma There is a lingering zone of what one might think of as sore cognitive muscle tissue in the area of materialism. It is an area of both contested territory and in some cases, a kind of pathos of distance of the 'Ugh! Keep that thing away from me!' sort. I have in mind the combination of materialism as an emancipatory socio-political project (which need not be construed in strictly Marx-Engels terms, if we think of Lucretius et al.) and as a cold-hearted 'spontaneous philosophy of the men in white coats', e.g. nefarious neurophilosophers. Faced with this rather massive alternative, this choice between two projects, I have stubbornly been saying since some discussions with Negri in the late 90s. (shrink)

During the second half of the 20th century education has been recognized as a human right in several international conventions, and the UN also holds that “Education shall be free” and that “Elementary education shall be compulsory” (UN, 1948, Article 26). The education-as-a-human right-project could be viewed as a good intention of global inclusion in recognizing that all individuals have a right to education in virtue of being humans, and the idea of education as a human right thus has a (...) tremendous global significance. However, if we look at this more critically, the education-as-a-human right-project, may not only be grounded in altruistic good intensions for the disadvantaged. The term “elementary education”, or sometimes “primary education”, which is used in several human rights-documents seems to suggest that it is some sort of formalized education. It would be useful however to make a distinction between formal and informal education, as well as between teaching, learning, education and schooling, in the discussion of the right to education and specifically in the discussion concerning education as a “human right”. There is obviously a difference between the right to teach, the right to learn, the right to education and the right to schooling. And how are these rights related to compulsory schooling, compulsory education and the supposed duty to teach and duty to learn? A further concern is what makes this a human right rather than for example a juridical right as a citizen. By addressing these questions within a theoretical framework of social ontology and ameliorative conceptual analysis I believe that we can find new ways of dealing with fundamental problems within philosophy of education such as the nature, purpose and aims of education as well as the right to education. (shrink)

Debate about legal and policy reform has been haunted by a pernicious confusion about human nature, the idea that it is a set of rigid dispositions, today generally conceived as genetic, that is manifested the same way in all circumstances. Opponents of egalitarian alternatives argue that we cannot depart far from the status quo because human nature stands in the way. Advocates of such reforms too often deny the existence of human nature because, sharing this conception, they think it would (...) prevent changes they deem desirable. Both views rest on deep errors about what it is to have a nature and how genetics works. Human nature, like the nature of anything else, is a set of potentials to behave certain ways in given environments, not a nonsocial genetic something that inevitably produces the same result in any environment. To say that existing inequalities, are due to our genes, inalterable because heritable, ignores that genetic propensities may be differently manifested in different environments. Heritability has meaning only relative to an environment and a population and implies nothing about inevitability. A better sort of inegalitarian argument is that a proposed reform, given our nature, would be too costly even if possible. However, this sort of argument is too rarely supported by evidence and generally ignores the costs of existing inequalities. But egalitarians err in supposing that, if behavior is unconstrained by biology, the status quo is easily alterable. The environment may be extremely hard to change. Legal and policy debate should adopt a correct understanding of human nature as a set of propensities and ask of any proposed reform agreed to be otherwise desirable what and how alterable are its causes, genetic, environmental, or more accurately both. (shrink)

In its war on terror, the United States tortured and abused individuals in its custody over a decade. This article examines a specific sort of epistemic response by Americans to the use of torture by their government, the sort of response that enables Americans to operate with epistemic ignorance to maintain a favorable construction of their identity as Americans. I lay out the concept of American ignorance as the active production of false and/or incomplete beliefs about what it means to (...) be an American and explore the mechanism through which this ignorance operates in society. The article argues for accountability to create better epistemic environments necessary for any meaningful shift in how Americans perceive themselves qua Americans. (shrink)

