Many economists and philosophers assume that status quo bias is necessarily irrational. I argue that, in some cases, status quo bias is fully rational. I discuss the rationality of status quo bias on both subjective and objective theories of the rationality of preferences. I argue that subjective theories cannot plausibly condemn this bias as irrational. I then discuss one kind of objective theory, which holds that a conservative bias toward existing things of (...) value is rational. This account can fruitfully explain some compelling aspects of common sense morality, and it may justify status quo bias. (shrink)

Conservative assumptions in medical ethics risk immense harms during a pandemic. Public health institutions and public discourse alike have repeatedly privileged inaction over aggressive medical interventions to address the pandemic, perversely increasing population-wide risks while claiming to be guided by ‘caution’. This puzzling disconnect between rhetoric and reality is suggestive of an underlying philosophical confusion. In this paper, I argue that we have been misled by status quo bias—exaggerating the moral significance of the risks inherent in medical interventions, (...) while systematically neglecting the risks inherent in the status quo prospect of an out-of-control pandemic. By coming to appreciate the possibility and significance of status quo risk, we will be better prepared to respond appropriately when the next pandemic strikes. (shrink)

This paper is a warning that objections based on thought experiments can be misleading because they may elicit judgments that, unbeknownst to the judger, have been seriously skewed by psychological biases. The fact that most people choose not to plug in to the Experience Machine in Nozick’s (1974) famous thought experiment has long been used as a knock-down objection to hedonism because it is widely thought to show that real experiences are more important to us than pleasurable experiences. This paper (...) argues that the commonplace choice to remain in reality when offered a life in the Experience Machine is best explained by status quo bias – the irrational preference for things to remain the same. An alternative thought experiment, empirical evidence, and discussion of how psychological biases can affect our judgments are provided to support this argument. (shrink)

The process of adopting a child is “not for the faint of heart.” This is what we were told the first time we, as a couple, began this process. Part of the challenge lies in fulfilling the licensing requirements for adoption, which, beyond the usual home study, can include mandatory participation in parenting classes. The question naturally arises for many people who are subjected to these requirements whether they are morally justified. We tackle this question in this paper. In our (...) view, while strong reasons exist in favour of licensing adoptive parents, these reasons support the licensing not only of adoptive parents, but of all or some subset of so-called “natural” parents as well. We therefore conclude that the status quo with respect to parental licensing, according to which only adoptive parents need to be licensed, is morally unjustified. (shrink)

While agreeing with the main conclusion of Dominic Wilkinson and colleagues (Wilkinson, Butcherine, and Savulescu 2019), namely, that there is no moral difference between treatment withholding and withdrawal as such, we wish to criticize their approach on the basis that it treats the widespread acceptance of withdrawal aversion (WA) as a cognitive bias. Wilkinson and colleagues understand WA as “a nonrational preference for withholding (WH) treatment over withdrawal (WD) of treatment” (22). They treat WA as a manifestation of loss (...) aversion and refer to Kahneman and colleagues (1991), which defined this effect as follows: “the disutility of giving up an object is greater that the utility associated with acquiring it” (194). In a previous work, Wilkinson and Savulescu understood nonequivalence between treatment withholding and withdrawal as a reflection of slightly different, although related, phenomena: status quo bias or omission bias (Wilkinson and Savulescu 2012, 130–131). In neither of these two papers do they describe precisely the relation between these well-known psychological effects and WA, nor do they explain why they treat these effects as examples of nonrational preferences, despite the fact that these issues have been the subject of wide-ranging discussions on the intersection of psychology, economy, and philosophy. (shrink)

In the last two decades Anglophone political theory witnessed a renewed interest in social-scientific empirical findings—partly as a reaction against normative theorizing centred on the formulation of abstract, intuition-driven moral principles. This brief paper begins by showing how this turn has taken two distinct forms: (i) a non-ideal theoretical orientation, which seeks to balance the emphasis on moral principles with feasibility and urgency considerations, and (ii) a fact-centric orientation, which seeks to ground normative conclusions in empirical results. The core of (...) the paper then compares and contrast three variants of fact-centric political theory: normative behaviourism, grounded normative theory, and radical realism. The upshot: normative behaviourism achieves focus on observable behaviour at the cost of status quo bias, grounded normative theory achieves radicalism at the cost of endorsing an activist orientation to theorising, and radical realism combines a non-activist orientation with the potential for far-reaching critique of the status quo. (shrink)

This paper argues that private property and rights assignment, especially as applied to communication infrastructure and information, should be informed by advances in both technology and our understanding of psychology. Current law in this area in the United States and many other jurisdictions is founded on assumptions about human behavior that have been shown not to hold empirically. A joint recognition of this fact, together with an understanding of what new technologies make possible, leads one to question basic assumptions about (...) how law is made and what laws we should have in a given area, if any. I begin by analyzing different aspects of U.S. law, from a high-level critique of law making to a critique of rights assignment for what I call 'simple nonrival goods.' I describe my understanding, as a non-lawyer with a background in psychology and computing, of the current conventions in U.S. law, consider the foundational assumptions that justify current conventions, describe advances in psychology and technology that call these conventions into question, and briefly note how the law might normatively change in this light. I then apply this general analysis to the question of domain name assignment by the Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers (ICANN). (shrink)

So you‘re leaving the cinema—you've just been blown away by Inception—and your mind is buzzing. There is a buzz around you too. Everyone‘s asking each other: ‗Does Cobb‘s spinning top fall?‘ Throughout Inception, Cobb has been struggling to achieve two things: to get back home so he can see his kids again and to keep a grip on reality in the process. What ends up happening to Cobb‘s totem bears on both of these struggles. So, most people who watch Inception (...) think that the whole point of the movie hinges on whether or not Cobb‘s top keeps spinning. Unfortunately for most people, they missed the point! The correct answer to 'Does Cobb‘s spinning top fall?‘ is: 'Who cares!‘ The truth, and in my opinion the main point of Inception, is that reality doesn't really matter. (shrink)

Richard Rorty’s liberal utopia offers an interesting model for those who wish to explore the emancipatory potential of a post-foundational account of politics, specifically liberalism. What Rorty proposes is a form of liberalism that is divorced from its Kantian metaphysical foundations. This paper will focus on the gulf that appears between Rorty’s liberal utopia in theory, the political form that it must ultimately manifest itself in, and the consequences this has for debates on pluralism, diversity, and identity, within liberal political (...) thought. -/- The strength of Rorty’s liberal utopia, in his analysis, lies in the fact that with the rejection of philosophy and metaphysics, we can simply get on with the job of reducing cruelty through experimental tinkering with the liberal political system. Instead of trying to develop intellectually sophisticated justifications for why we act, we should just act. Political action, for Rorty, does not require a philosophical or metaphysical justification. However, upon closer critical examination, we can see that whatever potential Rorty’s liberal utopia may have in theory, this is negated by the fact that at the level of political praxis, his re-description of liberalism leaves us with a conception of liberalism that is essentially unchanged. Whilst Rorty has re-situated liberalism from the philosophical to the political, his solution fails to address any internal problems. (shrink)

Epistemic Courage is a timely and thought-provoking exploration of the ethics of belief, which shows why epistemology is no mere academic abstraction - the question of what to believe couldn't be more urgent. Jonathan Ichikawa argues that a skeptical, negative bias about belief is connected to a conservative bias that reinforces the status quo.