Foucault’s disciplinary society and his notion of panopticism are often invoked in discussions regarding electronic surveillance. Against this use of Foucault, I argue that contemporary trends in surveillance technology abstract human bodies from their territorial settings, separating them into a series of discrete flows through what Deleuze will term, the surveillant assemblage. The surveillant assemblage and its product, the socially sorted body, aim less at molding, punishing and controlling the body and more at triggering events of in- and ex-clusion from (...) life opportunities. The meaning of the body as monitored by latest generation vision technologies formed from machine only surveillance has been transformed. Such a body is no longer disciplinary in the Foucauldian sense. It is a virtual/flesh interface broken into discrete data flows whose comparison and breakage generate bodies as both legible and eligible (or illegible). (shrink)

What sort of connection is there between business ethics and philosophy? The answer given here: a weak one, but it may be getting stronger. Comparatively few business ethics articles are structurally dependent on mainstream academic philosophy or on such sub-specialities thereof as normative ethics, moral theory, and social and political philosophy. Examining articles recently published in the Journal of Business Ethics that declare some dependence, the author finds that such declarations often constitute only a pro forma gesture which could (...) be omitted without detriment to the paper's content and conclusions. He also finds, however, that some authors do draw on solid philosophical work in ways that are establishing ever more meaningful interconnections between business ethics and academic philosophy. These cross-disciplinary studies, he concludes, are ground-breaking and invite creative imitation. (shrink)

My purpose in this text is to offer a general roadmap for navigating most current debates in the metaphysics of social categories regarding what sort of fact it is for a person to inhabit one social category or another—for example, what makes a person Mexican, or gay, or rich. With this goal in mind, I propose classifying the debating positions into three broad camps: common sense theories, socio-historical accounts, and performative theories. I characterise their main differences, identifying the (...) main challenges and achievements of each. I show that for persons well integrated into their categories, the differences between these three broad camps are minuscule, yet become crucial when we try to account for people not so well integrated. Then, I sketch a pluralist proposal that reconciles the three camps I have identified, while doing justice to the challenges presented by interstitial phenomena such as mestizaje, transition, passing, migration, etc. (shrink)

Social epistemologists use the term hermeneutical injustice to refer to a form of epistemic injustice in which a structural prejudice in the economy of collective interpretive resources results in a person’s inability to understand his/her/their own social experience. This essay argues that the phenomenon of unacknowledged date rapes, that is, when a person experiences sexual assault yet does not conceptualize him/her/their self as a rape victim, should be regarded as a form of hermeneutical injustice. The fact that the (...) concept of date rape has been widely used for at least three decades indicates the intractability of hermeneutical injustices of this sort and the challenges with its overcoming. (shrink)

Feminist epistemologies hold that differences in the social locations of inquirers make for epistemic differences, for instance, in the sorts of things that inquirers are justified in believing. In this paper we situate this core idea in feminist epistemologies with respect to debates about social constructivism. We address three questions. First, are feminist epistemologies committed to a form of social constructivism about knowledge? Second, to what extent are they incompatible with traditional epistemological thinking? Third, do the answers (...) to these questions raise serious problems for feminist epistemologies? We argue that some versions of two of the main strands in feminist epistemology – feminist standpoint theory and feminist empiricism – are committed to a form of social constructivism, which requires certain departures from traditional epistemological thinking. But we argue that these departures are less problematic than one might think. Thus, (some) feminist epistemologies provide a plausible way of understanding how (some) knowledge might be socially constructed. (shrink)

With increasing complexity of the networks of social interaction new and more abstract forms of trust are in need. A conceptual analysis of different forms of trust, namely interpersonal trust, trust in groups and institutional trust is given. It is argued that institutional trust cannot totally replace interpersonal trust. Institutional trust rather builds on more personal forms of trust in that it is primarily formed in personal encounters with salient representatives of the institution and presupposes trust in others trusting (...) in the institution. Any form of trust is grounded in some normative foundation. A trusting person can make herself vulnerable to the action of other individuals because she perceives those others as acting from shared aims or values. Thus, some sort of virtue is a prerequisite of any form of genuine trust. While institutional trust may in some respect be more easily acquired than interpersonal trust in general it may bear a fundamental problem: institutional trust may be extraordinary robust with regard to a wide range of behavioral experiences; thus, it may be enduringly maintained although in fact unjustified. In a concluding section the general analysis is illustrated by some reflections on the problem of trust in government. (shrink)