This paper outlines an account of political realism as a form of ideology critique. Our focus is a defence of the normative edge of this critical-theoretic project against the common charge that there is a problematic trade-off between a theory’s groundedness in facts about the political status quo and its ability to consistently envisage radical departures from the status quo. To overcome that problem we combine insights from three distant corners of the philosophical landscape: theories of legitimacy by (...) Bernard Williams and other realists, Frankfurt School-inspired Critical Theory, and recent analytic epistemological and metaphysical theories of cognitive bias, ideology, and social construction. The upshot is a novel account of realism as empirically-informed diagnosis- critique of social and political phenomena. This view rejects a sharp divide between descriptive and normative theory, and so is an alternative to the anti- empiricism of some approaches to Critical Theory as well as to the complacency towards existing power structures found within liberal realism, let alone mainstream normative political philosophy, liberal or otherwise. (shrink)

David DeGrazia tentatively defends what he calls the Interests Model of moral status (see page 135).1 On this model all sentient beings have the same moral status, though some are owed more than others in virtue of having more or stronger interests. The proponent of this model can accept, say, that one should normally save the life of a human in preference to that of a dog. But she denies that we should save the human because he has (...) higher moral status. Instead, the human should be saved because he has more at stake—he may, for example, have a stronger interest in continued existence. In defending the Interests Model, DeGrazia cuts against the grain of recent theorising on moral status, which has instead favoured what he calls the Respect Model. (shrink)

Oppression is easily recognized. That is, at least, when oppression results from overt, consciously professed racism, for example, in which violence, explicit exclusion from economic opportunities, denial of adequate legal access, and open discrimination perpetuate the subjugation of a group of people. There are relatively clear legal remedies to such oppression. But this is not the case with covert oppression where the psychological harms and resulting legal and economic exclusion are every bit as real, but caused by concealed mechanisms subtly (...) and systematically employed. In many cases, those with power and privilege use cultural stereotypes in order to sustain an unjust status quo. This is so even if the biases are implicit, automatic, and contrary to the consciously professed beliefs of the stereotyper. Furthermore, since many of these biases are not consciously reasoned into one's system of beliefs, and since they are notoriously difficult to bring to consciousness and dislodge via direct, logical confrontation, some other creative means of resistance is needed. I argue that an indirect and imaginative route through subversive humor offers a means to raise consciousness about covert oppression and the mechanisms underlying it, reveal the errors of those with power who complacently sustain systematic oppression, and even open those people up to changing their minds. Subversive humor confronts serious matters, but in a playful manner that fosters creative and critical thinking, and cultivates a desire and skill for recognizing incongruities between our professed ideals and a reality that does not meet those standards. Successful subversive wits create fictional scenarios that highlight such moral incongruities, but, like philosophical thought experiments, they reveal a moral truth that also holds in the real world. Such humor offers opportunities for "border crossing" where the audience is encouraged to see from the perspectives of marginalized people who, because they inhabit ambiguous spaces in between the dominant and subordinate spheres, are in an epistemically privileged position with respect to matters of oppression. Subversive humorists open their audiences to the lived experiences of others, uncover the absurdities of otherwise covert oppression, and appeal to our desire to be truthful and just. (shrink)

All else being equal, most of us typically prefer to have positive experiences in the future rather than the past and negative experiences in the past rather than the future. Recent empirical evidence tends not only to support the idea that people have these preferences, but further, that people tend to prefer more painful experiences in their past rather than fewer in their future (and mutatis mutandis for pleasant experiences). Are such preferences rationally permissible, or are they, as time-neutralists contend, (...) rationally impermissible? And what is it that grounds their having the normative status that they do have? We consider two sorts of arguments regarding the normative status of future-biased preferences. The first appeals to the supposed arbitrariness of these preferences, and the second appeals to their upshot. We evaluate these arguments in light of the recent empirical research on future-bias. (shrink)

This paper examines the role of prestige bias in shaping academic philosophy, with a focus on its demographics. I argue that prestige bias exacerbates the structural underrepresentation of minorities in philosophy. It works as a filter against (among others) philosophers of color, women philosophers, and philosophers of low socio-economic status. As a consequence of prestige bias our judgments of philosophical quality become distorted. I outline ways in which prestige bias in philosophy can be mitigated.

Moral, social, political, and other “nonepistemic” values can lead to bias in science, from prioritizing certain topics over others to the rationalization of questionable research practices. Such values might seem particularly common or powerful in the social sciences, given their subject matter. However, I argue first that the well-documented phenomenon of motivated reasoning provides a useful framework for understanding when values guide scientific inquiry (in pernicious or productive ways). Second, this analysis reveals a parity thesis: values influence the social (...) and natural sciences about equally, particularly because both are so prominently affected by desires for social credit and status, including recognition and career advancement. Ultimately, bias in natural and social science is both natural and social— that is, a part of human nature and considerably motivated by a concern for social status (and its maintenance). Whether the pervasive influence of values is inimical to the sciences is a separate question. (shrink)

Future-bias is the preference, all else being equal, for positive states of affairs to be located in the future not the past, and for negative states of affairs to be located in the past not the future. Three explanations for future-bias have been posited: the temporal metaphysics explanation, the practical irrelevance explanation, and the three mechanisms explanation. Understanding what explains future-bias is important not only for better understanding the phenomenon itself, but also because many philosophers think that (...) which explanation is the correct one has implications for our evaluation of the normative status of future-bias. In this paper we focus on the connection between future-bias and the temporal value asymmetry. The latter refers to the fact that people tend to assign more value to a state of affairs when it is located in the future, as opposed to being equidistant in the past. All three candidate explanations offered for future-bias proceed by explaining the temporal value asymmetry, and then supposing that future-bias is simply a manifestation of that asymmetry. Recently, however, it has been argued that the conditions under which people display the temporal value asymmetry and future-bias are different, and that this is reason to doubt that the latter is a manifestation of the former. In this paper we empirically test one response to this argument against the manifestation thesis—the simulation response—according to which once we control for the degree to which people can simulate the object of their preference, we find that people display future-bias and the temporal value asymmetry in the same conditions. We find no evidence in favour of the simulation response. Moreover, our results support some previous research that suggests that the temporal value asymmetry is less robust than previously thought, and this in itself casts doubt on the idea that future bias is just a manifestation of this asymmetry. (shrink)

Despite the closure of virtually all original grindhouse cinemas, ‘grindhouse’ lives on as a conceptual term. This article contends that the prevailing conceptualization of ‘grindhouse’ is problematized by a widening gap between the original grindhouse context (‘past’) and the DVD/home-viewing context (present). Despite fans’ and filmmakers’ desire to preserve this part of exploitation cinema history, the world of the grindhouse is now little more than a blurry set of tall-tales and faded phenomenal experiences, which are subject to present-bias. The (...) continuing usefulness of grindhouse-qua-concept requires that one should pay heed to the contemporary contexts in which ‘grindhouse’ is evoked. (shrink)