Particular applications of Privacy by Design (PbD) have proven to be valuable tools to protect privacy in many technological applications. However, PbD is not as promising when applied to technologies used for surveillance. After specifying how surveillance and privacy are understood in this paper, I will highlight the shortcomings of PbD when applied to surveillance, using a web-scanning system for counter-terrorism purposes as an example. I then suggest reworking PbD into a different approach: the Minimum Harm by Design (MHbD) model. (...) MHbD differs from PbD principally in that it acknowledges that the potential harms of surveillance bear not only upon privacy but also values that define the very constitution of a society and its political character. MHbD aims to identify and systematise the different categories of such harms and links them to current theories on surveillance on the one hand and on possible design measures on the other. (shrink)

Recent increases in the rates of parental refusal of routine childhood vaccination have eroded many countries’ “herd immunity” to communicable diseases. Some parents who refuse routine childhood vaccines do so because they deny the mainstream medical consensus that vaccines are safe and effective. I argue that one reason these vaccine denialists disagree with vaccine proponents about the reasons in favor of vaccination is because they also disagree about the sorts of practices that are conducive to good reasoning about healthcare choices. (...) Vaccine denialists allocate epistemic authority more democratically than do mainstream medical professionals. They also sometimes make truth ascriptions for nonepistemic reasons, fail to recognize legitimate differences in expertiseand competence, and seek uncritical affirmation of their existing beliefs. By focusing on the different epistemic values and practices of vaccine denialists and mainstream medical professionals, I locate my discussion of vaccine denialism within broader debates about rationality. Furthermore, I argue that gender inequality and gendered conceptions of reason are important parts of the explanation of vaccine denialism. Accordingly, I draw upon feminist work—primarily feminist social epistemology—to help explain and evaluate this form of vaccine refusal. (shrink)

If media studies are to become established as a genuine science, then it needs to be determined what the subject matter of this science is to be. I propose a specification of this subject matter as consisting in: 1. the new sorts of digital entities that have been added to social reality through the invention of the digital computer, and 2. the new sorts of interactions involving human beings which such entities make possible. I support this proposal by examining (...) examples of some of the ways in which the digital products of emerging media differ from entities of other sorts. I then draw consequences from this examination to demonstrate how these products mark out a new realm within the larger domain of social ontology. (shrink)

Social epistemologists often operationalize the task of indirectly assessing experts’ trustworthiness to identifying whose beliefs are more reliably true on matters in an area of expertise. Not only does this neglect the philosophically rich space between belief formation and testimonial utterances, it also reduces trustworthiness to reliability. In ethics of trust, by contrast, explicitly relational views of trust include things like good will and responsiveness. One might think that relational aspects can be safely set aside for social epistemology (...) of trust in experts, that such considerations may be relevant for personal relationships but not for expert trustworthiness. Against these claims I argue for the social-epistemic relevance of relational aspects of trust in experts, and to that end I discuss three sorts of considerations – responsively positive, neutral, and negative factors – that can make a difference for expert trustworthiness. (shrink)

Artificial intelligence has historically been conceptualized in anthropomorphic terms. Some algorithms deploy biomimetic designs in a deliberate attempt to effect a sort of digital isomorphism of the human brain. Others leverage more general learning strategies that happen to coincide with popular theories of cognitive science and social epistemology. In this paper, I challenge the anthropomorphic credentials of the neural network algorithm, whose similarities to human cognition I argue are vastly overstated and narrowly construed. I submit that three alternative supervised (...) learning methods—namely lasso penalties, bagging, and boosting—offer subtler, more interesting analogies to human reasoning as both an individual and a social phenomenon. Despite the temptation to fall back on anthropomorphic tropes when discussing AI, however, I conclude that such rhetoric is at best misleading and at worst downright dangerous. The impulse to humanize algorithms is an obstacle to properly conceptualizing the ethical challenges posed by emerging technologies. (shrink)