Proceeding from serendipitous observations, three studies and two pilot experiments examined how the way mental representations are conceived varies as the subjective status of the representations is manifest or otherwise. Participants were found to produce simple line drawings differently when the drawings were assumed to represent mental contents (beliefs, imaginations, percepts). The results challenged particular lay epistemological concepts. They were partly accounted for by Gricean conversational rules, but a "subjective status bias" was postulated to have them fully (...) explained. The discussion and recommendations for research--completed with two pilot studies--center on the nature of this bias relating it either to a tendency to conceive subjective representations as vague "shadows of reality", or to a tendency to have an increased impact of the law of pregnance. The empirical outcomes of the pilot studies argue for the latter tendency. (shrink)

What is the status of research on implicit bias? In light of meta‐analyses revealing ostensibly low average correlations between implicit measures and behavior, as well as various other psychometric concerns, criticism has become ubiquitous. We argue that while there are significant challenges and ample room for improvement, research on the causes, psychological properties, and behavioral effects of implicit bias continues to deserve a role in the sciences of the mind as well as in efforts to understand, and (...) ultimately combat, discrimination and inequality. (shrink)

Philosophers working on time-biases assume that people are hedonically biased toward the future. A hedonically future-biased agent prefers pleasurable experiences to be future instead of past, and painful experiences to be past instead of future. Philosophers further predict that this bias is strong enough to apply to unequal payoffs: people often prefer less pleasurable future experiences to more pleasurable past ones, and more painful past experiences to less painful future ones. In addition, philosophers have predicted that future-bias is (...) restricted to first-person preferences, and that people’s third-person preferences are time-neutral. Philosophers disagree vigorously about the normative status of these preferences—i.e., they disagree about whether first-person future-bias is rationally permissible. Time-neutralists, for example, have appealed to the predicted asymmetry between first- and third-person preferences to argue for the rational impermissibility of future-bias. We empirically tested these predictions, and found that while people do prefer more past pain to less future pain, they do not prefer less future pleasure to more past pleasure. This was so in both first and third-person conditions. This suggests that future-bias is typically non-absolute, and is more easily outweighed in the case of positive events. We connect this result to the normative debate over future-bias. (shrink)

This chapter is about micro-inequities and their connection to the problem of implicit bias. It begins by defining micro-inequities, goes on to discuss what makes them wrong and what solutions might be appropriate given the institutional context in which they occur.

This paper investigates the connection between temporal attitudes (attitudes characterised by a concern (or lack thereof) about future and past events), beliefs about temporal ontology (beliefs about the existence of future and past events) and temporal preferences (preferences regarding where in time events are located). Our aim is to probe the connection between these preferences, attitudes, and beliefs, in order to better evaluate the normative status of these preferences. We investigate the hypothesis that there is a three-way association between (...) (a) being present-biased (that is, preferring that positive events are located in the present, and negative events are located in the non-present), (b) believing that past and future events do not exist and (c) tending to have present-focused rather than non-present-focused temporal attitudes. We find no such association. This suggests that insofar as temporal preferences and temporal attitudes are connected to the ways we represent time, they are not connected to the ways we represent temporal ontology; rather, they are more likely connected to the ways we represent relative movement in, or of, time. This has important consequences for, first, explaining why we exhibit these preferences and, second, for their normative evaluation. (shrink)

Empirical evidence shows that people have multiple time-biases. One is near-bias; another is future-bias. Philosophical theorising about these biases often proceeds on two assumptions. First, that the two biases are _independent_: that they are explained by different factors (the independence assumption). Second, that there is a normative asymmetry between the two biases: one is rationally impermissible (near-bias) and the other rationally permissible (future-bias). The former assumption at least partly feeds into the latter: if the two biases (...) were not explained by different factors, then it would be less plausible that their normative statuses differ. This paper investigates the independence assumption and finds it unwarranted. In light of this, we argue, there is reason to question the normative asymmetry assumption. (shrink)

This article develops a constructive criticism of methodological conventionalism. Methodological conventionalism asserts that standards of inductive risk ought to be justified in virtue of their ability to facilitate coordination in a research community. On that view, industry bias occurs when conventional methodological standards are violated to foster industry preferences. The underlying account of scientific conventionality, however, is problematically incomplete. Conventions may be justified in virtue of their coordinative functions, but often qualify for posterior empirical criticism as research advances. Accordingly, (...) industry bias does not only threaten existing conventions but may impede their empirically warranted improvement if they align with industry preferences. My empiricist account of standards of inductive risk avoids such a problem by asserting that conventional justification can be pragmatically warranted but has, in principle, only a provisional status. Methodological conventions, therefore, should not only be defended from preference-based infringements on their coordinative function but ought to be subjected to empirical criticism. (shrink)

In this paper, I will try to answer the question: How are we supposed to assess the expert’s opinion in an argument from the position of an outsider to the specialized field? by placing it in the larger context of the political status of epistemic authority. In order to do this I will first sketch the actual debate around the problem of expertise in a democracy and relate this to the issue of the status of science in society. (...) Secondly, I will review how Douglas Walton’s pragma-dialectical approach offers a practical procedure to assess the expert bias from a nonprofessional’s perspective. Thirdly, I will introduce the problem of group bias using insights from Bohman and Fischer and show how Walton’s solution does not address this specific type of bias. Lastly, I will try proposing a revision of Walton’s solution in order to address this problem. In order to make the explanation more easy to follow I will use a case study concerning the medical expertise in the public debate on second-hand smoke. (shrink)

We explore ChatGPT’s handling of left-peripheral phenomena in Italian and Italian varieties through prompt engineering to investigate 1) forms of syntactic bias in the model, 2) the model’s metalinguistic awareness in relation to reorderings of canonical clauses (e.g., Topics) and certain grammatical categories (object clitics). A further question concerns the content of the model’s sources of training data: how are minor languages included in the model’s training? The results of our investigation show that 1) the model seems to be (...) biased against reorderings, labelling them as archaic even though it is not the case; 2) the model seems to have difficulties with coindexed elements such as clitics and their anaphoric status, labeling them as ‘not referring to any element in the phrase’, and 3) major languages still seem to be dominant, overshadowing the positive effects of including minor languages in the model’s training. (shrink)

Qualitative evidence concerning the relationship between QoL and a wide range of disabilities suggests that subjective judgments regarding other people’s QoL are wrong more often than not and that such judgments by medical practitioners in particular can be biased. Guided by their desire to do good and avoid harm, surgeons often rely on "the eyeball test" to decide whether a patient will or will not benefit from surgery. But the eyeball test can easily harbor a range of implicit judgments and (...) biases against patients with disabilities, including erroneous assumptions about QoL. We critique the use of the "eyeball" test and offer suggestions to reduce bias and ensure that patients’ values are more consistently prioritized in surgical decision-making. (shrink)

With the #MeToo movement and the Women’s Marches behind us, it has become clear that women are angry. This anger is often criticised for being disruptive or uncommunicative, with calm rationality being praised as a superior alternative. In this article, I use the framework of Fricker’s (2007) Epistemic Injustice to examine the communicative disadvantages and merits of what I call feminist anger. I explain how feminist anger can be subject to both testimonial and hermeneutical injustices, but that this does not (...) mean it should not be used to communicate. Importantly, feminist anger can challenge the patriarchal status quo and it can provide an epistemic bridge towards hermeneutical justice. By listening to feminist anger, both our own and others’, we can get one step closer to epistemic equality. (shrink)

Prepublication peer review should be abolished. We consider the effects that such a change will have on the social structure of science, paying particular attention to the changed incentive structure and the likely effects on the behaviour of individual scientists. We evaluate these changes from the perspective of epistemic consequentialism. We find that where the effects of abolishing prepublication peer review can be evaluated with a reasonable level of confidence based on presently available evidence, they are either positive or neutral. (...) We conclude that on present evidence abolishing peer review weakly dominates the status quo. (shrink)

Investments in mitigating climate change have their greatest environmental impact over the long term. As a consequence the incentives to invest in cutting greenhouse gas emissions today appear to be weak. In response to this challenge, there has been increasing attention given to the idea that current generations can be motivated to start financing mitigation at much higher levels today by shifting these costs to the future through national debt. Shifting costs to the future in this way benefits future generations (...) by break- ing existing patterns of delaying large-scale investment in low-carbon energy and efficiency. As we will see in this chapter, it does appear to be technically feasible to transfer the costs of investments made today to the future in such a way that people alive today do not incur any net cost. the aim of this chapter is to take seriously the possibility that climate change has produced an extremely intractable political problem and that we must now consider strong measures that can break existing patterns of delaying mitigation. I defend the claim that if climate change involves a stark conflict of interests between current and future generations, then borrowing from the future would be both strategically and normatively much better than the status quo. Nevertheless, I challenge the borrowing from the future proposal on the grounds that it is not in fact the powerful tool for motivating existing agents that its proponents imagine it to be. The purpose of developing this critical argument is not, however, simply to throw doubt onto the idea of borrowing from the future. If we really do find ourselves in a political context where the prospects for effective action are very poor then strategic forms of buck-passing may make an important positive contribution to avoiding dangerous global cli- mate change. Consequently, if debt financing is not as powerful of a motivational tool as imagined we still have strong reasons, I will argue, to identify other strategies that will change agents’ incentive structures. To this end, I propose an alternative form of passing on the costs of mitigation to the future that warrants consideration. (shrink)

In many jurisdictions in the United States and elsewhere, the law governing deadly force by police and civilians contains a notable asymmetry. Often civilians but not police are bound by the imminence requirement—that is, a necessary condition for justifying deadly force is reasonable belief that oneself or another innocent person faces imminent threat of grave harm. In U.S. law enforcement, however, there has been some shift toward the imminence requirement, most evident in the use-of-force policy adopted by the Department of (...) Justice in 2022. This article defends that shift and argues that the ethical case for the imminence requirement in policing is stronger than Shannon Brandt Ford suggests in a recent article. Though the imminence requirement’s impacts on policing and public safety require ongoing study, the principle of equality before the law and the Doctrine of Doing and Allowing both provide moral grounds for this requirement, especially given the lack of evidence that the status quo helps protect life. (shrink)

Purpose This paper aims to formalize long-term trajectories of human civilization as a scientific and ethical field of study. The long-term trajectory of human civilization can be defined as the path that human civilization takes during the entire future time period in which human civilization could continue to exist. -/- Design/methodology/approach This paper focuses on four types of trajectories: status quo trajectories, in which human civilization persists in a state broadly similar to its current state into the distant future; (...) catastrophe trajectories, in which one or more events cause significant harm to human civilization; technological transformation trajectories, in which radical technological breakthroughs put human civilization on a fundamentally different course; and astronomical trajectories, in which human civilization expands beyond its home planet and into the accessible portions of the cosmos. -/- Findings Status quo trajectories appear unlikely to persist into the distant future, especially in light of long-term astronomical processes. Several catastrophe, technological transformation and astronomical trajectories appear possible. -/- Originality/value Some current actions may be able to affect the long-term trajectory. Whether these actions should be pursued depends on a mix of empirical and ethical factors. For some ethical frameworks, these actions may be especially important to pursue. (shrink)

My goal in this paper is, to tentatively sketch and try defend some observations regarding the ontological dignity of object references, as they may be used from within in a formalized language. -/- Hence I try to explore, what properties objects are presupposed to have, in order to enter the universe of discourse of an interpreted formalized language. -/- First I review Frege′s analysis of the logical structure of truth value definite sentences of scientific colloquial language, to draw suggestions from (...) his saturated vs. unsaturated sentence components paradigm. -/- Next try investigate, in how far reference to non pure math objects might allow for a role as argument of a truth value function. Object kinds to be considered are: common sense objects, technical objects, humanities object kinds (social, psychical, ...), objects of art, ... , be they abstract, concrete, or in this respect mixed objects. -/- Then have a comment on the just referenced label abstract objects. -/- Next try to get an idea wrt the ontological significance of the fact, that pure math objects and functions in some important classical cases can be uniquely defined by means of categorical theories. Here, in the course of my argument, I have a little corollary wrt the standard model of first order Peano arithmetic, reducing the epistemological significance of the existence of the non standard models. -/- Next, wrt a special concept of a formalized empirical theory, I care for whether the impure math objects and mixed objects described here, and complying best with truth value function mapping, are also reliable candidates for the ontological commitment of such theories: and discuss an alternative, which reduces the ontological significance of the universe of discourse of the theories intended models. -/- In the end I sum up what is - from my point of view - the status quo, according to my respective findings. (shrink)

The evaluation of labour markets and of particular jobs ought to be sensitive to a plurality of benefits and burdens of work. We use the term 'the goods of work' to refer to those benefits of work that cannot be obtained in exchange for money and that can be enjoyed mostly or exclusively in the context of work. Drawing on empirical research and various philosophical traditions of thinking about work we identify four goods of work: 1) attaining various types of (...) excellence; 2) making a social contribution; 3) experiencing community; and 4) gaining social recognition. Our account of the goods of work can be read as unpacking the ways in which work can be meaningful. The distribution of the goods of work is a concern of justice for two conjoint reasons: First, they are part of the conception of the good of a large number of individuals. Second, in societies without an unconditional income and in which most people are not independently wealthy, paid work is non-optional and workers have few, if any, occasions to realize these goods outside their job. Taking into account the plurality of the goods of work and their importance for justice challenges the theoretical and political status quo, which focuses mostly on justice with regard to the distribution of income. We defend this account against the libertarian challenge that a free labour market gives individuals sufficient options to realise the goods of work important to them, and discuss the challenge from state neutrality. In the conclusion, we hint towards possible implications for today’s labour markets. (shrink)

In this paper, we take up an old issue that of pragmemes, broached by Mey and further explored by Capone. It is not easy to define pragmemes and distinguish them sufficiently from speech acts (units of language use broached by Austin and Searle) or from Wittgensteinian language games or from macro speech acts (see van Dijk on macrostructures) or from Goffman’s scripts. The best idea we could develop about pragmemes is that they instantiate the triple articulation of language, proposed by (...) Jock Wong; being essentially composed of phonological-syntactic units, that have a certain content relative to a social situation and to a certain culture, pragmemes express a certain function (or illocutionary force), like, e.g., modifying society or some aspect of it. They are part of a chapter that can be called either “societal pragmatics” or “emancipatory pragmatics,” to use the words by Mey. In fact, knowledge of how language is used to diminish the rights of people and to propagate the “status quo” may be instrumental to give rights and power to ordinary human beings who are oppressed by political and economical structures. -/- . (shrink)