Assertion is fundamental to our lives as social and cognitive beings. By asserting we share knowledge, coordinate behavior, and advance collective inquiry. Accordingly, assertion is of considerable interest to cognitive scientists, social scientists, and philosophers. This paper advances our understanding of the norm of assertion. Prior evidence suggests that knowledge is the norm of assertion, a view known as “the knowledge account.” In its strongest form, the knowledge account says that knowledge is both necessary and sufficient for assertability: (...) you should make an assertion if and only if you know that it is true. The knowledge account has been rejected on the grounds that it conflicts with our ordinary practice of evaluating assertions. This paper reports four experiments that address an important objection of this sort, which focuses on a class of examples known as “Gettier cases.” The results undermine the objection and, in the process, provide further evidence for the knowledge account. The findings also teach some important general lessons about intuitional methodology and the curation of genres of thought experiment. (shrink)

Human social intelligence includes a remarkable power to evaluate what people know and believe, and to assess the quality of well- or ill-formed beliefs. Epistemic evaluations emerge in a great variety of contexts, from moments of deliberate private reflection on tough theoretical questions, to casual social observations about what other people know and think. We seem to be able to draw systematic lines between knowledge and mere belief, to distinguish justified and unjustified beliefs, and to recognize some beliefs (...) as delusional or irrational. This article outlines the main types of epistemic evaluations, and examines how our capacities to perform these evaluations develop, how they function at maturity, and how they are deployed in the vital task of sorting out when to believe what others say. (shrink)

Leading virtue epistemologists defend the view that knowledge must proceed from intellectual virtue and they understand virtues either as refned character traits cultivated by the agent over time through deliberate effort, or as reliable cognitive abilities. Philosophical situationists argue that results from empirical psychology should make us doubt that we have either sort of epistemic virtue, thereby discrediting virtue epistemology’s empirical adequacy. I evaluate this situationist challenge and outline a successor to virtue epistemology: abilism . Abilism delivers all the main (...) benefts of virtue epistemology and is as empirically adequate as any theory in philosophy or the social sciences could hope to be. (shrink)

Often, when one faces a choice between alternative actions, there are reasons both for and against each alternative. On one way of understanding these words, what one “ought to do all things considered (ATC)” is determined by the totality of these reasons. So, these reasons can somehow be “combined” or “aggregated” to yield an ATC verdict on these alternatives. First, various assumptions about this sort of aggregation of reasons are articulated. Then it is shown that these assumptions allow for the (...) proof of a “Reasons Aggregation Theorem” – parallel to John Harsanyi’s 1955 “Social Aggregation Theorem”. All reasons for action are grounded in reason-providing values; and, for every such reason-providing value, there is in principle a way of measuring how strongly this value counts against each alternative. The theorem tells us that the appropriate measure of how much reason ATC there is against each alternative is simply a weighted sum of the strengths with which these values count against that alternative; the agent ought not ATC to perform an action iff there is ATC more reason against it than against some available alternative. (shrink)

A long series of studies in social psychology have shown that the explanations people give for their own behaviors are fundamentally different from the explanations they give for the behaviors of others. Still, a great deal of uncertainty remains about precisely what sorts of differences one finds here. We offer a new approach to addressing the problem. Specifically, we distinguish between two levels of representation ─ the level of linguistic structure (which consists of the actual series of words used (...) in the explanation) and the level of conceptual structure (which consists of the concepts these words are used to express). We then formulate and test hypotheses both about self-other differences in conceptual structure and about self-other differences in the mapping from conceptual structure to linguistic structure. (shrink)