Standard semantic theories predict that non-deictic readings for complex demonstratives should be much more widely available than they in fact are. If such readings are the result of a lexical ambiguity, as Kaplan (1977) and others suggest, we should expect them to be available wherever a definite description can be used. The same prediction follows from ‘hidden argument’ theories like the ones described by King (2001) and Elbourne (2005). Wolter (2006), however, has shown that complex demonstratives admit non-deictic interpretations only (...) when a precise set of structural constrains are met. In this paper, I argue that Wolter’s results, properly understood, upend the philosophical status quo. They fatally undermine the ambiguity theory and demand a fundamental rethinking of the hidden argument approach. (shrink)

(Título: Por outras Historiografias, Filosofias, Sociologias, Antropologias, Teorias da História e Filosofias da História |||\\\ -/- Subtítulo: Três Ensaios sobre a ‘Antiguidade, a era Medieval, a Modernidade e a Pós-modernidade: Transições, Rupturas, Continuidades, Ligações e Interconexões) |||\\\ -/- (Title: For other Historiographies, Philosophies, Sociologies, Anthropologies, Theories of History and Philosophies of History |||\\\ -/- Subtitle: Three Essays on 'Antiquity, the Medieval Era, Modernity and Postmodernity: Transitions, Ruptures, Continuities, Links and Interconnections) |||\\\ -/- (Título: Para otras Historiografías, Filosofías, Sociologías, Antropologías, Teorías (...) de la Historia y Filosofías de la Historia |||\\\ -/- Subtítulo: Tres ensayos sobre 'La antigüedad, la época medieval, la modernidad y la posmodernidad: transiciones, rupturas, continuidades, vínculos e interconexiones') |||\\\ -/- (1. Tema: ‘O declínio e a queda do império romano,’ um equívoco interpretativo, linguístico, conceitual ou metodológico? Ou uma fluidez das percepções, narrativas e concepções estéticas do ‘Antigo frente ao Novo?’ |||\\\ -/- 'The decline and fall of the Roman Empire,' an interpretative, linguistic, conceptual or methodological misunderstanding? Or a fluidity of perceptions, narratives and aesthetic conceptions of the 'Old in the face of the New? |||\\\ -/- «Decadencia y caída del Imperio Romano», ¿un malentendido interpretativo, lingüístico, conceptual o metodológico? ¿O una fluidez de percepciones, narrativas y concepciones estéticas de lo «Antiguo frente a lo Nuevo»?) |||\\\ -/- (2. Tema: O Antigo e Atual ritual de sacrifícios humanos aos Deuses e ou Divindades: Ritos que se repetem em novas roupagens, fórmulas e modus operandi. |||\\\ -/- The Ancient and Current Ritual of Human Sacrifice to the Gods and/or Divinities: Rites that are repeated in new guises, formulas and modus operandi. |||\\\ -/- El Ritual Antiguo y Actual del Sacrificio Humano a los Dioses y/o Divinidades: Ritos que se repiten con nuevos disfraces, fórmulas y modus operandi.) |||\\\ -/- (3. Tema: ‘Feudalismo erudito,’ ‘feudalismo rústico’ e ‘feudalismo pós moderno:’ termos com sutis interconexões e em práticas também sutis na atualidade capitalista |||\\\ -/- Erudite feudalism,' 'rustic feudalism' and 'pos-tmodern feudalism:' terms with subtle interconnections and in equally subtle practices in today's capitalist world. |||\\\ -/- 'Feudalismo erudito', 'feudalismo rústico' y 'feudalismo posmoderno': términos con sutiles interconexiones y en prácticas igualmente sutiles en el mundo capitalista actual.).|||\\\ -/- Apresentação sobre e dos três Ensaios - ||| - \\\ - ||| -/- Durante certos períodos de estudos, sempre ouvi falar sobre a ascensão, declínio e queda do império romano, o período romano monárquico, republicano e imperial. E atrelado a esses assuntos, outros não menos importantes, tais como a era ou período medieval, sistema feudal, feudalismos, capitalismo, era ou período moderno ou da modernidade e a pós-modernidade. Talvez esta última seja a nossa contemporaneidade. Geralmente há alguns consensos e também certas dissenções ou polêmicas sobre tais temas, assuntos, seus conteúdos e demarcações históricas. Até então estamos falando apenas da historiografia e de suas produções. Entretanto, é notório que é difícil falar de historiografia sem recorrer a arqueologia, sociologia, filosofia, filologia, antropologia, epigrafia, linguística, geografia, biologia, artes e dentre outras. Isso porque a historiografia necessita do auxílio e apoio dessas como de tantas outras áreas de estudos para investigar seus objetos e fontes, e assim extrair seus conteúdos, interpretações e compor os dados e achados durante os procedimentos e processos de estudos e análises das fontes e de seus dados. Portanto, é bastante difícil falar em historiografia sem reconhecer a necessidade de suporte de outras inúmeras áreas e campos de estudos e de produção de conhecimentos. Ou seja, há intercâmbios diretos e indiretamente tanto para e em modos de olhares investigativos, conceituais, métodos e outros instrumentos quanto de ferramentas para e de análises de dados e fontes. Enfim, há certa composição multidisciplinar para a prática da historiografia quanto para a formação de seus ‘produtos.’ Sendo assim, realizar um ensaio sobre a ascensão, declínio e queda do império romano, o período romano monárquico, republicano e imperial. E atrelado a esses assuntos, outros não menos importantes, tais como a era ou período medieval, sistema feudal, feudalismos, capitalismo, era ou período moderno ou da modernidade e a pós-modernidade, não é uma tarefa fácil. Ainda mais investigar questões, assuntos e conteúdos que dizem respeito as práticas de magias, de rituais e de sacrifícios ao longo da história, bem como novos olhares sobre o sistema feudal e relacionar todos estes fatos com a contemporaneidade. Até porque de alguma forma, todos esses fatos, acontecimentos e processos do passado ou mundo antigo, tem influências e relações com muitas práticas e modos de ser, pensar e agir na atualidade. E por isso também eles são importantes de serem reanalisados, estudados continuamente e revistos através e por meio das novas tecnologias e os novos olhares que elas podem nos proporcionar. Porém, sem incorrermos em anacronismos. Com isso, é de suma importância abrirmos novos olhares, horizontes, possibilidades e perspectivas para reinvestigar tais assuntos e eventos históricos mencionados, seus conteúdos, fontes e produtos. E assim, quem sabe talvez possamos extrair novas informações, conteúdos e saberes que possam cooperar com nossas sociedades na e da contemporaneidade. É importante dizer que, quando incluímos em tais temas, assuntos e seus conteúdos, áreas, disciplinas ou campos de estudos como a filosofia, a sociologia, a antropologia, a geografia, a filologia, a arqueologia, a biologia, a epigrafia, as artes e dentre outras, a discussão se torna ainda maior, mais complexa e gerando também maiores problemáticas. Entretanto, isso não inviabiliza tal abordagem e ação, muito pelo contrário, é justamente melhor que isso ocorra sobre tais assuntos, temas e seus conteúdos a serem estudados, pois os tornam mais ricos, amplos e abertos, e não fechados e isolados em si mesmos. Logo, é de suma relevância e importância, bem como de grande urgência se evocar, invocar e complementar tais investigações auxiliadas pelas vias da interdisciplinaridade, multidisciplinaridade e da transdisciplinaridade, isso para não se correr riscos de se cair em dogmatismos, apologias ou doutrinas dentro dos grupos ou guetos de tais áreas ou campos de saber. Já que é um fato e realidade a existência de correntes e ‘vertentes’ historiográficas, históricas, sociológicas, filosóficas, antropológicas e assim por diante. Ou seja, como dentre outras, bem como também em outras áreas de estudo ou campos do saber. E por isso a importância da interdisciplinaridade, multidisciplinaridade e da transdisciplinaridade, pois se dificultam os processos e formações de dogmatismos, apologias, doutrinas, paradigmas engessados, diretrizes ultra ou extremamente conservadoras de certos status quo e de cânones postos em certos pedestais. Desse modo, há certas correntes com suas convenções, consensos, seus paradigmas e diretrizes, no qual as seguem, e assim elas criam quase que amarras ou emolduram alguns assuntos, temas e seus conteúdos históricos. No qual as discussões ficam por décadas como as mesmas, com raros casos em que alguns daqueles temas, assuntos ou conteúdos recebem algum novo tratamento e talvez novas considerações, ou às vezes nenhum ou nenhuma. Permanecendo quase que os mesmos ou intactos como uma moldura a ser preservada, até que surja alguém que ouse remexê-los, trazer alguma novidade e inovações. Se algo não for feito, tudo fica do mesmo modo por décadas. Tais fatos ocorrem com e em muitas outras áreas e campos do saber, ou seja, não é apenas um fato na historiografia, sociologia, filosofia, antropologia e outras. É justamente por tudo isso que ousamos escrever um ensaio, no caso aqui três, envolvendo questões, assuntos, temas, conteúdos, novas reflexões e produções que giram em torno da antiguidade até a contemporaneidade, e sobretudo novas abordagens e produções sobre a era do império romano desde a monarquia aos tempos do império; sobre a era feudal do ou com o seu ‘início no séc. V d.C. até o séc. XV d.C., bem como sobre práticas e manifestações místicas, mágicas, ritualísticas e sacrificiais contemplando a antiguidade até a contemporaneidade. No qual lançamos mais luz em pequenos detalhes que talvez tenham passado desapercebidos em alguns escritos ou produções historiográficas, onde o fizemos com auxílio da interdisciplinaridade, multidisciplinaridade e da transdisciplinaridade, onde denominamos de ‘Por outras Historiografias, Filosofias, Sociologias, Antropologias, Teorias da História e Filosofias da História.’ Nossa ação, movimento e intervenção se dá justamente pelos fatos aqui apontados e criticados, que ocorrem devido aos seus consensos, convenções e porque não dizer: dogmas, apologias ou doutrinas. Uma vez que, como já mencionado, muitas das produções sejam da historiografia, sociologia, antropologia e até mesmo da filosofia, infelizmente, estão repletas de dogmas, doutrinas, apologias de teorias, teóricos e de certos cânones que são idolatrados mais do que o fazer científico e a produção de novos conhecimentos. Nosso trabalho talvez não possua um caráter acadêmico ou científico, já que é um ensaio talvez hipotético, de novas observações, visões, possibilidades e perspectivas. Mas que não renunciou ao rigor em e nos estudos, investigações e coletas de dados para a produção de um construto que comungue e dialogue com as produções de caráter científicas e acadêmicas. Infelizmente nós brasileiros ainda possuímos muitos novos horizontes quase pouco ou nunca explorados, isso por e em muitas de nossas áreas e produções de conhecimentos e científicas, onde quase não há grandes e efetivos incentivos, e muito menos para se ousar fazer e produzir tais conhecimentos. Às vezes com pequenas exceções e para alguns grupos e guetos seletos, geralmente já beneficiados com vastos recursos. Vale ainda dizer que mesmo assim e com tudo isso, boa parte do saber e da produção de conhecimentos e científicos do país, infelizmente foi, se tornou e ainda é bastante dependente e submisso das produções, arcabouços e cânones euramericanos. E isso dificulta ainda mais as produções, incentivos e inovações da produção de conhecimentos e científicos do e no Brasil. Já que o que é produzido aqui, geralmente em boa medida é uma reprodução dos produtos daqueles quanto a ânsia da chancela, legitimação, autorização e aprovação daqueles sobre as produções dos daqui do país. Ou seja, o Brasil parece que fica a certa mercê ou a espera de aprovações, legitimações e chancelas das ‘autoridades cientificas e dos saberes euramericanos.’ E assim, infelizmente em muitos casos nos tornamos mais reprodutores de ideias, teorias, conteúdos, métodos, paradigmas e diretrizes, bem como sintetizadores e resumidores das ideias deles, talvez até mesmo nos posicionemos como meros copistas das produções euramericanas. Foi através e por meio de tais observações, percepções, inquietações e críticas que passei a ler, reler e examinar certos cânones teóricos e bibliográficos com mais atenção e pelo crivo da criticidade. Isso sob olhares não etnocêntricos, e nem tão pouco eurocêntricos e ou ocidentais. Onde com o auxílio da interdisciplinaridade, multidisciplinaridade e da transdisciplinaridade, bem como e inclusive também da e entre as várias correntes das áreas de estudos da historiografia, sociologia, filosofia e antropologia, passei a reanalisar certos eventos históricos e da historiografia, me apoiando em várias áreas ou campos do saber e ou do conhecimento, tal como a biologia, geografia, política, análises do discurso, teologia, ciência da religião, linguística e dentre outras. E com isso, os objetos observados e analisados foram nos mostrando novos conteúdos, novos fenômenos, novos movimentos e nos proporcionando também novos olhares sobre tais objetos e seus dados a serem observados, estudados e analisados. Sendo assim, surgiu os três ensaios aqui em tela e em discussão. No qual colocamos sobre a crítica se realmente o império romano do ocidente declinou e caiu, bem como o que seria esse declinar e cair. Se realmente podemos marcar e demarcar as datas convencionais e consensuais ou podemos especular em hipóteses outras novas. Inclusive se podemos talvez estender tal declínio, se é que houve, bem como a sua queda, para datas mais adiantes do suposto ocorrido. Estas hipóteses, especulações e possibilidades geraram o ensaio de título ou tema: ‘O declínio e a queda do império romano,’ um equívoco interpretativo, linguístico, conceitual ou metodológico? Ou uma fluidez das percepções, narrativas e concepções estéticas do ‘Antigo frente ao Novo?’ A segunda reflexão crítica sobre acontecimentos, períodos, fenômenos, fatos, movimentos, eventos e narrativas historiográficas e sociológicas foram sobre manifestações, processos e práticas místicas, mágicas e ritualísticas ao longo da história, da antiguidade até a contemporaneidade, no qual surgiu o ensaio com o título ou tema: O Antigo e Atual ritual de sacrifícios humanos aos Deuses e ou Divindades: Ritos que se repetem em novas roupagens, fórmulas e modus operandi. E o último ensaio faz reflexões críticas sobre o período medieval com seu suposto feudalismo e ou sistema feudal. Onde trazemos novas reflexões sobre a prática feudal ou de feudos, demonstrando que tais práticas eram além de mais antiga do que pensamos, elas eram comuns, normal e naturais em vários sentidos, âmbitos e aspectos, e isso ocorrendo em muitas sociedades, culturas e civilizações desde a era romana monárquica, republicana e imperial e que se tornou em um sistema, o feudal, dentro da era tida como medieval (que possuo certas críticas a ambos os conceitos e seus pejorativismos). Através disso desenvolvemos três novas categorias de feudos ou de práticas feudais: o feudo erudito, o feudo rústico e os elementos feudais na contemporaneidade. Ora, o sistema feudal ou feudalismo não era ou foi apenas uma nomenclatura com certo ar pejorativo, mas sim um sistema econômico e ‘financeiro (até mesmo comercial)’ baseado e fundamentado na produção rural e ou do campo, seus insumos, matérias primas, mão de obra barata e escrava, no poderio militar ou de milicias, bem como e sobretudo posse e poderio da terra e de quem as obtém em grandes quantidades e extensões, em certa política descentralizada, na organização de uma sociedade estamental e sua divisão social em determinados grupos, os sem terras e os donos de muitas terras. E esse sistema econômico não surgiu do nada e nem do acaso, mas teve suas origens nas práticas feudais eruditas e rústicas, dando origem a um sistema, o feudal. E que ainda hoje podemos ver elementos de suas práticas, no qual resistiram a era capitalista, a modernidade e onde certos elementos feudais foram incorporados e reelaborados desde o surgimento do sistema capitalista até a contemporaneidade, e assim tais elementos avançaram com e em novas formas, roupagens e fórmulas pelo capitalismo. No qual ainda é um fato a relação de donos de grandes extensões de terras com poder, política, riquezas, conflitos, milicias e guerras. Se tais fatos dos resquícios ou elementos feudais não fossem reais, países da Europa em pleno século XXI não teriam ou manteriam ainda sua dominação sob colônias na África, Ásia e até mesmo nas Américas, bem como tentando as recolonizar ou neocolonizar, inclusive em outras regiões do globo, como assim ‘bem’ o faz os EUA desde o fim do século XIX, início do XX até a atualidade. Colonização e expansão de domínio e poder, bem como exploração e expropriação de mãos de obra, terras, matérias primas etc. Fundamentalmente a dominação de terras nacionais e sobretudo alheias, bem como a exploração das mesmas e de seus povos presos nas mesmas, digo ao sistema de seus países. Ou seja, o sistema capitalista também utiliza elementos das práticas feudais. Entretanto, de modos reformulados, personalizados e atualizados conforme seus interesses, do capitalismo e das classes ou grupos dominantes, e das necessidades contextuais para cumprir as metas de tal sistema, o capitalista e seus ditames. A estas reflexões críticas surgiu o ensaio: ‘Feudalismo erudito,’ ‘feudalismo rústico’ e ‘feudalismo pós-moderno:’ termos com sutis interconexões e em práticas também sutis na atualidade capitalista. Para que os leitores já pudessem adentrar nos temas, assuntos, conteúdos, fatos e discussões, isso em certa cronologia, foi colocado de antemão os resumos de cada ensaio e seus respectivos temas. Com isso, o leitor poderá observar certas conexões ou interligações entre tais acontecimentos, processos, fatos e fenômenos sócio-históricos, políticos, econômicos, culturais etc. E não apenas entre ou na transição da antiguidade para a era medieval e moderna, mas também daquelas com seus resquícios na e para a contemporaneidade. Entretanto, há um grande problema que precisaremos superar continuamente, é que ao longo da história, muitas das narrativas e produções históricas e historiográficas são e ou estão repletas de eufemismos, de jogos de linguagens e inundados neles, nos referidos. E isso consegue mascarar ideologias dominantes, hegemônicas, colonialistas, antagonismos, alienações, contradições e até mesmo certos paradoxos (como observaremos nos textos dos ensaios). Sendo assim, tais eufemismos conseguem como que ‘em passes de mágicas,’ criarem muitas ilusões e confusões nos prováveis e possíveis entendimentos, percepções, compreensões, concepções e ideias entre os fatos e as realidades, e tudo isso feito intencionalmente. Portanto, essas produções fantasiadas com os eufemismos e seus jogos de linguagens criam certas ‘ilusões de ‘óticas’ e em suas mágicas,’ no qual confundem vários leitores e estudiosos descuidados com esses instrumentos e ferramentadas metodológicas logocêntricas, grafocentricas e verborrágicas. Logo, tais fatos geram inúmeras confusões e conflitos intelectivos, de reflexões lógicas e de fatos que verdadeiramente correspondam com as realidades sociais e históricas. O trabalho em tela fará justamente o esforço de superar tais embaraços e armadilhas, filtrando e sintetizando as reflexões e interpretações extraídas das bibliografias e as relacionando com outras áreas, campos e saberes, e os submetendo ao crivo da lógica e da crítica. (shrink)

Anger is often an appropriate reaction to harms and injustices, but is it a politically beneficial one? Martha Nussbaum (Journal of the American Philosophical Association 1 (1), 41–56, 2015, Anger and Forgiveness. Oxford University Press, 2016) has argued that, although anger is useful in initially recruiting agents for action, anger is typically counterproductive to securing the political aims of those harmed. After the initial shockwave of outrage, Nussbaum argues that to be effective at enacting positive social change, groups and individuals (...) alike, must move quickly out of the state of anger. Feminist theorists (Frye, The Politics of Reality. Crossing Press, 1983; Lorde, 1997; Narayan, Hypatia 3 (2): 31–48, 1988) on the other hand have for long highlighted the efficacy of anger, as well as its moral and epistemic value, in fighting against the oppressive status quo. It might be thought therefore that for political action to be effective, a continued state of anger is preferable. Protestors must after all create and sustain a sense of moral obligation and justice. A main way of doing so is to promote successive moral shocks that trigger outrage (Jasper, Emotion Review 6 (3): 208–213, 2014). I present a novel, empirically informed defense of anger’s efficacy in political action. Nussbaum holds a traditional view on the nature of anger, inherited from Aristotle and the Stoics, which holds that anger constitutively involves a desire for retribution. The view that anger is counterproductive falls out of this and is dominant in academic work as well as in our personal and political lives. Based on work in social psychology, I argue that we need to reconsider this. In doing so, I highlight anger’s aim for recognition, rather than retribution, as key. Furthermore, I uncover conditions for anger’s political efficacy, as well as reasons for why the traditional view of anger has been so pervasive. (shrink)

Background: Patient participation in clinical ethics support services has been marked as an important issue. There seems to be a wide variety of practices globally, but extensive theoretical or empirical studies on the matter are missing. Scarce publications indicate that, in Europe, patient participation in CESS varies from region to region, and per type of support. Practices vary from being non-existent, to patients being a full conversation partner. This contrasts with North America, where PP seems more or less standard. While (...) PP seems to be on the rise in Europe, there is no data to confirm this. This study sought a deep understanding of both habits and the attitudes towards PP in the Netherlands, including respondents’ practical and normative perspectives on the matter. Methods and Results: We developed a national survey on PP for Dutch CESS staff. Our survey comprised a total of 25 open and close-ended questions, focused on four topics related to PP goals of CESS, status quo of PP, ideas and ideals concerning PP, and obstacles for PP. Discussion: The four most important findings were that: Patient participation in Dutch CESS is far from standard. Views on patient participation are very much intertwined with the goals of ethics support. Hesitations, fears and perceived obstacles for PP were not on principle and Most respondents see PP as a positive opportunity, yet requiring additional training, practical guidance and experience. Conclusions: Various normative reasons require PP. However, PP seems far from standard and somewhat rare in Dutch CESS settings. Our respondents did not raise many principled objections to PP. Instead, reasons for the lack of PP are intertwined with viewpoints on the goals of CESS, which seemingly focus on supporting health care professionals. Training and practical guidance was thought to be helpful for gaining experience for both CESS staff and HCPs. (shrink)

Scientific realism and anti-realism are most frequently discussed as global theses: theses that apply equally well across the board to all the various sciences. Against this status quo I defend the localist alternative, a methodological stance on scientific realism that approaches debates on realism at the level of individual sciences, rather than at science itself. After identifying the localist view, I provide a number of arguments in its defense, drawing on the diversity and disunity found in the sciences, as (...) well as problems with other approaches (such as basing realism debates on the aim of science). I also show how the view is already at work, explicitly or implicitly, in the work of several philosophers of science. After meeting the objections that localism collapses either into globalism or hyperlocalism, I conclude by sketching what sorts of impacts localism can have in the philosophy of science. (shrink)

The ills of psychiatry are currently diagnoses with the aid of deficient etiologies. The currently proposed prescriptions for psychiatry are practically impossible. The defective part of the profession is its leadership which in its very defensiveness sticks to the status quo, thereby owning the worst defects and impeding all possible cure. The current discussions of the matter are pretentious and thus woolly. The minimal requirement from the profession as a whole and from each of its individual members is that (...) they be not defensive and clear. In this vein I offer here preliminary discussions of propriety, of responsibility and of science. (shrink)

Throughout the history of mankind, energy security has been always seen as a means of protection from disruptions of essential energy systems. The idea of protection from disorders emerged from the process of securing political and military control over energy resources to set up policies and measures on managing risks that affect all elements of energy systems. The various systems placed in a place to achieve energy security are the driving force towards the energy innovations or emerging trends in the (...) energy sector. Our paper discusses energy security status and innovations in the energy sector in European Union (EU). We analyze the recent up-to-date developments of the energy policy and exploitation of energy sources, as well as scrutinize the channels of energy streaming to the EU countries and the risks associated with this energy import. Moreover, we argue that the shift to the low-carbon production of energy and the massive deployment of renewable energy sources (RES) might become the key issue in ensuring the energy security and independency of the EU from its external energy supplies. Both RES, distributed energy resources (DER) and “green energy” that will be based on the energy efficiency and the shift to the alternative energy supply might change the energy security status quo for the EU. (shrink)

The ecofeminist argument for veganism is powerful. Meat consumption is a deeply gendered act that is closely tied to the systematic objectification of women and nonhuman animals. I worry, however, that presenting veganism as "the" moral ideal might reinforce rather than alleviate the disordered status quo in gendered eating, further disadvantaging women in patriarchal power structures. In this chapter, I advocate a feminist account of ethical eating that treats dietary choices as moral choices insofar as they constitute an integral (...) part of our relationships to ourselves and to others. I believe that we should think of dietary choices in Aristotelian moral terms as a mean relative to us, falling on a continuum between the vice of doing injustice to ourselves, on the one hand, and the vice of doing injustice to others, on the other. On this view, what it is moral to eat for individuals is not a fixed ideal, but rather depends on particulars of our physiological, psychological, economic, cultural, and relational situations. (shrink)

This study aims to grasp the two distinct artworks one is from the literary field: Penal Colony, written by F. Kafka and the other one is from painting: The Large Glass, designed by M. Duchamp. This text tries to unravel the similarities betwe- en these artworks in terms of two main significations around “The Officer” from Penal Colony and “The Bachelors” from The Large Glass. Because of their vital role on the re-production of status-quo, this text asserts that there (...) is a similarity between them in the name of being part of the dispositions of body and desire. First of all, the text focuses on Penal Colony, especially on “The Officer” in or- der to observe his obsession towards the order that ruled by former and the late officer of colony. Deleuze & Guattari conceptualize it as “abstract-machines” and it refers to a contingent state of being which is produced as an obligatory entity. Besides, The Officers’ application via a “labeling machine” on inmates creates a framewok of a dispositif in Foucauldian terminology. Secondly, it is emphasized that The Bachelors from the Large Glass for his context, due to its reference for the concept of desire and a metaphorical connotation for desire as “cocoa”. The Large Glass is also turn around the dispositif in a different way: love. It is stated that criticizing the love to nowhere which belongs to The Bachelors and it can be found that there is an abstract-machine again in back of this practice and it converts The Bachelors’ energeia to make an apparatus possible and operative. (shrink)

The aim of this doctoral dissertation is to closely explore the nature of Einstein’s block universe and to tease out its implications for the nature of time and human freedom. Four questions, in particular, are central to this dissertation, and set out the four dimensions of this philosophical investigation: (1) Does the block universe view of time follow inevitably from the theory of special relativity? (2) Is there room for the passage of time in the block universe? (3) Can we (...) distinguish past from future in the block universe? (4) Is there room for human freedom in the block universe? Although the answer of most philosophers would be yes, triple no, my own answer, controversially, is no, triple yes. -/- I thereby challenge the status quo with respect to each of these metaphysical questions, and argue that none of these questions can be answered from looking at physics alone. Physics may constrain our metaphysics, but it certainly does not settle it. What is needed in order to answer these questions, are additional metaphysical assumptions that fall outside the scope of modern physics. My primary goal in this dissertation, therefore, is not to settle the debates on the nature of time and human freedom, but to clarify them by expliciting the metaphysical assumptions that are otherwise left implicit. (shrink)

The article analyzes the significance of situated knowledges for going beyond dominating conceptual dichotomies that a) establish status quo dialectics, b) proliferate homogenization of the Global Northern experienced materialities, and c) conceal and suppress alternate affectual body-environment experiences and materializations. With the example of postsocialist ontogenealogies, the article analyzes the potential blind spots when failing to consider both sides of a status quo dialectic in their interconnectedness. To conclude, the article suggests the potential of situated knowledges as a (...) vehicle for future environmental ethicalities. (shrink)

Many political philosophers hold the Feasible Alternatives Principle (FAP): justice demands that we implement some reform of international institutions P only if P is feasible and P improves upon the status quo from the standpoint of justice. The FAP implies that any argument for a moral requirement to implement P must incorporate claims whose content pertains to the causal processes that explain the current state of affairs. Yet, philosophers routinely neglect the need to attend to actual causal processes. This (...) undermines their arguments concerning moral requirements to reform international institutions. The upshot is that philosophers’ arguments must engage in causal analysis to a greater extent than is typical. -/- [Supplement: Handout available at http://db.tt/fyuVW3Xv]. (shrink)